A Remarkable Read
-
- Posts: 1211
- Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:35 am
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: A Remarkable Read
Mostly remarkable for being an entire waste of time
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
I'm sure some posters will want to pick over the bones of the report. Whatever its merits, I think we should pause and thank Julian Clissold, Stephen Woodhouse and Mike Gunn for the time taken to produce it. I'm sure there are more enjoyable things for which to volunteer.
-
- Posts: 10381
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: A Remarkable Read
Indeed; the bit about "It is acknowledged there have been recent breaches of Board confidentiality" is particularly interesting
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 3559
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: A Remarkable Read
Yes. If the £50 payment required to lodge a complaint is meant to deter unnecessary ones, it's obviously not enough.
Also, I suspect readers of this forum will not find it difficult to correctly guess the identity of the unnamed "horrified" Director.
-
- Posts: 3495
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
- Location: Under Cover
Re: A Remarkable Read
From the above link.
'Whether that is right or not, MT [Mike Truran] apologised when he realised that RW [Rob Willmoth] had
not acted dishonestly and RW accepted the apology. That should have resolved the matter."
'RW has paid the £50 fee required by paragraph 1.3.'
---
The £50.00 is probably in place to deter needless squabbles and clashes of personalities.
Mike apologised and Rob accepted it. 'That should have resolved the matter' Maybe raise it to £150.00.
Edit: I see Ian has suggested an increase in the fee as well, he posted one minute before me!
'Whether that is right or not, MT [Mike Truran] apologised when he realised that RW [Rob Willmoth] had
not acted dishonestly and RW accepted the apology. That should have resolved the matter."
'RW has paid the £50 fee required by paragraph 1.3.'
---
The £50.00 is probably in place to deter needless squabbles and clashes of personalities.
Mike apologised and Rob accepted it. 'That should have resolved the matter' Maybe raise it to £150.00.
Edit: I see Ian has suggested an increase in the fee as well, he posted one minute before me!
-
- Posts: 1729
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
Given the allegiances of those making the complaint and the timing of it in relation to the impending election, it's hard not to see this as simply an attempt at an old fashioned pulling a political opponent through the mud routine.
The whole complaint reads to me as a big a waste of time - carried out with a goal in mind.
The whole complaint reads to me as a big a waste of time - carried out with a goal in mind.
-
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 6:07 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
An own one ?Unread post by Nick Burrows » Mon Sep 13, 2021 12:35 pm
Given the allegiances of those making the complaint and the timing of it in relation to the impending election, it's hard not to see this as simply an attempt at an old fashioned pulling a political opponent through the mud routine.
The whole complaint reads to me as a big a waste of time - carried out with a goal in mind.
-
- Posts: 2075
- Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
- Location: Harrogate
Re: A Remarkable Read
Is there any reason why this judgement has to be put in the public domain at all?
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own
-
- Posts: 2069
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
- Location: Morecambe, Europe
Re: A Remarkable Read
Regulation 5 Paragraph 3.5:Andrew Zigmond wrote: ↑Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:22 pmIs there any reason why this judgement has to be put in the public domain at all?
The outcome of the complaint will be published on the ECF website
PS I think that I have achieved a new record: in the posts made on this thread so far I am unable to disagree with a single word.
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
A nonsensical row about nothing.
-
- Posts: 1057
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:40 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
Challenge accep...Michael Farthing wrote: ↑Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:30 pmPS I think that I have achieved a new record: in the posts made on this thread so far I am unable to disagree with a single word.
Wait, someone thought it was worth paying £50 to accuse someone of accusing them of being a liar, and this merited an hour's discussion at a meeting?
Okay, never mind. I agree with the consensus of the forum.
Donate to Sabrina's fundraiser at https://gofund.me/aeae42c7 to support victims of sexual abuse in the chess world.
Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.
Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.
-
- Posts: 2069
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
- Location: Morecambe, Europe
Re: A Remarkable Read
Ah! Chris
I meant it to be a personal record - I wasn't claiming there has never been another forum member who has agreed with every word of a whole thread! My bad phraseology.
I meant it to be a personal record - I wasn't claiming there has never been another forum member who has agreed with every word of a whole thread! My bad phraseology.
-
- Posts: 676
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
- Location: Manchester
Re: A Remarkable Read
i wonder if it to do with a election maybe lolAndrew Zigmond wrote: ↑Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:22 pmIs there any reason why this judgement has to be put in the public domain at all?
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well
-
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Re: A Remarkable Read
Rob Willmoth spent a non trivial sum pursuing a failed claim against Mike Truran. But there is no similar scrutiny applied ro Rob's friends. Integrity seems in short supply. I'd like to see candidates put forward positive proposals and distance themselves from the lying attack dogs that have been deployed in advance. Those who share the Wall/Fegan approach are not fit for office in an organisation which requires a broad base consensus to be maintained for anything to be done. (and yes that may be a failing, but abuse/dark arts aren't the best way to change the status quo.)
Last edited by J T Melsom on Tue Sep 14, 2021 8:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.