Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by Paul Cooksey » Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:12 pm

An ECF Council Zoom this evening on how to include online games in voting rights for Council.

I don't really object to the idea, but the ECFs introspection depresses me a bit. Still, maybe my view that the significant amount of work being done wont really change very much is wrong. So I thought I'd mention it so forumites could share the excitement and express their views.
Last edited by Paul Cooksey on Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Nick Grey » Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:48 pm

Strange to even consider with issues which will not be live in sept 2021. IMO

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19349
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:54 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:12 pm
An ECF Council Zoom this evening on how to include online games in voting rights for Council.

Isn't the problem with voting rights that the number of votes is based on the games played under the auspices of an organisation between two cut off dates? For many organisations, particularly Congresses, that's going to be nil unless prior years are rolled forward. You would then get "one organisation, one vote".

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4261
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed Jan 20, 2021 10:04 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:54 pm
Isn't the problem with voting rights that the number of votes is based on the games played under the auspices of an organisation between two cut off dates? For many organisations, particularly Congresses, that's going to be nil unless prior years are rolled forward. You would then get "one organisation, one vote".
The paper also addresses that issue.

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

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Nick Grey » Wed Jan 20, 2021 11:28 pm

I hope it went well.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Paul Cooksey » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:45 am

David Sedgwick wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 10:04 pm
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 9:54 pm
Isn't the problem with voting rights that the number of votes is based on the games played under the auspices of an organisation between two cut off dates? For many organisations, particularly Congresses, that's going to be nil unless prior years are rolled forward. You would then get "one organisation, one vote".
The paper also addresses that issue.
I think the spirit of the meeting was to publicise so the relevant bit below. I have Alex Holowczak's voice in my head saying "I'm sorry to butt in but not actually addressed by the paper, referenced in it" since he seems to focus on these points of precision.

I did think when the meeting first arranged that online votes might be in focus given the likelihood of contested elections at the AGM. But it was rather being presented as an opportunity to engage in the detail of future constitutional changes.

It puts me in a difficult position. I feel obliged to pay attention to anything that Council does so I can properly understand and represent my organisation. But the idea that the ECF executive is going to devote more resources to internal governance is contrary to my overarching position that the ECF should simplify. I'd rather have seen 50 hours of volunteer time going towards reform rather than codification.

"Independent of the Proposal, a resolution is to be put to Finance Council in April 2021 to amend the articles of association to provide for a voting register to be published in September 2021 that will be representative of usual levels of OTB activity rather than being distorted by the effect of Covid-19 on OTB activity in the year to 30th June 2021. In short, a Member’s voting entitlement will be the highest of the 2019, 2020 and 2021 entitlements (and if a resolution is passed to attribute votes to online games, the third of these figures will take account of online Qualifying Games)."

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2615
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Adam Raoof » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:31 am

One member, one vote - simple. Better than giving more votes to the same organisers. What does one do with all the votes the ECF itself gathers through online competitions? The ECF could just give online organisers a bit of a break and encourage more online competition around the country.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

J T Melsom
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by J T Melsom » Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:13 am

I find the debate here a little confusing. It is surely necessary for the ECF to adjust the criteria for the Voting Register to reflect more equitably the situation that we are in, and to enable members to take decisions at Council. OMOV has been debated before and may be better, but would surely be too radical a step at the current time especially when normal debate is subject to restriction. And there are many people putting in volunteer time to run events some of whom are also addressing these constitutional questions. There are some people dwelling on the latter and doing nothing about events, and others doing nothing but struggle with living life in uncertain times. I don't see the issue in binary terms at all.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri Jan 22, 2021 7:57 am

J T Melsom wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:13 am
I find the debate here a little confusing. It is surely necessary for the ECF to adjust the criteria for the Voting Register to reflect more equitably the situation that we are in, and to enable members to take decisions at Council.
I don't think Bucks was represented, so a friendly neighbouring county will try to help :-)

The thread I was pulling in the meeting was "equitable". The proposal made two assumptions, that the ECF should encourage online chess, and that the right way to encourage organisers is to give them more votes at Council.

