PDA

View Full Version : 22. New Business



Lyle Craver
09-30-2011, 04:31 AM
Governors, here is where you post any new business not dealt with in the main agenda.

Michael Barron
10-02-2011, 12:09 AM
I would suggest the following item:
"CFC Governors Ethics and Code of Conduct"

Michael Barron
10-02-2011, 11:07 PM
Dear Governors,

First of all, I must admit that the following is just my personal opinion, and would like to apologize beforehand if somebody find it not "politically correct".

But we need to address this issue that recently became a problem that hinders chess development in Canada and damages public image of Chess Federation of Canada.

Unfortunately, some CFC Governors use public forums to denigrate CFC as organization and CFC Officers personally.
Such Governors don't consider themselves as part of organization and create impression that they're fighting against the CFC.

Such attitude is absolutely unacceptable for a person who supposed to govern an organization.
Any CFC Governor should accept any democratic decision made by the CFC management and assume ownership of it, even if he personally doesn't agree with it.
If a Governor can't do it, he should resign immediately!

We have private Governors forum to express constructive criticism and suggest legitimate solution for any real or imaginary problem, where we can discuss all proposals and make necessary corrections to the rules.

We could have sharp debates on the private Governors forum, but for the general public we all should appear as a strong and unite organization.

This should be CFC Governors Code of Conduct.

Thank you for your consideration!

Lyle Craver
10-04-2011, 01:24 AM
There's been all kinds of stuff over the last decade I haven't agreed with and sometimes I've had to quietly change the subject :)

But I hope it would be taken as a given that we're all volunteers working for the good of the game in this country? As opposed to our private benefit?

As far as I know the only people making anything from chess in this country are Jonathan Berry (the pittance he gets from the Globe & Mail) and Larry Bevand (I have no idea how much he makes but he's clearly a chess entrepreneur to some extent).

Simon Ong
10-04-2011, 01:25 AM
I would like to suggest update of the CFC certified t.d's list (http://chess.ca/cfc-arbiters). I think we should be adding new certified t.d's to the list.

In this meeting, we have discussed about class certificates which is a very good idea:). I am thinking if we can do the same for t.ds and organizers. We can make it easy for t.ds. to become certified, for example,

Local Tournament Director
1. Run at least 4 tournaments, including one swiss and one round robin
2. One swiss at least 10 participants.
3. Knowledge of the CFC Handbook, especially FIDE Law of Chess.

Regional Tournament Director
1. Run at least 4 tournaments, including one swiss and one round robin.
2. One swiss at least 30 participants.
3. Knowledge of the CFC Handbook, especially FIDE Law of Chess.

National Tournament Director
1. Run at least 6 tournaments, including one swiss and one round robin.
2. One of the tournament must be a major national or international tournament.
3. Knowledge of the CFC Handbook, especially FIDE Law of Chess.

Of course, we the TDOCP committee can administer an exam if they want to follow what was outlined in Section 20 of the Handbook.

Just an idea :)

Patrick McDonald
10-04-2011, 03:23 PM
Governors, here is where you post any new business not dealt with in the main agenda.

I have introduced a discussion around the Youth Committee under my report as Youth Coordinator.

Please have a look and make your comments / suggestions.

Thank You,

Paul Leblanc
10-04-2011, 07:20 PM
Michael, I agree with you. We have enough challenges without having to deal with this type of unhelpful behavior.

Michael Barron
10-05-2011, 11:59 PM
There's been all kinds of stuff over the last decade I haven't agreed with and sometimes I've had to quietly change the subject :)

But I hope it would be taken as a given that we're all volunteers working for the good of the game in this country? As opposed to our private benefit?

As far as I know the only people making anything from chess in this country are Jonathan Berry (the pittance he gets from the Globe & Mail) and Larry Bevand (I have no idea how much he makes but he's clearly a chess entrepreneur to some extent).

Lyle,

You're free to disagree, but in this country there is relatively big category that makes money from chess - private chess coaches.

I'm quite sure, for example, that Mr.Egorov got paid by Mrs.Jin, although don't have a hard evidence in hand.

