Candidate for CFC President

[roger patterson]

Really? Now is your complaint with the CFC, or the players?

The CFC does provide you with free SwissSys software, which does alert you to the fact that memberships are expired when you register them for the tournament. The membership list is updated weekly and is available on the CFC website.

I simply don’t accept your statement that the number of people with membership issues is huge. Prove it to me, send me an email with a list of issues you had at your most recent tournament.

Collecting all the relevant data!
Name, cfc number, address, and email. What’s so hard about that?

At the Keres, 1/3 of the people pre-registered had membership issues that were not resolved by the start of round 1.

What's so hard? It's work and I don't like working.

And I wouldn't say it's difficult or slimey players deliberately trying to pull a fast one - they are just not that concerned about it.

[roger patterson]

ps: Bob - just look at the number of people on the Canadian Open pre-registered list that have "CHECK" under their CFC status.

[Bob Gillanders]

ps: Bob - just look at the number of people on the Canadian Open pre-registered list that have "CHECK" under their CFC status.

Well, so what! What do you think that means?

Take for example, Roman Sapozhnikov, listed as "CHECK" membership.
He is also listed as 2400 rating. If I check his history, I see him rating was 2400 back last November. Presumably that was his rating when he registered for the tournament. At that time, David added him to the list, marked "CHECK" membership at the time because his expiry date would have been February 2011. So he was listed as such because it would be necessary for him to renew his membership before the Canadian Open. I see now he has renewed, his expiry date is now February 2012.

Okay?

[Christopher Mallon]

Wow you guys are really taking this thread off topic. So far that I don't even know where to prune it!

[Fred McKim]

Really? Now is your complaint with the CFC, or the players?

The CFC does provide you with free SwissSys software, which does alert you to the fact that memberships are expired when you register them for the tournament. The membership list is updated weekly and is available on the CFC website.

I simply don’t accept your statement that the number of people with membership issues is huge. Prove it to me, send me an email with a list of issues you had at your most recent tournament.

Collecting all the relevant data!
Name, cfc number, address, and email. What’s so hard about that?

I've organized/directed probably close to 300 tournaments, and it is very little hassle, however most of my tournaments are under 25 players - that may be where the problem is.

[roger patterson]

Wow you guys are really taking this thread off topic. So far that I don't even know where to prune it!

well, to bring it back on topic, if there are lots of people with unresolved membership issues at a tournament, it's not going to be easier to deal with if they hail from different clubs with different membership fees.

[John Coleman]

What do I do if a player shows up, and I say "your membership is expired", and he replies "I'm a member of XYZ chess club, I paid my dues to them."

So I look up XYZ chess club, and see that their membership, or affilliate status, or whatever it is, has expired. So I say to the player "sorry, your club hasn't renewed, you are no longer eligible to play in tournaments. Hit the road, jack."

[roger patterson]

What do I do if a player shows up, and I say "your membership is expired", and he replies "I'm a member of XYZ chess club, I paid my dues to them."

So I look up XYZ chess club, and see that their membership, or affilliate status, or whatever it is, has expired. So I say to the player "sorry, your club hasn't renewed, you are no longer eligible to play in tournaments. Hit the road, jack."

Clearly Michael would have lots of issues to work out and some more convincing on purported benefits

[Michael von Keitz]

What do I do if a player shows up, and I say "your membership is expired", and he replies "I'm a member of XYZ chess club, I paid my dues to them."

So I look up XYZ chess club, and see that their membership, or affilliate status, or whatever it is, has expired. So I say to the player "sorry, your club hasn't renewed, you are no longer eligible to play in tournaments. Hit the road, jack."

On that particular count, I would like to return to the distribution of individual membership cards (especially if clubs were to agree to distribute them, for those players that are tied to a club). I'm fairly certain I mentioned something to that effect somewhere on the first page. Anyway, quite simply, if your membership card indicates you are near expiry (regardless of whether we stick with the old model or not), you should be following up (assuming you wish to continue on as a member of the CFC and the CFC office has failed to send you or your club a reminder).