We all agree with the first part. People organising chess are be applauded, in the current difficult times more than ever. But the second part that votes in Council are allocated to organisers based on how much chess they organise is controversial. I think the job of Council is to represent individual
members. Votes are not the only way to reward organisers, some have different preferences.

The argument OMOV is difficult to implement is true. But so is continuing to tweak the existing model with online voting rights. I'd argue the form of OMOV I usually propose, allowing members to choose which organisation represents them, is not much more complicated to implement. So it is a choice.

J T Melsom
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by J T Melsom » Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:13 am

I didn't attend (a) because I don't really do Zoom meetings (b) I didn't see the issue as one of sufficient import to justify a change to (a). I see this as a short term fix to allow organisations to have a voice and also to include those organisations who have made the effort to organise online without unduly penalising those that have not. I would be opposed to making more radical changes at this time. I accept that radical change might need to be undertaken post pandemic, but other changes at this time would be unacceptable, for what I hope are obvious reasons. There was I think a little too much emphasis on introspection and the alleged waste of volunteer time in your posts.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:32 am

I don't want to be too combative, but I disagree with almost all of Jon's post.

The idea this is a short term fix is not how the proposers positioned it. The proposal was presented as having minimal short term impact, but being important to change the constitution to incorporate online chess in voting rights for the longer term.

If this was a five minute job to redraft one of the regulations, I would not mind. But not only is it a thing needing significant work to implement, but commits the ECF to significant ongoing work. Blitz rating lists for OTB and online chess for example.

Of course, if you think this is a good idea it is not a waste of volunteer resources. But I don't think it is a good idea. I cannot think of a politer word than introspective to describe it.

More generally, the point of Council is to vote on what the ECF should do, not how the ECF should do it. So I think this thing is being handled the wrong way round.

J T Melsom
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by J T Melsom » Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:50 am

Well as you don't agree with the strategy of the ECF, its current constitution or its funding model, then my view is never going to find much favour. From your point of view this may indeed look like tinkering. Whether for short or longer term is a bigger issue, but it seems to me that any constitutional change is by your own definition introspective. You might just as well said - don't approve this approach, would like to see more radical reform, and skipped the carping. And whether it is these proposals, full OMOV or your own personal version, trying to force through reform that doesn't have over-whelming support at a time when debate is restricted would be nothing short of a coup.

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:05 am

For the benefit of people who live more than a few miles away, an irony here is that I played more chess in Bucks than Berks when we were last able to play OTB. So Jon represents me more than I do.

I think Jon's frustration that constitutional changes are being proposed, at a time he does not think they should be made, is misdirected at me. I am neither proposing or driving anything, I am only pointing out that it is happening and saying if we commit out resources to this it is at the expense of something else. It isn't a no brainer we should definitely do, which is why I brought up the major alternative approach.

Obviously I could save a lot of time and effort by just ignoring the ECF. But it isn't terribly constructive. John may not like my tone, but I did think this proposal was worth my time. I said above that I supported attempts to encourage online chess organisers. But I do not support constitutional changes to do it, and I do not like the new way the ECF is trying to push them through.

There are alternatives, finding a way to give organisers money for example.

J T Melsom
Posts: 848
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by J T Melsom » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:32 am

Nobody else is posting here , so I won't prolong things, but I certainly don't oppose constitutional change at this time or any other for the sake of opposing it. I support the thrust of these proposals as recognising the short and long term relevance of online chess to the way chess takes place in England. And you were proposing something, and something rather different, or else you would not have posted at all, or changed the title of the thread to include OMOV.

Look forward to getting back to the chess. :)

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Online Voting Rights/ OMOV

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:40 am

J T Melsom wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:32 am
And you were proposing something, and something rather different, or else you would not have posted at all, or changed the title of the thread to include OMOV.
Apologies for the lack of clarity. I have made no constitutional proposals to the ECF on Berkshire's behalf and do not intend to.

I have personally proposed various things here over the years. Generally, the ECF opposes them. But it sometimes does them later.

Post Reply