Just to clarify:
I don't want to say that a coach should work for free or that a coach can't be a CFC Governor,
I just want to say that a coach can't be completely impartial and we should take his opinion on certain matters with a gran of salt... ;)

Kevin Pacey
10-06-2011, 05:24 PM
Unless I've occasionally slipped up, I've actually personally tried to follow Michael's ideal WHILE I'm a Governor. However, it's a bit of a slippery slope. Does criticizing inacative Governors as 'Deadwood' constitute a violation of such a code, for example, as even an Exec member has recently publicly done?

As for the frustration I've occasionally been given to vent while I'm not a Governor, or even a CFC member, should that count against me under such a code when I become a Governor later? That I think, of course, should be left up to those who appoint or vote in Governors in the first place.

Fred McKim
10-06-2011, 08:33 PM
Does criticizing inacative Governors as 'Deadwood' constitute a violation of such a code, for example, as even an Exec member has recently publicly done?


That would be me....

:o

Christopher Mallon
10-06-2011, 10:01 PM
Michael, I couldn't help but notice that you left out that CFC Governors should also not publicly "go after" in any way CFC Members or their relatives...

Michael Barron
10-06-2011, 11:26 PM
Michael, I couldn't help but notice that you left out that CFC Governors should also not publicly "go after" in any way CFC Members or their relatives...

Christopher,

Could you please show some examples?

Ken Craft
10-07-2011, 09:49 AM
Frankly, I think a Governors' Code of Conduct is a non-starter. These codes are usually used to stifle dissent and force conformity.

Hugh Brodie
10-07-2011, 10:39 AM
Lyle wrote:


As far as I know the only people making anything from chess in this country are Jonathan Berry (the pittance he gets from the Globe & Mail) and Larry Bevand (I have no idea how much he makes but he's clearly a chess entrepreneur to some extent).


There are several CMA teachers in Montreal that have told me (or claimed) that their only income (or almost all) comes from teaching chess.

Michael Barron
10-07-2011, 10:05 PM
Frankly, I think a Governors' Code of Conduct is a non-starter. These codes are usually used to stifle dissent and force conformity.

Ken,

If you like dissent for the sake of dissent, you shouldn't be a Governor.
A Governor supposed to make a positive contribution to the organization.
If you have some constructive idea, you should convince a majority of Governors that your idea would actually help to develop chess in Canada and change the CFC rules accordingly.

And here is an example of inappropriate Governor's conduct:
http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/showthread.php?p=43167#poststop

Neither this post nor consequent "discussion" do anything good for Canadian chess - they only damage public image of Chess Federation of Canada and CFC Executive... :mad:

Lyle Craver
10-08-2011, 01:00 AM
Sorry Michael, I forgot about teachers and coaches - you are of course quite correct.

Mark S. Dutton, I.A.
10-08-2011, 03:40 PM
Ken,

If you like dissent for the sake of dissent, you shouldn't be a Governor.
A Governor supposed to make a positive contribution to the organization.
If you have some constructive idea, you should convince a majority of Governors that your idea would actually help to develop chess in Canada and change the CFC rules accordingly.

And here is an example of inappropriate Governor's conduct:
http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/showthread.php?p=43167#poststop

Neither this post nor consequent "discussion" do anything good for Canadian chess - they only damage public image of Chess Federation of Canada and CFC Executive... :mad:


I totally agree with you Michael. Ken Craft -- you seem to want to make a habit of disagreeing with everyone and everything all the time -- just because you have the "right" to. How about doing something positive for the CFC like resigning and leaving those who are intereseted in volunteering their time to make a positive contibution to do just that. It will be really nice to not have to waste our time constantly answering your "dissent". You are not the Leader of the Opposition. This is not the House of Commons -- this is the CFC - please help us or let the rest of us help the chess players in Canada -- do the right thing and RESIGN Ken Craft! :mad:

Christopher Mallon
10-08-2011, 08:50 PM
I totally agree with you Michael. Ken Craft -- you seem to want to make a habit of disagreeing with everyone and everything all the time -- just because you have the "right" to. How about doing something positive for the CFC like resigning and leaving those who are intereseted in volunteering their time to make a positive contibution to do just that. It will be really nice to not have to waste our time constantly answering your "dissent". You are not the Leader of the Opposition. This is not the House of Commons -- this is the CFC - please help us or let the rest of us help the chess players in Canada -- do the right thing and RESIGN Ken Craft! :mad:

Wow seriously? A member of the Executive demanding that a Governor resigns just because there is a disagreement with him? That's ridiculous.