Clearly Michael would have lots of issues to work out and some more convincing on purported benefits

As far as this proposed pilot is concerned (disregarding my previous suggestion of a wholesale implementation in the long term), I would anticipate dealing with some issues as they arise, but there are certainly simple enough answers to most issues, virtually all of which I believe the assembly of governors can identify long before January. What it may become a question of at that point, however, is cost.

[Michael von Keitz]

I guess my first question is, do you have numbers that would tend to demonstrate a Club-affiliate model would help the CFC in any way or is it try to change for the sake of saying things changed ? Any study that would help understanding what part of our membership would favor (and why) that type of model ? Any numbers in mind that would help us consider the monetary aspects of such a change ?

By its nature, a pilot is a study. That said, as a result of the discussion, some have even suggested simply reinstating the old affiliate program would be a good step toward providing incentives to clubs to recruit. I look forward to continuing the discussion and seeing what other thoughts the incoming assembly of governors may have.

Michael, even in the most populated part of the CFC membership (Ontario), the Governors are "elected/selected/nominated" on a twist-harm platform. Even though in theory the Governors are supposed to be elected by the members, in fact in the vast majority of the Governors are either nominated unopposed or twisted an harm and leg to accept the "job". In fact, as an example, it seems only 7 persons attended the EOCA annual meeting out of those people nobody really wanted to be a Governor.

I think I'm missing your point here. I don't dispute that recruiting governors can be cumbersome.

I'm sure you understand it's even worse in smaller parts of the country. If it's already been proven that it already doesn't work very well at the regional level with such situations, what would make you believe that the clubs would join the boat ? What about the life members ? Honorary members ? What happens with members from provinces (or territories) that don't have a structured enough setting to provide a 10-members club ? What about Quebec members ? What about casual players (those that play chess but not in clubs or tournaments ? Have you considered the loss in revenue with all those type of situations (and more) ? How much money are we talking about ? Do you believe the revenues from the clubs would cover more than that ? How would that affect the CFC employee work ? How would you determine the choice for your "trial and error" method ? How would you make sure it's representative of every chess club in Canada ? Have you consulted with the Provincial Associations ? How would the Provincial Associations manage the chess clubs ? What level of responsability vs powers would they have ? Who are your "feeders" ? To be honest, I see this approach as a direct contradiction to our most basic bylaws.

I have begun preliminary discussions with a number of clubs that are primarily composed of CFC members. They may or may not be representative of the average club in this country, but they are exactly the sort of place I envisage conducting a pilot of this nature. The reason I suggested January as a potential launch date is precisely because I anticipate kinks to be worked out before "going live," so to speak.

To be honest, this sound like a used car salesman pitch. I'm pretty sure even you don't believe some of what you claim to be your "vision". The members already have most of what you'd like to "offer" the clubs. In fact, it seems you are trying to shift the CFC's responsabilities to the clubs while offering them nothing more than what they already have. Actually those interested in getting the information you are "offering" already have more than what YOU can provide. In fact, it is very likely the chess clubs you're aiming at will quickly realize they don't need to be part of the CFC because the CFC will have nothing new to offer. Since they would be doing all the work, they'll likely quickly realize they are the ones that should be rewarded for it, not the CFC. As a francophone, I'm sure you'll understand your "biliingual" content offering is at best laughable. Over the last decade most CFC Presidents claimed they were bilingual and promised the french content would finally be completed in their mandates. I believe members are tired to be deceived. Time for a change. Offering the members more of the same (all that long text of yours to basicly say "screw members get in clubs maybe you'll be more appreciative of what the CFC has to offer" ) has proven not to work. Whatever the structure might be.

I'll assume this remark was not intended to be condescending and say that I disagree. As a bilingual candidate, as opposed to seeing the prospect of bilingual content on the website as being "laughable," I would assume you would want to be the first to offer your services in improving the federation's communication with its membership base.