It is indeed different this time. Out of the 24 votes cast only only 8 supported
actual endorsement of KI. Of the 8 votes that supported actual endorsement 3 of the endorsement votes were from the executive. You seem to like "straw polls" as was the case with chess talk. Normally in an NFP "input" from voting members are in the form of real binding votes. This is to avoid scenarios of the executive doing whatever it likes when it likes. AKA corporate governance. This is especially true when at least one of the members of the executive has a self admitted conflict of interest as was publicly declared by him during the last FIDE election. This also brings up the question of why the conflicted executive did not recuse himself from this poll all together or did he?
I agree with you that despite our efforts for early endorsement that does include the US government
http://en.chessbase.com/post/first-u...ess-tournament (yes Kirsan is very close friends of Putin as can be evidenced in recent news stories about him
http://kevinspraggettonchess.wordpre...ss-tournament/) that if you felt it necessary to take actions to seek input of the governors that is fair game. If you actually had an overwhelming majority of voting members for endorsement or for that matter chess players (as in the poll you put up on chess talk) I would be the first to say that the result was disappointing but it reflected the will of the voting members and the CFC members. This is simply not the case.