Pre AGM 2009 Interviews

[Adam Raoof]

Unfortunately I will not be able to attend either the pre-interviews, or the council meeting due to a family holiday.

Joe Brown from Cambridge City Chess Club will be there to represent me and will answer questions from the floor on my behalf. This is very kind of him, and I thank him for his trouble. I will brief him in advance about the questions I expect to be raised, and my thoughts about the role I expect to play in the coming months should I be elected. I am always, and remain, very accessible through this forum to answer questions directly. You can be as blunt as you like!

I am sure that the pre-interview is a formality requested of all candidates. As a candidate I am not unduly concerned about this because I know, having checked, that if there are two candidates for a post, one of whom is a current Board member, each will be interviewed independently without the other being present, and the subsequent private Board discussion to determine whether a recommendation will take place with the Board applicant for the post remaining outside the room.

It is likely that any Board recommendation will be far less significant than the election addresses and responses to questions posed of the candidates by Council.

I have greater concerns about the rights that Direct Members have to ensure that their views be represented at the council meeting.

[John Philpott]

Martin Regan wrote

Blowing bubbles then John - you just know this season they'll reach the sky but fade and die

A common inaccuracy - they will nearly reach the sky before proceeding to fade and die!

I am, incidentally, grateful to Carl for making my new avatar avaialble.

[Roger de Coverly]

I have greater concerns about the rights that Direct Members have to ensure that their views be represented at the council meeting.

The only issue that Direct Members are ever consulted about is who should be "Player of the Year". Would an indicative (non-binding) poll of Direct Members on their preferred candidates for board positions be that difficult or expensive to organise? I'm not aware whether the Direct Members' Representatives make any attempt to contact their constituency or even indicate by a posting here or otherwise that they would welcome feedback. My 2 don't.

[E Michael White]

I'm not aware whether the Direct Members' Representatives make any attempt to contact their constituency.....

Many ECF officials dont seem to understand the difference between representation and delegation.

[John Philpott]

Theoretically there should be an annual election for direct members representatives. In practice (at least in recent years) there have invariably been fewer candidates than the posts available, so whoever has volunteered by the deadline has been appointed without an election process being necessary, and the Board is then left with the task of filling the vacancies (because that is what Article 13 indicates). An unsurprising consequence of this is that some of the present representatives are members of or have close connections with the Board.

The solution to this is, of course, for individuals who think that direct members representatives should pro-actively communicate with the members they represent to put themselves forward as candidates. Unfortunately we are beyond the deadline for 2009/10 (representatives act from the conclusion of one AGM to the conclusion of the next AGM) and my understanding is that there are once again fewer candidates than the posts available.

There is nothing to prevent direct members making their views known to their representatives, and indicating the way in which they consider they should vote, even if in certain cases this could mean recommending that the representative should vote against himself (no fewer than four of the eight current representatives are standing for election as Directors at the AGM).

[Roger de Coverly]

There is nothing to prevent direct members making their views known to their representatives

I imagine the absence of contact information for one of the representatives to be something of a barrier .


http://www.englishchess.org.uk/index.ph ... &Itemid=71

[John Upham]

There is nothing to prevent direct members making their views known to their representatives

The inability to reply to enquiries from Direct Members is something of a prevention.

I have never had a reply to numerous enquiries from PJB Wilson, his contact details are not even listed! How does one make contact John?

I have had a reply from Bill Armstrong.

[John Philpott]

John Upham wrote:

The inability to reply to enquiries from Direct Members is something of a prevention.

I have never had a reply to numerous enquiries from PJB Wilson, his contact details are not even listed! How does one make contact John?

I have had a reply from Bill Armstrong.

It is beyond my power to ensure that somebody replies. However, if enough direct members can be bothered to stand as representatives and for there to be an election, a tendency to reply or not to reply might be a fact that would influence the voters.

While it would undoubtedly be more helpful if the full contact details were listed in the direct members representatives section, I am inclined to acquit the ECF of hiding the contact details of Peter Wilson, as a postal address, telephone number and official e-mail address do appear further up that very page (as do those of Cyril Johnson and Stewart Reuben) in respect of Peter's position as a Director. I accept that the same is not true of John Paines, and will see what can be done to fix this. I do not propose to publish somebody's e-mail address on the Forum without their express permission, but I will provide this in a PM (and indeed have already done so once).

[Laurie Roberts]

Around a month ago, I wrote an e-mail to the ECF chairman, CEO, ECF office and all the members reps whose e-mail addresses are provided on the site.

It wasn't about anything major; just - ironically - a little idea about how communication with members could be improved. It might have been regarded as a bad idea

Not a single person responded....

[Sean Hewitt]

Around a month ago, I wrote an e-mail to the ECF chairman, CEO, ECF office and all the members reps whose e-mail addresses are provided on the site.

It wasn't about anything major; just - ironically - a little idea about how communication with members could be improved. It might have been regarded as a bad idea

Not a single person responded....

I am a members rep and I received the email. I've just re-read it and I have to say it doesn't appear to be asking for a response! Apologies if I got that wrong.

For what it's worth, I don't think that your idea as presented (that is, no player can have games graded unless they register with a valid email address on the ECF website or a postal address) is a starter.

However, I think that voluntary e-registration with some sort of incentive to do so has merit.

Regards,

Sean

[Laurie Roberts]

thanks for replying. Not so much that the games wouldn't be graded, rather than players wouldn't have their grades published if they hadn't at least supplied a contact address. The aim of this is simply to ensure that the ECF have chess players contact details which will then allow them to consult more widely on issues affecting them with polls etc.

I take your point that it might not work although I note that in other sports you have to register with the governing body to take part.

Thanks for replying. You are correct in that I didn't specify explicitly that I wanted a reply. Although if I was an ECF officer and someone sent me an idea, I would at least acknowledge receipt, even if the idea was not great! Thanks for your reply here though

[Carl Hibbard]

Thanks for replying. You are correct in that I didn't specify explicitly that I wanted a reply. Although if I was an ECF officer and someone sent me an idea, I would at least acknowledge receipt, even if the idea was not great! Thanks for your reply here though

It does highlight the state of ECF general IT if you didn't receive a response

I get a *lot* of email from my various projects and will always respond even if its not with the answer someone was looking for

[Alex Holowczak]

I am a members rep and I received the email. I've just re-read it and I have to say it doesn't appear to be asking for a response! Apologies if I got that wrong.

I think it's just good manners to send a reply, even if the message doesn't directly ask for one.

[Laurie Roberts]

Sean: Thanks for replying here. I'm pleased you like the principle behind the idea anyway, and hope something better can emerge as a result

[Sean Hewitt]

Thanks for replying. You are correct in that I didn't specify explicitly that I wanted a reply. Although if I was an ECF officer and someone sent me an idea, I would at least acknowledge receipt, even if the idea was not great! Thanks for your reply here though

As you say, the email didn't suggest that you were looking for a reply. As soon as your post here suggested otherwise, I replied!

Perhaps the problem was that because it was sent to so many people nobody knew who it was actually to, so nobody knew if they were the person who should reply or if it was just cc'd to them for information. For example, although I am a Basic Members Rep I'm not an ECF officer.

Coincidentally I have suggested to an ECF officer that a congress mailing list should be set up where players can voluntarily sign up to receive information on congresses (both by type and location) that are of specific interest to them and I believe that's looked at.