View Poll Results: BIRT The CFC cover any Olympic fundraising shortfall.

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

    9 40.91%
  • No

    10 45.45%
  • Abstain

    3 13.64%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: STRAW POLL: FIDE Rep on Olympic Fundraising

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
    Assuming we don't lose too many members because of it, your plan seems viable, Chris.
    I see it as a viable starting point for a discussion anyway.

    I suggested earlier that we conduct a poll via the newsletter to see what member's opinions of the newsletter were - along with other options for spending the money. Another Governor thought that was ridiculous as many people don't even get the newsletter and thus wouldn't respond to the poll.

    However, that really proves my point in a way... if they don't get the newsletter now, they won't miss it either.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ottawa Ontario National Master Former Gov.
    Posts
    10,761
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    For those who haven't seen it, here is a link to a thread from the Governors Private Forum that I believe Chris is refering to (in his post above) concerning a previous discussion about scaling back/axing the Newsletter:

    http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/showthread.php?t=2358
    Last edited by Kevin Pacey; 04-06-2012 at 03:27 PM. Reason: Spelling

  3. #13

    Default

    If you would like, if you were to open a poll on this topic in the English Forum on or about May 1st, I could point the members to it on the next distribution of the newsletter. Just so everyone is aware, approximately 70% of members receive the newsletter directly. Exactly how many of the remaining 30% receive it by indirect means is beyond the scope of my knowledge, but I know there are at least a few.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    3,268
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I think funding the Olympiad teams makes more sense than spending $18k on an email newsletter that few seem to care about.

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec View Post
    I think funding the Olympiad teams makes more sense than spending $18k on an email newsletter that few seem to care about.
    We just need to be careful that we're not underestimating the newsletter's popularity. Shooting first and asking questions later could be disastrous.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    I'm not sure a public poll is the best way to go. Using actual poll software, feeding in all the email addresses which receive the newsletter, would be far better. I'll look around and see if there's anything free we can use.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kanata, Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    1,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Mallon View Post
    It's foolish to even think of going back to deficit spending after finally taming the CFC's budget.

    Now, my counter-proposal:

    Cancel the newsletter as it currently exists ($18k per year?)

    Pay someone say $3000 a year to do a much more modest newsletter with chess community contributions ie tournament reports.

    Take the remaining $15k. On Olympiad years, that pays for the team (roughly). On non-Olympiad years, the money goes towards the Canadian Closed.

    You may not like my plan, but at least it's financially viable, rather than just "hoping" we'll have the money.
    I have heard Chris, and others, float similar ideas before, but we don't seem to cut to the chase about what we are spending on our newsletter, that we could potentially spend elsewhere, or not spend at all. In my humble opinion, the newsletter is actually a BETTER product than what I expected for that cost. However, and unfortunately, that does not necessarily mean that we should spend that much on it. I believe that a really good poll would be the sensible next step. I know for myself, I barely have time to work through the great articles in it, but maybe the majority of people do? I have no idea!

    P.S. A risk in announcing the CFC covering a shortfall this year, is that it will dampen the usual genuine efforts by the greater chess community to raise that much money in time.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Port Moody, BC
    Posts
    594
    Blog Entries
    3

    Post Newsletter

    We all pay a yearly fee to be members of CFC. What do we get in return of the membership fee if now you want to dilute the value of the existing newsletter? What is left to offer anyone across Canada for their membership?

    A member already pays tournament fees (to cover for rating, etc) outside the membership one. What gives? Will you reduce the amount of membership proportionally with the dilution of the newsletter? How come we could pay for it, but we should also contribute for its content?

    This smells bad...
    Valer Eugen Demian
    FIDE CM & Instructor, ICCF IM
    https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ches...593013634?mt=8

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kitchener, ON
    Posts
    2,235
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Valer Eugen Demian View Post
    We all pay a yearly fee to be members of CFC. What do we get in return of the membership fee if now you want to dilute the value of the existing newsletter? What is left to offer anyone across Canada for their membership?
    I don't consider our current newsletter to have "value" personally. In fact it's just a little bit embarrassing.

    A member already pays tournament fees (to cover for rating, etc) outside the membership one. What gives? Will you reduce the amount of membership proportionally with the dilution of the newsletter?
    That's certainly another option. The newsletter is somewhere between $10 and $15 of each member's fee.

    How come we could pay for it, but we should also contribute for its content?
    So you are saying that you are offended that TDs might be asked to submit reports about their own tournaments? Even though that was happening for years already?
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    694

    Default

    The alternative to sending a team when we can't afford it is not to send a team, or perhaps only send the men's team or the women's team. This is sad, I agree.
    Paul Leblanc
    Treasurer, Chess Foundation of Canada
    CFC Voting Member

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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