CFC Executive Candidates Start to Come Forward - Gillanders

[Pierre Dénommée]

and you could add: not to mention the CFC rating system makes money for the CFC [according to rumor :-) ] and is perhaps the CFC's most valuable asset.

Another point - FIDE rated events must be run under FIDE rules. I'm not sure what idiosyntric differences the CFC rules may have but there is some level of freedom there that one might not want to give up.

If you go by the book,

A member federation is free to introduce more detailed rules provided they:

1. do not conflict in any way with the official FIDE Laws of Chess, and
2. are limited to the territory of the federation concerned, and
3. are not valid for any FIDE match, championship or qualifying event, or for a FIDE title or rating tournament.


Which means the end of all CFC Tournament Rules.

But FIDE rates tournaments played under USCF rules (violation number one) and paired according to USCF pairing rules (violation number two), some of which are using an alteration of the pairings to increase norm chances (violation number 3).

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob:

As I've mentioned, I have a wish list of " Goals for CFC for 2010-11 ". Some are big, some are small, some are crucial, some are just modest improvements. So I'm lobbing them at you every few days, just to get an idea of some planks of your " Presidential Platform " - I hope others will ask you some questions too, to flesh out some other platform topics.

Here is my Goal # 6 for you to comment on:

6. New CFC Website – The current website is old, unattractive, hard to upgrade, and very vulnerable to hacking. The Executive should deal initially with this as an administrative matter, to develop a Request for Proposals ( RFP ). Eric van Dusen, 2009-10 President, had personally taken on this task, but found it more complex and challenging than anticipated, and made no progress. I initially had arranged for a Toronto Information Technology specialist to contact Eric directly and volunteer to do the Request for Proposals. He is good, and supportive of the CFC, and a chess player and helped me on the Grassroots’ Campaign – he advises that Eric never gave clear instructions as to what he should do this past year , and he made no progress on this file. One of the new Executive must take on this file, and develop a RFP.

Once a RFP is developed, then a Committee of Governors should definitely see the RFP before it goes out, and be given a cost estimate. They should then make a recommendation to all governors, who should be asked to approve the project.

I have been advised that to do the job right, CFC should spend $ 10.000 - $ 15,000 – I am willing to invest this, out of the $ 65,809 office sale savings fund, put into the Chess Federation of Canada.

Anyone else have any thoughts re this " goal " ?

Bob

[Bob Gillanders]

Hi Bob,

We are very much on the same page here. I take it as a given that we are past the "do we need a new website stage?" by now. So let's get it done.

Developing a good RFP is crucial in defining exactly what you want. It is a more involved process than most people appreciate, and integrating the rating program adds a level of complexity.

I confess to be "technically challenged" when dealing with computers! They drive me nuts! Fortunately, when I was ED, I had Vincent Chow to lean on for "all things" computer. For a year and a half, he kept the rating system and website working smoothly, anticipating problems, and quietly making improvements. So, I would again lean on Vince for council.

I would hope to complete the RFP process by September. Identify potential individuals to do the work (hopefully Vince would be available), make a recommendation to the governors, and get the approval. It is even possible we could have the new website by Christmas. (note: possible!!)

[Alex Ferreira]

Hi Bob:

As I've mentioned, I have a wish list of " Goals for CFC for 2010-11 ". Some are big, some are small, some are crucial, some are just modest improvements. So I'm lobbing them at you every few days, just to get an idea of some planks of your " Presidential Platform " - I hope others will ask you some questions too, to flesh out some other platform topics.

Here is my Goal # 6 for you to comment on:

6. New CFC Website – The current website is old, unattractive, hard to upgrade, and very vulnerable to hacking. The Executive should deal initially with this as an administrative matter, to develop a Request for Proposals ( RFP ). Eric van Dusen, 2009-10 President, had personally taken on this task, but found it more complex and challenging than anticipated, and made no progress. I initially had arranged for a Toronto Information Technology specialist to contact Eric directly and volunteer to do the Request for Proposals. He is good, and supportive of the CFC, and a chess player and helped me on the Grassroots’ Campaign – he advises that Eric never gave clear instructions as to what he should do this past year , and he made no progress on this file. One of the new Executive must take on this file, and develop a RFP.

Once a RFP is developed, then a Committee of Governors should definitely see the RFP before it goes out, and be given a cost estimate. They should then make a recommendation to all governors, who should be asked to approve the project.

I have been advised that to do the job right, CFC should spend $ 10.000 - $ 15,000 – I am willing to invest this, out of the $ 65,809 office sale savings fund, put into the Chess Federation of Canada.

Anyone else have any thoughts re this " goal " ?

Bob

Hi Bob,

On the whole I disagree. I think the CFC website should be simple and user-friendly. I have no problems finding what I am looking for when searching for something new, if it's actually there. Some sections are completely outdated, probably because nobody cares. People use the website to check their ratings. A few others go as far as checking crosstables and the forum, or tournaments in their area.
Is this really worth investing $10,000 on? For CFC's purposes, you could probably get a high school kid to do something comparable in return for volunteer hours.
If CFC has money to burn then by all means, go for it! The only legitimate concern is low security as we've recently seen.

