English Chess Forum

Bob Clark wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:11 pm

But as a starter for 10

During Mike’s time as CEO, the ECF has made an appalling decision to remove the option of three year membership renewals

Have you got records showing why and how this decision was made? By an individual Director or by the board? If by an individual Director, which one? If by the Board, who was in favour and who was against?

A

Is this another one for the great code-breaking tradition of English chess

Bob Clark wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:38 am

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:07 am

Is Fenella's campaign slogan "I wasn't nominated by Chris"?

It’s more likely to be I’ll do everything Mike tells me to do.

I’m not sure of the point of these polls before the election addresses are published, when will that happen?

I heard from one of the people who has put forward Fenella that she wanted to stand herself and was not approach by anyone from the board, but wanted to stand as i did asked the question as i don't know Fenella and they did.

so i did not like Bob comment about I do everything Mike tells me to do

John Reyes wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:11 pm

Bob Clark wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:38 am

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 8:07 am

Is Fenella's campaign slogan "I wasn't nominated by Chris"?

It’s more likely to be I’ll do everything Mike tells me to do.

I’m not sure of the point of these polls before the election addresses are published, when will that happen?

I heard from one of the people who has put forward Fenella that she wanted to stand herself and was not approach by anyone from the board, but wanted to stand as i did asked the question as i don't know Fenella and they did.

so i did not like Bob comment about I do everything Mike tells me to do

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe your the MCF Rep for the ECF.

On another thread Mick Norris stated that the MCF would vote for Fenella.

Remembering that we are sticking to discussing about policy, can you explain why the MCF made that decision.

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:18 pm

Perhaps you would consider removing the reference to trolls - I don't think you actually know what it means.

To aid in the identification I attach one I made earlier

Doesn't resemble anybody in this place that I've met John. But I'm sure it amuses at least one person.

Troll just means 'anyone that disagrees with my comment'.

J T Melsom wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:41 pm

Doesn't resemble anybody in this place that I've met John. But I'm sure it amuses at least one person.

In fact, it is a selfie from my visit to Calcutta.

Well we have met so I erred in that regard, but its still a scarcely relevant contribution to the thread.

Bob Clark wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:34 pm

John Reyes wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 3:11 pm

Bob Clark wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 9:38 am

It’s more likely to be I’ll do everything Mike tells me to do.

I’m not sure of the point of these polls before the election addresses are published, when will that happen?

I heard from one of the people who has put forward Fenella that she wanted to stand herself and was not approach by anyone from the board, but wanted to stand as i did asked the question as i don't know Fenella and they did.

so i did not like Bob comment about I do everything Mike tells me to do

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe your the MCF Rep for the ECF.

On another thread Mick Norris stated that the MCF would vote for Fenella.

Remembering that we are sticking to discussing about policy, can you explain why the MCF made that decision.

Yes and No

Julian was the MCF ECF but after our AGM was done on the Wednesday 8th Septemeber i was elected as i feel that our rep did not vote for the last AGM and he wanted to step down

But Julian Put in the MCF Council meeting agenda for September to talk about the elections

The MCF committee made their decision as i did not know who was standing, but their name was on the public domain and they make thier own decision (i did not know Fenalla so i could not comment but other people know her with the junior contact)

I was intending a similar point to Bob, that no real way to judge the candidates at the time the poll released unless some existing prejudice.

We do now have statements, but unlike other posts I don't see much in the statements indicating policy differences

Yes, this is one snag in the process

MCF Council met on Monday night and next meet November 16th

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:24 pm

... the vote at the top of this thread, which, although not official, may be indicative.

Well, I'm not sure anything said or done here is indicative of anything other than people here have said and done some stuff.



Perhaps more relevant is past ECF Elections. I'm thinking of October 2015 in particular when people associated with CSC did rather badly. Chris Kreuzer's post (viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7839#p166518) records the following:-

CEO: Phil Ehr lost to not this candidate
Commercial Director: Bob Kane lost to nobody
Director of Home Chess: John Foley lost 42 to 250 votes against Alex Holowczak
Director of International Chess: Malcolm Pein lost 139 to 142 to David Openshaw


Although:
In fact Malcolm Pein won his election on recount:-
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7843

If memory serves (it may not) Bob Kane took up his post anyway. Or took up a different post, perhaps, that allowed him to continue to deal with one particular sponsor.

Also of note:
Chris Fegan was also initially standing for NED
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7670&start=75#p163078

but as can be seen from Chris Kreuzer's results post, wasn't there on election day. My memory (and again, I need to emphasise this may not be accurate) was that he dropped out along the way when it appeared that he was going to lose.


Now, these results weren't necessarily as a result of seeing the people concerned as part of a 'CSC Block', but there does seem to have been a certain lukewarmish response to CSC candidates at times. E.g. the following year John Foley lost a NED election getting only 31 of around 500 votes cast

posting.php?mode=quote&f=25&p=271702


Btw, the 2015 elections also showed early signs of a conflict with Mike Turan

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7670&start=60#p163018



The question for election watchers, has anything changed in the last 6 years that will reverse the strong trend in 2015/2016 of votes not favouring CSC candidates?

Jonathan Bryant wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 15, 2021 5:57 pm

The question for election watchers, has anything changed in the last 6 years that will reverse the strong trend in 2015/2016 of votes not favouring CSC candidates?

Yes, they have done a very professional job of getting hold of the Member Rep votes.