View Poll Results: I support Chris Mallon's proposal to split this motion in two.

Voters
17. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    15 88.24%
  • No

    0 0%
  • Abstain

    2 11.76%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 33 of 33

Thread: 13. CYCC Eligibility Motion (Motion 2012-A)

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Hi Lyle:

    1. Your division for new Motion 2012-A # 1, and 2012-A # 2, seem fine on my review. Thanks.

    2. It seems that the overwhelming majority of governors wanted the motion split, and there has been vigorous debate on the " residency restriction ", so I think governors are already aware of the issues. I myself don't see why the voting couldn't start tonight as planned.

    3. I have already posted my motion to amend the Zeromskis/ Barron motion 2012-E on the Canadian Junior Championship, and I would like it voted on before the main motion, and I am now searching out a seconder since no one has yet commented on my agenda item # 17 post. But if it will be helpful, I will also send you an e-mail on it.

    Bob A
    Hi Lyle:

    I agree with Bob on all points regarding Motion 2012-A:
    Your division for new Motion 2012-A # 1, and 2012-A # 2, seem fine, and the voting could start tonight as planned.
    Thanks,
    Michael Barron

  2. #32

    Default

    I apologize for not being available sooner. Commence voting on this motion, Lyle!

  3. #33

    Default

    An update of the text of the original motion was presented by Michael Barron, as had been filed with Lyle Craver, but was overlooked in the run-up to the meeting. A vote to split the original motion was applied to the subsequent update. Questions arising were those of who should be eligible to compete in the CYCC. Permanent residents and citizens were argued to be the eligible groups; however, that left the question of how to handle cases in which otherwise eligible players fly under the FIDE flag of a different country. The reply was that the CYCC determines Canadian Champions first and foremost and that WYCC eligibility/qualification should be of secondary importance. This sentiment was not unanimously supported. Chris Mallon presented an amendment to the motion that would have required participants in the CYCC to first be eligible to represent Canada in the WYCC, but it failed to receive a seconder. In reply to the suggestion, Bob Armstrong expressed his concern that "there could be a successful lawsuit to strike down a " residency " prohibition, that represses a Canadian permanent resident right, like playing in a national Canadian chess championship."

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •