CFC Executive Director
No, No. When I read the amendment, I do not understand what the changes mean. It does not say that players over 2200 (or 2199) are not eligible for bonus points. I think that is Paul's point.Originally Posted by Michael von Keitz
Anyway, if we all understand that YES means no bonus points for guys over 2199 (or 2200), when fine.
Bishop
Okay, I've pasted a note at the top of the preamble. I probably could have dealt with it differently, but I wanted the message as close to the poll as possible. I thought Paul's note was in reference to Lyle's "notice to governors" in this thread (i.e. Lyle's reference to "players rated over 2200"), so thanks for pointing out the misunderstanding.
CFC Voting Member
After re-reading I agree that the L.C. edition confuses my intention. The statement should be in the text ""Bonus points are not calculated for players rated above 2199"". (or "at or over 2200")
.*-1
CFC Secretary
It certainly was not my intention to confuse and I apologize to any one who was confused.
CFC Voting Member
I think a "yes" vote means that my motion goes to a later vote with an amendment stating that 2200+ players would not receive bonus points.
This isn't a vote on my motion, it is a vote to amend the motion. If the amendment passes, we have to vote again on the amended motion. For example, I voted against the amendment but I may vote to implement the new, amended bonus point formula when we enter the voting phase of the meeting. Am I correct on this?
Paul Leblanc
Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
CFC Voting Member
Posting Permissions