Also, that sorta actually proves his point, by the way. Good job! :)

Christopher Mallon
10-08-2011, 08:52 PM
By the way, will the demand for Ken's resignation make it into the official minutes of the meeting? Should be interesting!

Michael Barron
10-08-2011, 11:51 PM
Wow seriously? A member of the Executive demanding that a Governor resigns just because there is a disagreement with him? That's ridiculous.

Also, that sorta actually proves his point, by the way. Good job! :)

Sorry, Christopher, but you missed the point... :(

Everybody's entitled to his own opinion, but there is a proper time and place to show disagreement.

If a Governor can't accept responsibility for well being of the organization, if he constantly publicly denigrate CFC as organization and CFC Executive personally, he should resign.

Vladimir Drkulec
10-09-2011, 01:04 AM
Disagreeing with a decision is not the same as denigrating the CFC. As far as I am concerned four of the five presidents that have reigned since I returned to chess have been pretty good. Hal, David, Bob and Michael have all done their best with the situations that have presented themselves. Nobody's perfect and no one is going to be right 100% of the time. The guy in between was in over his head so I can't be too hard on him either.

Stifling dissent leads to groupthink and bad decisions. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax.

Michael Barron
10-09-2011, 10:17 PM
Disagreeing with a decision is not the same as denigrating the CFC. As far as I am concerned four of the five presidents that have reigned since I returned to chess have been pretty good. Hal, David, Bob and Michael have all done their best with the situations that have presented themselves. Nobody's perfect and no one is going to be right 100% of the time. The guy in between was in over his head so I can't be too hard on him either.

Stifling dissent leads to groupthink and bad decisions. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax.

Sorry, Vlad, if I was not clear enough... :(

Let me try once more:

CFC's mandate is to promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada.
Unfortunately, chess in Canada is still not very popular.
Why?
Because Canadian chess community has too many critics and too few doers.
As a result, chess image is not very appealing for the general public, including potential sponsors from business community and from all levels of government.

How could we improve the situation?
We should appear to the general public as a strong unite organization.
All CFC Governors should use word "we" talking to the general public about CFC and its decisions.
We all should move to the same goal, in the same direction.

Does it mean "stifling dissent"?
No.
Different opinions and open discussions are welcome.
But they have an appropriate time and place - such as this forum.
During this online meeting we have voted on 9 motions.
No single vote was unanimous.
Every Governor had a chance to express his opinion and convince other Governors in its merit.

But as soon as voting is finished, the decision is made - it becomes a low, and whole organization is going to enforce it.
Every Governor should accept the decision of majority - no matter if he agree or disagree.
If a Governor can't publicly say anything good about CFC's decision, it's better say nothing.
If a Governor can't accept a CFC's decision as his own, he should resign.

It's not about "stifling dissent", it's about protecting public image of the organization.

Hope, this long explanation clarifies my opinion... :)

Vladimir Drkulec
10-10-2011, 01:37 AM
Sorry, Vlad, if I was not clear enough... :(

Let me try once more:

CFC's mandate is to promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada.

When I am doing things that "promote and encourage the knowledge, study and play of the game of chess in Canada" is when I feel that I am being most useful and successful in spreading the word about this wonderful game of ours. For the most part this occurs when I am helping kids or adults realize more of their chess potential.



Unfortunately, chess in Canada is still not very popular.
Why?
Because Canadian chess community has too many critics and too few doers.


I can't disagree with you there about the need for more doers and fewer critics but that is true about every aspect of life.



As a result, chess image is not very appealing for the general public, including potential sponsors from business community and from all levels of government.


I don't find that "chess is not very appealing for the general public". There is probably more chess being played now than ever before. Most of it is beyond the purview of the CFC and is being played on chess servers.



How could we improve the situation?
We should appear to the general public as a strong unite organization.

There is a undercurrent of authoritarianism which rears its head from time to time in the CFC and in particular is being manifested in this thread. Whether we appear as a strong united organization or not has little bearing on the popularity of chess or the emergence of significant sponsorship. What will make chess more popular is the value proposition that we offer the general public and sponsors.



