Nominations 2021

[JustinHorton]

Not expecting a reply is not the same as thinking you should not get one. As it goes, I spent quite a lot of time during my period writing about chess not getting replies to messages I thought should have been replied to.

[Paul Robert Jackson]

But David Welch was for all practical purposes the same person as Peter Purland!

a rather strange comment.
.....the pillars of British Congress Chess!!

[Paul Robert Jackson]

But David Welch was for all practical purposes the same person as Peter Purland!

a rather strange comment.
.....the pillars of British Congress Chess!!

+ Alex & Lara & the others I have failed to mention.

[NickFaulks]

As it goes, I spent quite a lot of time during my period writing about chess not getting replies to messages I thought should have been replied to.

I have to say that I would not reply to a question posed in the manner of the one you quote. Perhaps they were not all like that.

[Mick Norris]

Time for a new President I think, but I expect there's no appetite for that

Who do you think could do better at the job's primary responsibilities of:

Ambassador of the ECF to represent it:

• At important public events
• To other important organisations
• To politicians and other distinguished persons
• To sponsors and donors
• To the media where appropriate

There is so much I dislike about him I wouldn't know where to start

A female President would be a good idea

[JustinHorton]

As it goes, I spent quite a lot of time during my period writing about chess not getting replies to messages I thought should have been replied to.

I have to say that I would not reply to a question posed in the manner of the one you quote. Perhaps they were not all like that.

Well I was writing it neither to yourself nor to anybody in their private capacity. Nor is the addressee noted for the gentleness of his manner. I very much doubt that the style of the email had anything to do with absence of a response.

[Michael Farthing]

But David Welch was for all practical purposes the same person as Peter Purland!

a rather strange comment.
.....the pillars of British Congress Chess!!

Perhaps it was light-hearted for this topic, but I don't think it was strange. David and Peter both took a delight in the way their lives had intertwined in so many ways - teaching in the same school; sharing similar chess careers and right back to the days of their birth - which were identical. This was a theme that Peter highlighted at David's funeral, which he had himself organised. I once complimented David on his effective bringing of a congress to order by declaiming, "Please everyone sit down - you're making the room look untidy". "I think that was you?" I added. He replied, "It might have been but it could equally as well have been Peter. We've worked together so long we've forgotten whose lines are whose".

[NickFaulks]

That is fascinating, Michael. I understood your general point but had no idea of the specifics.

[Nick Burrows]

I very much doubt

Yes you do.

[JustinHorton]

De omnibus dubitandum, Nick

[mickriding]

Any more Nicks want to weigh in to defend the righteous?

Seriously though, this type of thread is becoming depressingly familiar.

I agree completely with Nick Ivell's assessment. And I wish any posts regarding Mike Truran's tenure would indicate clearly where a nominated successor would do better. how and at what cost. And substantiate allegations with facts. But guess might have legal implications eh?

[Mick Norris]

I am taking the unusual step of intervening on a thread on the Forum because after serving on the Board for 3 years I’ve concluded Mike Truran needs to be challenged and replaced as ECF Chief Executive.

Mike’s tenure pre-covid saw very limited progress in the Federation's performance, financially and operationally. He has made virtually no efforts in the areas of fundraising and sponsorship or in seeking to develop the remit of the ECF and indeed some of his actions have, in my view, attempted to neuter the organisation.

I was horrified when he proposed that the PIF funds be moved into a separate Chess Trust charity when we should be working on transferring them to the ECF for the direct benefit of members

Just coming back to the casual statement of this as if it were a fact; it's not just the PIF, it's the John Robinson Trust as well (is that what John would have wanted, or indeed specified? No clue, but probably not)

Some of us don't think that transferring money to the ECF for the benefit of Malcolm spending it, leaving the ECF with less money, and hoping that in the process fundraising/sponsorship/increased member fees will come to the rescue, is a decent strategy

We've been told a few times that membership will increase if only (fill in your favourite explanation here, mine's that we drop the fees charged to members ), that sponsorship will cover the full cost of sending teams to events (notably, not women's or seniors or juniors) which proved not to be the case when Malcolm promised this to get elected

It would be good to see a fully costed financial plan put to the members, well even just Council, but we're not likely to get that

Hopefully, Council will see sense and re-elect Mike

[Stephen Westmoreland]

Chess seems very personal these days. Please be kind, we want to bring people in and not put them off due to squabbling.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Chess seems very personal these days. Please be kind, we want to bring people in and not put them off due to squabbling."

I think the only thing that has changed is the internet. Now, anybody can have a voice. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it's bad...

There were always loads of arguments in the old days, just not so public.

[Alan Kennedy]

Chess seems very personal these days. Please be kind, we want to bring people in and not put them off due to squabbling.

I agree!