Direct Members’ Representatives election

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
John Reyes
Posts: 477
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by John Reyes » Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:44 pm

Nick Grey wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:07 pm
Thanks Michael. I hope direct members reps consult on October matters.
I will and at the moment, i just finished the Silver members report and i will be asking Members if they have any motions to put forward from an Silver members side or not

Also I know Michael well and he is an great person, and he will always do what is right for the chess world and i do class him as an friend, and i will always supported the ecf and the silver members and any other as long as people wanted me too

i have been a silver rep for now 5 years and i feel that my record is good and i always follow the ethos of doing what is right for people and for no personal gain.
Any postings on here represent my personal views only

David Stott
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:29 pm

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by David Stott » Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:54 pm

What could possibly be wrong with publishing the total number of votes cast in each category as well as the number of votes cast for the winners? I don't believe any of the winners could object to this and surely it can't matter how far behind the losers were.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 3646
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:04 pm

Adam Raoof wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:12 pm
which candidates did not want the voting figures published?
I expect they wouldn't want that publicised either......
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1576
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Alex McFarlane » Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm

Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:19 pm
A statement about the decision not to publish detailed votes for the direct members' elections has now appeared on the ECF website:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/dmr-elections-footnote/
I see nothing in the statement which would prevent the percentage of votes cast (for those getting over, say, 20%) from being published. (The important part in the quote is the word "detailed". If it is not known how many voted the %age is a long way from being detailed!

That seems a reasonable compromise to me.

Certainly, if one of the successful candidates does not want their vote published that might confuse the matter. However, I would want to know why that person does not think that the people he represents deserve to know the margin of victory.

John Reyes
Posts: 477
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by John Reyes » Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:50 pm

Alex McFarlane wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm
Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:19 pm
A statement about the decision not to publish detailed votes for the direct members' elections has now appeared on the ECF website:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/dmr-elections-footnote/
I see nothing in the statement which would prevent the percentage of votes cast (for those getting over, say, 20%) from being published. (The important part in the quote is the word "detailed". If it is not known how many voted the %age is a long way from being detailed!

That seems a reasonable compromise to me.

Certainly, if one of the successful candidates does not want their vote published that might confuse the matter. However, I would want to know why that person does not think that the people he represents deserve to know the margin of victory.
I don't know how many votes was in each section but Alex i can confirmed it is not me that don't want their vote published.
Any postings on here represent my personal views only

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1969
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Michael Farthing » Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:08 pm

Alex McFarlane wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm
Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:19 pm
A statement about the decision not to publish detailed votes for the direct members' elections has now appeared on the ECF website:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/dmr-elections-footnote/
I see nothing in the statement which would prevent the percentage of votes cast (for those getting over, say, 20%) from being published. (The important part in the quote is the word "detailed". If it is not known how many voted the %age is a long way from being detailed!

That seems a reasonable compromise to me.
In the Arbiter of the Year Award there were three candidates:Lara, Peter and Alex

We are announcing the results for those with more than 20%
Lara 49%
Peter 48%

{purely for illustration - nothing meant personally, Alex}

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5866
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Carl Hibbard » Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:12 pm

Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:19 pm
A statement about the decision not to publish detailed votes for the direct members' elections has now appeared on the ECF website:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/dmr-elections-footnote/
Very poor ECF decision.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 792
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Paul Cooksey » Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:30 pm

Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:08 pm
In the Arbiter of the Year Award
Lara 49%
Peter 48%
Congratulations Lara, commiserations Peter. I assume Lara gets a trophy from the ECF since her win seems as legitimate as the other elections.

Nick Grey
Posts: 1760
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Nick Grey » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:09 pm

Is that Arbiter of the Year Award from Arbiters or members

Angus French
Posts: 1725
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Angus French » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:36 pm

Carl Hibbard wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:12 pm
Michael Farthing wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 4:19 pm
A statement about the decision not to publish detailed votes for the direct members' elections has now appeared on the ECF website:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/dmr-elections-footnote/
Very poor ECF decision.
Who exactly made the decision not to publish vote counts - and why exactly was that decision made?

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4255
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by David Sedgwick » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:28 pm

Could I please make the no doubt controversial suggestion that it's time to give Michael Farthing a break?

He has admitted to an error of judgment in the matter and said that he does not intend to repeat it. He has also explained why he feels unable to reverse the decision in this instance.

Like almost everyone else in English chess, he is a voluntary officer doing his best. We cannot expect people to get things right every time.

This Forum does have something of a reputation for hounding people mercilessly and beyond all reason. As a result a number of people have stopped posting over the years and the Forum is poorer for their absence. Others may have been deterred from offering their services for positions from which they would have been well suited.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1838
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:40 pm

I have to say that I'm struggling to understand why this is being treated by such a big deal. A decision was taken not to publish the exact voting figures, maybe that was the wrong call but unless there are any suggestions that the vote was a stitch up or anything was done in bad faith (and there appear to be none) surely we can agree to make a note to review for future years and leave it at that.

Even without the actual ballot numbers being revealed this election surely had much more accountability and transparency than most elections to council.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 792
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Paul Cooksey » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:55 pm

deleted
Last edited by Paul Cooksey on Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

Angus French
Posts: 1725
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Angus French » Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:11 am

I'm told others were involved in the decision not to publish vote counts. I'm also told that the number of valid vote returns was well over 500 - which strikes me as somewhat high and well over the number who have provided feedback to DMRs for any Council meeting. I also understand that more than 20 returns were rejected with half of those for double voting.

Angus French
Posts: 1725
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election

Post by Angus French » Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:18 am

David Sedgwick wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:28 pm
Could I please make the no doubt controversial suggestion that it's time to give Michael Farthing a break?

He has admitted to an error of judgment in the matter and said that he does not intend to repeat it. He has also explained why he feels unable to reverse the decision in this instance.

Like almost everyone else in English chess, he is a voluntary officer doing his best. We cannot expect people to get things right every time.

This Forum does have something of a reputation for hounding people mercilessly and beyond all reason. As a result a number of people have stopped posting over the years and the Forum is poorer for their absence. Others may have been deterred from offering their services for positions from which they would have been well suited.
Perhaps others may be deterred from participation and standing for office by the dominance of vested interests.

Post Reply