Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Mick Norris
Posts: 10310
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:08 pm

John Upham wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 9:38 am
I've alerted Phil Ehr to this thread to allow him to respond should he feel the need to do so.
Presumably, based on past experience, not at all, or only after a few months :roll:
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Neill Cooper
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Cumbria
Contact:

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Neill Cooper » Sun Aug 01, 2021 9:38 am

Mick Norris wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 6:33 pm
Phil narrowly beat Sabrina, and the ECF would have been a lot different if he had lost I think
Phil was an excellent ECF Junior DIrector and various strands of junior chess flourised under his leadership.
He ran a large team of volunteers, in a similar manner to that proposed by EJOG.
He delegated most of the organisation to the team which meant that lots of junior chess was organised under the ECF umbrella.

I speak as someone he invited to become Secondary School Manager and he enabled me to run mass participation events such as Team Chess Challenge and the Eton Schools' Rapidplay.
Similarly the U18 country championships had large numbers of teams and participants.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 01, 2021 9:47 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:58 pm
"Maybe you shouldn't project your own paranoias onto other people"

I think paranoia is a mass noun and can't be pluralized.
Wiktionary (which gives no source)

This item includes a piece entitled Modernism and the Two Paranoias: The Neurology of Persecution which might be enough to convince me it's a proper usage but (obviously) not that it's a common one.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Upham » Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:11 am

Neill Cooper wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 9:38 am

Phil was an excellent ECF Junior DIrector and various strands of junior chess flourised under his leadership.
He ran a large team of volunteers, in a similar manner to that proposed by EJOG.
He delegated most of the organisation to the team which meant that lots of junior chess was organised under the ECF umbrella.

I speak as someone he invited to become Secondary School Manager and he enabled me to run mass participation events such as Team Chess Challenge and the Eton Schools' Rapidplay.
Similarly the U18 country championships had large numbers of teams and participants.
I will echo Neill's comments and assessment. PE was a positive force for good and a thoroughly nice chap.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1757
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Alex McFarlane » Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:27 pm

I too agree about Phil. It could be argued that both he and Andrew Farthing before were 'promoted' far too quickly from jobs they were doing well before into ones that they were not able to cope with. As a result they left with their reputations damaged whereas if they had continued in their previous posts the members would have continued to hold them in high regard.
I think it is fair to say that no matter your management background, nothing prepares you for dealing with the chess community as an administrator!!

I have had my disagreements with Mike Truran but I continue to consider him as a good CEO. It is difficult to comment on any rivals for the position until these are announced, but it would need to be someone very good to persuade me to vote for them over Mike. The two suggested candidates would not do so. The job is time consuming if it is being done well. That would make me have concerns about some potential candidates that I might otherwise think worthy of consideration. It is a position which requires, from time to time, a full time commitment which many would not be in a position to comply with.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Paul Cooksey » Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:44 am

Interesting to hear Alex's thoughts, given the relative importance of the arbiter nexus in ECF politics.

Not naming names is of course the diplomatic thing to do. ECF roles are typically taken on reluctantly, since active campaigning tends to make one look like a politician. We all know it is a bit of fiction of course. None of the above would not have beaten Phil Ehr if there had not been an understanding someone was willing to do the job.

I did decide to name names mainly because I was annoyed by the line in the blog "In the ECF elections this October, Mike Truran is standing for a third term as CEO. Rumour has it that there will be a challenge to his inept and divisive leadership". I don't think healthy to allow the game playing to escalate to that point.

I think Malcolm Pein would be a good CEO if he had the time to do it. He probably does not. So I think will rule himself out on that basis rather than giving Alex the difficult decision he describes. But the point about the level of commitment needed is well made for other candidates.

John Reyes
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Reyes » Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:13 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 7:44 am
Interesting to hear Alex's thoughts, given the relative importance of the arbiter nexus in ECF politics.

Not naming names is of course the diplomatic thing to do. ECF roles are typically taken on reluctantly, since active campaigning tends to make one look like a politician. We all know it is a bit of fiction of course. None of the above would not have beaten Phil Ehr if there had not been an understanding someone was willing to do the job.

I did decide to name names mainly because I was annoyed by the line in the blog "In the ECF elections this October, Mike Truran is standing for a third term as CEO. Rumour has it that there will be a challenge to his inept and divisive leadership". I don't think healthy to allow the game playing to escalate to that point.

I think Malcolm Pein would be a good CEO if he had the time to do it. He probably does not. So I think will rule himself out on that basis rather than giving Alex the difficult decision he describes. But the point about the level of commitment needed is well made for other candidates.
You need to think why is someone standing against Mike as CEO?

