I have some issues here.
First of all, as the one who lead the development of the system, and as the one who wrote the software that gives us a nice easy list of who has which titles, it may have helped to run this by me ahead of time!
I have big issues with both proposals. The main one is that the whole system was designed to be SIMPLE, with very few loopholes (if any), and one that a computer could, in a matter of less than 10 seconds, spit out a list of every CFC member in the database and what title they are eligible for.
Both proposals will ruin that computer capability, forcing us to do everything by hand. Not to mention adding two more layers of confusion to something that should be dead-simple.
A 6-round event does not always pair the first 5 rounds the same as a 5-round event pairs the 5 rounds - they can be (not always) different, in other ways as well (# of players for example). An event should be taken as a complete set of games, not breaking them up.
The improvement we SHOULD be making to the system is to automate the titles to run every week right after new ratings are uploaded, and to display people's titles on their rating pages. I've suggested this extremely minor thing several times now. I can even easily make the software post a list directly to the forums of everyone who earned a new title each week (once the website displays them, anyway). So long as this proposed motion doesn't ruin that software capability, of course.
Christopher Mallon
FIDE Arbiter