Page 8 of 9
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:44 pm
by John Reyes
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:54 pm
by David Stott
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:04 pm
by Matt Mackenzie
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......
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm
by Alex McFarlane
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:50 pm
by John Reyes
Alex McFarlane wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:08 pm
by Michael Farthing
Alex McFarlane wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:43 pm
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}
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:12 pm
by Carl Hibbard
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:30 pm
by Paul Cooksey
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:09 pm
by Nick Grey
Is that Arbiter of the Year Award from Arbiters or members
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:36 pm
by Angus French
Carl Hibbard wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:12 pm
Very poor ECF decision.
Who exactly made the decision not to publish vote counts - and why exactly was that decision made?
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:28 pm
by David Sedgwick
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:40 pm
by Andrew Zigmond
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:55 pm
by Paul Cooksey
deleted
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:11 am
by Angus French
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.
Re: Direct Members’ Representatives election
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:18 am
by Angus French
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.