Re: Nominations 2021
Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:43 pm
There is manifestly something wrong with a system where representatives nominate candidates and the people who they represent don't even know this is happening.
The independent home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
https://ecforum.org.uk/
Thanks Roger and you was right as i did feel that that the Members should have the right to asked the members 1st to see how to nominations people 1st before putting your name 1stRoger de Coverly wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 2:42 pmThe membership in the sense of the minority with votes seemingly knew who the candidates were. Those endorsing a candidate with nominations certainly did.Alex McFarlane wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 2:31 pmI find it worrying that the reason for not informing the membership was that there was a possibility of a 'deal' being done which would prevent them from having a meaningful election.
Could I also say that I really don't think the member's direct representatives should be part of a list nominating candidates? Certainly without some degree of soundings as to what their constituency thinks. Only Joe Reyes out of the Gold, Silver or Bronze representatives has declined to express a preference by virtue of making a nomination.
Or indeed if he loses; I'd like to see him go either wayAndrew Zigmond wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:21 pmAnother important question that needs to be asked is what happens to International if Malcolm wins. I'm assuming he has a likely candidate in mind to be appointed pending the next election for that post (which I think is next year) in which case it should be made public.
Malcolm's manifesto asks Mike to stand asideAlex McFarlane wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 2:31 pmThat is a concern but, in my view, not the main one.Andrew Zigmond wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 2:04 pmMy concern was that it left a vacuum where some people were more in the "know" than others, meaning that some manoeuvring behind the scenes has taken place while other people were in the dark
What does this mean? Surely the point of the election is to decide between candidates with different outlooks!! I find it worrying that the reason for not informing the membership was that there was a possibility of a 'deal' being done which would prevent them from having a meaningful election.Michael Farthing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:30 pmThe reason for the delay from last Thursday is that I judged it to be in the best long term interest of the ECF as there were active discussions taking place at reconciliation between two candidates with different outlooks on how the organisation should move forward.
Provided the contest does not deteriorate into a mud slinging fiasco this is what democracy means.
If they had enough respect for those they represent to answer that question, they wouldn't have done it the first place.JustinHorton wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:05 pm"why did you nominate X without asking your members first?" is a question that ought to be asked and answered.
That can't possibly be true, can it? That would mean Ms. Milewska had been nominated by Tim Wall, Tim Wall, Tim Wall, Timothy Wall and T. P. Wall, and someone would have noticed that obvious abuse of the nomination process.Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:25 pmYou would probably find that such decisions have been devolved explicitly or implicitly to whoever represents the county association at ECF Council meetings.Chris Goodall wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 3:13 pmIn that I'm the Grading Officer for Durham CCA and have never been asked to vote on, or discuss, said nominations
Definitely when it comes to the actual vote, but this is only to get them into the first stage, then it's down to the person to earn any votes.Post by JustinHorton » Tue Sep 14, 2021 4:05 pm
Incidentally, while it's up to individuals what they do or do not do, it seems to me that when dsuch a thing has occurred,"why did you nominate X without asking your members first?" is a question that ought to be asked and answered.
Why not consult with the members though? What possible good reason can there be?Gareth T Ellis wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:49 pmDefinitely when it comes to the actual vote, but this is only to get them into the first stage
Unless the person wanting to be nominated is totally unfit for the position, what possible good reason is there not to nominate them and let the whole electorate decide?Why not consult with the members though? What possible good reason can there be?
I wonder what percentage of ECF members care to any degree about ECF elections?JustinHorton wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 8:47 pmmany members don't even know that this is happening or who is involved.