All CFC Governors should use word "we" talking to the general public about CFC and its decisions.
We all should move to the same goal, in the same direction.

Does it mean "stifling dissent"?
No.
Different opinions and open discussions are welcome.
But they have an appropriate time and place - such as this forum.

And yet someone has been asked to resign while expressing those different opinions in this forum...

If you think that I am going to defend the CFC and bite my tongue if I perceive that the CFC is doing something stupid and that this silence would be doing some kind of a service to the CFC then I believe that you are just wrong.



During this online meeting we have voted on 9 motions.
No single vote was unanimous.
Every Governor had a chance to express his opinion and convince other Governors in its merit.

With regard to the matters that we voted on at this meeting, the only one that I can see having any direct impact on popularity of CFC chess is the institution of class titles. This is working for the USCF and I suspect it will work for us as well. I would have liked to have got the senior master designation as a possibility but can live with having a system that stops at national master. It is still relevant to 98% of CFC members and potential CFC members.



But as soon as voting is finished, the decision is made - it becomes a low, and whole organization is going to enforce it.

Most of the matters voted on were not controversial and thus unlikely to arouse any particular emotion for or against and thus there is likely to be no blowback from any of the decisions made at this meeting.

If you want chess to become more popular then I would suggest that the executive, the governors and the chess community should become a little more aware of the optics and politics of their decisions. Always err on the side of kindness. Try not to stomp on puppy dogs and the dreams of little girls who are photogenic, black belts in Tae Kwon Do (they didn't have black belts in Tae Kwon Do in my day) and who can belt out twenty minutes of operatic song at the drop of a hat. Its like taking that poisoned pawn that gives your opponent a long initiative. It always seems like a good idea at the time but you often live to regret it.



Every Governor should accept the decision of majority - no matter if he agree or disagree.
If a Governor can't publicly say anything good about CFC's decision, it's better say nothing.

If a Governor can't accept a CFC's decision as his own, he should resign.



We will have to agree to disagree on that. And I am not resigning since my job is to represent the interests of masters which I have been doing to the best of my abilities. The last executive and this one have been very responsive to my communications so I have no beefs in that area.



It's not about "stifling dissent", it's about protecting public image of the organization.

Hope, this long explanation clarifies my opinion... :)

Michael, we are not masters of the universe with a Cartmanish need for others "to respect our authoritah". We are a bunch of people who love chess and are trying to promote it to anyone who will listen and can help us in that aim. If everyone remembers that then the CFC will refrain from making bad decisions and governors will not have to refrain from criticizing bad decisions.

Michael Barron
10-10-2011, 09:08 PM
...
And yet someone has been asked to resign while expressing those different opinions in this forum...


Sorry, Vlad, but you missed the point... :(

I never suggested that someone should resign while expressing those different opinions in this forum.

To the contrary:
If a Governor wants to improve decisions made by the Chess Federation of Canada, he should express his concerns regarding CFC matters on this forum and on this forum only.

Of course, if a Governor has different agenda, he could choose another forum...
But such choice leads to the question:
Why he is a CFC Governor? :confused:

Michael von Keitz
10-10-2011, 11:54 PM
Michael Barron proposed that a "CFC Governors Ethics and Code of Conduct" be established. He cited particular examples of behaviour he considered to be contrary to the ethics to be expected of a CFC Governor. This led to a discussion on what would be considered an appropriate forum for dissent (i.e. dissent should be expressed to the assembly of governors, not vented in public) and what constitutes appropriate public commentary (e.g. is decrying "deadwood governors" inappropriate?). Ultimately, he identified his concern as being that of "protecting [the] public image of the organization."

Simon Ong proposed that the list of CFC TDs/Organizers (http://chess.ca/cfc-arbiters) be expanded, through the re-introduction of a TDOCP. Offering his own proposal, he likened the value of a TDOCP to that of the recently approved class certificate program.

Patrick McDonald indicated that he had initiated a discussion on the Youth Committee under the thread containing his Executive Report.

All parties may wish to have their concerns formally added to the agenda for the Winter Quarterly Meeting, either as stand-alone discussions, or in connection with the presentation of a formal motion.