Correspondence chess community

[Paul Leblanc]

You shoot first and then want to ask questions later; nice...

Valer, I don't see it that way. I said at this meeting that I had opened a discussion about this at the January meeting. If you go back to the record of the January meeting you will see that I asked for comments about rating internet games in my Rating Auditor report and you did not say anything.

However, I did not hesitate to tell you as soon as you made me aware of the CCCA that I will investigate the CCCA and correspond with the head of the CCCA to reach an amicable agreement.

[Kerry Liles]

You shoot first and then want to ask questions later; nice...

Valer, I don't see it that way. I said at this meeting that I had opened a discussion about this at the January meeting. If you go back to the record of the January meeting you will see that I asked for comments about rating internet games in my Rating Auditor report and you did not say anything.

However, I did not hesitate to tell you as soon as you made me aware of the CCCA that I will investigate the CCCA and correspond with the head of the CCCA to reach an amicable agreement.

Best of luck Paul. Given the apparent position of the CCCA that they (and they alone!) are the keepers of all chess that is played NOTB, I don't see much wiggle room.

I find it preposterous that the CCCA could even dream that it could have a reasonable claim to internet chess (by that I mean a game played via the internet using standard time controls for OTB play with proper supervision at both ends).

I sometimes play a game with a friend via Blackberry BBM (with time controls set at "whenever you get around to moving") - is THAT something the CCCA also claims to have in its jurisdiction?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I find it preposterous that the CCCA could even dream that it could have a reasonable claim to internet chess (by that I mean a game played via the internet using standard time controls for OTB play with proper supervision at both ends).

I don't think that the CCCA has registered its opinion. So far we have one individual's opinion.

[Kerry Liles]

I don't think that the CCCA has registered its opinion. So far we have one individual's opinion.

That is a good point (and thanks for making it clear). That "one individual's opinion" does come from someone on the CCCA executive though? (the Secretary).

I also note this on the CCCA website:

The CCCA is an affiliate of the Chess Federation of Canada (CFC). An annual affiliation fee will be paid to the CFC. This fee shall be set by the Executive of the CCCA from time to time.

[Ken Craft]

The current fee, I believe, is $0.

[Kerry Liles]

The current fee, I believe, is $0.

Colour me surprised.

[Valer Eugen Demian]

I am not sure what your points are vis a vis CCCA? I have said it several times and will say it again:

a) Being unaware of an organization and what it does is not an excuse, but maybe an opportunity to learn something new.

b) My main displeasure is about the way I have been treated - with one notable exception (!) - by the Executives and governors: no discussions, no delays, let's vote first and will talk with "him" later. It sets a double standard, one can see from the discussions here too.

c1) "Official" chess over the internet in Canada falls - whether you like it or not - under the jurisdiction of CCCA, affiliated to ICCF which is also affiliated to FIDE. Anyone can play anywhere they want over the internet outside CCCA and it is the same as myself playing OTB with my neighbour over a barbeque, or at the corner club which barely survives because we support it so well within CFC... Those who want to see my point can do that; those who do not, will never see it anyway.

c2) Any game not played "over the board = face to face" falls at least within a grey area where you have to be careful how you define it. In my opinion those with experience in such situations have a better understanding of the whole issue.

d) I simply missed the January discussions about rating internet games. Hasn't it happened to any of you? Still there are several examples (at the same forums) of motions delayed for more discussions and clarifications when one or more governors intervened.

e) I do not know anything about the fees CCCA might have to pay CFC and fail to see what this has to do with my complain? Why such con descendent remarks here? Do you even know those you include have done a lot for chess in Canada you are not even aware of?

f) Yes, I am one of the CCCA Executives; also I am one of the few involved in both CCCA and CFC at several levels. I was hoping this to be regarded as an asset and not as a derogatory label. I fail to remember when I've done the same with any of you!

Any more questions, please feel free to write me! I am not coming here more often than once a week unless there's an online meeting.

[Paul Leblanc]

So far no response to my e-mail to the CCCA executive offering to discuss.

CFC games last 4-6 hours. I've asked CCCA to comment on the length of their games. No repsonse.

CFC internet games require strict TD supervision and full disclosure of moves. I've asked CCCA to comment on the level of supervision they require. No response.

I maintain that CFC and CCCA internet competitions do not overlap, and have asked CCCA to comment. No response.

[Christopher Mallon]

d) I simply missed the January discussions about rating internet games. Hasn't it happened to any of you?

Considering that you are complaining about people missing your post questioning the motion, that's a bit ironic isn't it?