Alex has mentioned he has done a good role as CEO, however there are people who seems to have issues with him personal.

Also would someone stand against Mike and then if get elected, would stand down and bring someone else in?

Also paul you mentioned Malcolm but he is the current international director and also our fide delegate, would he have to resign before standing as director before he stood, but I would be asking why he is standing? For getting rid of Mike because he don’t like him?

Also if someone stands against him who would be the candidates?

Tim Wall?
Chris Fegan? (He is stepping down as woman director and I’m thinking aga will become the new director)
Someone from the CSC?
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Upham » Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:33 am

John Reyes wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:13 am
You need to think why is someone standing against Mike as CEO?
Is this a general principle for all contested elections (replacing Mike with X and CEO with Y)?

I seem to be detecting some sort of aversion to the democratic principles that support choice in an election. Choice is a good thing or I am completley out of touch?

I read a disturbing recent email from a high ranking ECF official that commenced with the schoolboy error ("I am writing to you") suggesting that it was an affront to the writer that X should be standing in the same election as Y. "How dare you" was the tone. A really rather silly email from someone I would expect better of and had much respect for.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Michael Farthing » Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:50 am

John Upham wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:33 am

I read a disturbing recent email from a high ranking ECF official that commenced with the schoolboy error ("I am writing to you") suggesting that it was an affront to the writer that X should be standing in the same election as Y. "How dare you" was the tone. A really rather silly email from someone I would expect better of and had much respect for.
Sounds like me. I often start like that - perhaps a mannerism. Can you explain to this schoolboy why it is an "error"?

If it was me, you might be kind enough to give me more detail so I can consider if I think it could be read the way you describe, in which case I shall go to my shed and consider how I can improve.

[In the meantime a challenge - who have I just quoted?]

John Reyes
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Reyes » Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:01 am

John Upham wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:33 am
John Reyes wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:13 am
You need to think why is someone standing against Mike as CEO?
Is this a general principle for all contested elections (replacing Mike with X and CEO with Y)?

I seem to be detecting some sort of aversion to the democratic principles that support choice in an election. Choice is a good thing or I am completley out of touch?

I read a disturbing recent email from a high ranking ECF official that commenced with the schoolboy error ("I am writing to you") suggesting that it was an affront to the writer that X should be standing in the same election as Y. "How dare you" was the tone. A really rather silly email from someone I would expect better of and had much respect for.
I’m all for choice but for the right reason?

Are the end of the day we are volunteers, I know when I email the silver members (and happy to reached out to tim to do a joint one as we are elected for the 2021-22 season)

I’m not going to tell the members to vote for person a, but vote for who you think?

I’m proud to representing the voice of the leagues and not my own personal views as some of my fellow reps
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3600
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Matthew Turner » Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:08 am

John Upham wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:33 am
John Reyes wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:13 am
You need to think why is someone standing against Mike as CEO?
Is this a general principle for all contested elections (replacing Mike with X and CEO with Y)?

I seem to be detecting some sort of aversion to the democratic principles that support choice in an election. Choice is a good thing or I am completley out of touch?

I read a disturbing recent email from a high ranking ECF official that commenced with the schoolboy error ("I am writing to you") suggesting that it was an affront to the writer that X should be standing in the same election as Y. "How dare you" was the tone. A really rather silly email from someone I would expect better of and had much respect for.
I think there is a big difference between standing in an election and setting out your ideas and policies for positive change and saying you are going to field a candidate with no names or policies.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Roger Lancaster » Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:23 am

Matthew Turner wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:08 am
I think there is a big difference between standing in an election and setting out your ideas and policies for positive change and saying you are going to field a candidate with no names or policies.
Particularly so, I'd suggest, if accompanied by statements such as "inept and divisive leadership" which - although they may be genuinely held - are opinions presented as facts in the cynical knowledge that some readers will accept them as facts.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by JustinHorton » Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:02 pm

John Upham wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:33 am
I seem to be detecting some sort of aversion to the democratic principles that support choice in an election.
This is what I call "the internet seem"
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:48 pm

John Reyes wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:13 am
he is the current international director and also our fide delegate, would he have to resign before standing as director before he stood
Unless the rules have subsequently been changed, it's necessary to stand down from one director position before seeking another. That was the case when John Foley as a non-exec challenged Alex H for the position of Home Director.

If the challenger was defeated and if the original position remained vacant, on paper at least, the original incumbent could be reappointed by the new Board.

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Is Positive Change Coming To English Chess?

Post by John Upham » Mon Aug 02, 2021 1:22 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:02 pm
This is what I call "the internet seem"

What's your point, caller?
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

Post Reply