Alex F.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Alex:

Just one point - the website outdatedness is not because no one cares. It has to do with the outsourcing contract to EKG. We only get 3.5 days of an ED ( Gerry Litchfield ). He is good, but simply has too little time - I have been asking for website updates for a year now, and only got a few done, because it is not a " money-making " priority.

I think we need a full-time ED ( an " employee " ), for whom we have total control over priorities.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob:

Continuing on my wish list of " 2010-11 Goals for CFC ", to get more of an idea of your " Presidential Platform ", here is my Goal # 3 for your comments:

3. ED/Outsourcing – I never agreed with what CFC President David Lavin did in late 2008 in outsourcing the whole CFC office functions, including Executive Director ( and it should have been a governor decision ). I have publicly called for non-renewal of the outsourcing contract with EKG ( no criticism of Gerry ) - not sure of its exact termination date, but I thought it was a 2 or 3 year contract ( need help from an Executive on this ). I think CFC needs an employee ( home office ) , for whom it can determine the priorities ( This is why the website was not being updated – not a priority for EKG, and not enough time ). It needs to be 5 days a week ( not 3.5 as in the outsourcing contract ), and CFC will have to pay to have this. We will have to look at sustaining revenue to pay for this ( which may mean increasing membership fees ? )

Anyone else have any comments?

Bob

[Kerry Liles]

Hi Bob:

Continuing on my wish list of " 2010-11 Goals for CFC ", to get more of an idea of your " Presidential Platform ", here is my Goal # 3 for your comments:

3. ED/Outsourcing – I never agreed with what CFC President David Lavin did in late 2008 in outsourcing the whole CFC office functions, including Executive Director ( and it should have been a governor decision ). I have publicly called for non-renewal of the outsourcing contract with EKG ( no criticism of Gerry ) - not sure of its exact termination date, but I thought it was a 2 or 3 year contract ( need help from an Executive on this ). I think CFC needs an employee ( home office ) , for whom it can determine the priorities ( This is why the website was not being updated – not a priority for EKG, and not enough time ). It needs to be 5 days a week ( not 3.5 as in the outsourcing contract ), and CFC will have to pay to have this. We will have to look at sustaining revenue to pay for this ( which may mean increasing membership fees ? )

Anyone else have any comments?

Bob

Until Bob Gillanders and Vincent Chow (and I believe Paul Beckwith?) were unilaterally sacked by the CFC president, we HAD full-time, competent people working on these matters. Their only request was to have a reasonable rate of pay. Instead, only critical functions are now outsourced on a part-time basis.

Blowing $10K or more on a website is a complete waste of money.

[John Coleman]

At the moment, the CFC website is down. Just temporary, we hope.

[Bob Gillanders]

Hi Bob:

Continuing on my wish list of " 2010-11 Goals for CFC ", to get more of an idea of your " Presidential Platform ", here is my Goal # 3 for your comments:

3. ED/Outsourcing – I never agreed with what CFC President David Lavin did in late 2008 in outsourcing the whole CFC office functions, including Executive Director ( and it should have been a governor decision ). I have publicly called for non-renewal of the outsourcing contract with EKG ( no criticism of Gerry ) - not sure of its exact termination date, but I thought it was a 2 or 3 year contract ( need help from an Executive on this ). I think CFC needs an employee ( home office ) , for whom it can determine the priorities ( This is why the website was not being updated – not a priority for EKG, and not enough time ). It needs to be 5 days a week ( not 3.5 as in the outsourcing contract ), and CFC will have to pay to have this. We will have to look at sustaining revenue to pay for this ( which may mean increasing membership fees ? )

Anyone else have any comments?

Bob

Bob, wow, the degree of difficulty in your questions just went thru the roof! I am going to trend softly on this issue, bite my tongue so to speak, and self censor my comments. I see no need to open up old wounds unnecessarily, I trust you understand. The CFC has been thru hell with the restructuring and balancing the budget. Time to move on.

The relationship between the CFC executive and office staff has a troubled history. Of course, many organizations and companies do so as well, but we are hampered as well with systematic factors which aggrevate the situation. The annual turnover of the executive, 60+ governors, geography, declining membership, lack of resources, and unrealistic expectations. Add to that the occasional inevitable clash of personalities, and you get the CFC!

I would favour a return to a full time Executive Director. Giving competent people the time needed to get the job done properly is how we will improve our profile and deliver member services. I really don't believe 3.5 days is adequate. But the obvious question is: Can we really afford it?

The answer is Yes! We simply need to recognize it as a priority item.

There are other options.
No paid staff, just volunteers.
Part time ED, with Executives doing extra chores.
Reduce services.

But are any of these really feasible or desirable? No.

As to increasing membership dues, let's demonstrate that we have earned it first.

[Christopher Mallon]

Just one point - the website outdatedness is not because no one cares. It has to do with the outsourcing contract to EKG.

It has virtually nothing to do with that. Some stuff on the website has not been updated since the mid-90s, which includes a lot of time when we had TWO full-time office workers.