+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: AGM (/thread-1038.html)
Re: AGM - Alan Tate - 20-08-2014
Well I read most of it. It seems that if the wording was changed to make these guidelines rather than rules then there would be no complaints, although I still don't think humanity is at the stage yet where people are so thoughtless and cruel that they would "bar" (Steven's word not mine) a particularly vulnerable section of society.
Re: AGM - Phil Thomas - 20-08-2014
Patrick McGovern Wrote:David Deary;Quote: What troubles me is the glee that certain posters take in tearing things to shreds, inventing doomsday scenarios and zombie apocalypses without so much as a constructive comment... I don't think its unreasonable to expect people to be constructive.
John;Quote:The more fanciful scenarios dreamed up, I feel, only serve to obscure the real issues by taking attention away from them.
The examples I gave were not scenarios but actual events that happened in Ayrshire chess, David it happened to our club Greenwood. We have been on the receiving end of unreasonable demands from a disabled player.
and finally;
Pat,
this is anecdotal evidence from just one of the two parties involved.
Did this matter get referred to the standards committee?
Did this matter get referred to the Ayrshire equivalent and get resolved in your favour?
Are the facts agreed by the disabled player?
Had Andy Howie been the proposer rather then the seconder of this motion would he have encountered such hostility?
Please stop using the notice board to act as judge and jury for historical incidents.
Can you bring yourself around to agree with my suggestion that one part of the motion should be amended to read
No one has the right to refuse to meet a player against whom he has been correctly paired.
Moderators,
if Pat is unable to do so can I publish some recent real facts about a recent incident in which a player refused to play me and was allowed to get the correct draw changed and obtain a much weaker opponent to play ?
Re: AGM - Tommy Lennox - 20-08-2014
John Dempsey Wrote:Alan, I have no idea if there have been complaints. What I do know is that passing this motion does not cause an organizational problem for tournaments. And yet there is definite resistance. Having read all 21 pages (lol!) I cannot really get to grips with what the issue(s) is/are for those who oppose the idea. Perhaps it's just a resistance to change (which is already upon the whole chess world anyway).
It's not resistance, It is the Scottish equivalent of the Peoples front of Judea (or was it the Judean Peoples Front) aka the Greenwood Mafia!
Re: AGM - robin moore - 20-08-2014
The "Greenwood mafia" views at the moment appear to be...
option 1-Godfather David
option 2-Godfather Robin
option 3-Godfather Pat
Re: AGM - Alex Gillies - 20-08-2014
I think the motion is a mistake as its creating more questions than answers and simply not needed.
I'll repeat my earlier post- for none fide CS events just adopt the fide guidelines as "recommended" (not enforceable) where possible and practical - ie let common sense and the organisers discretion prevail.
:tumble:
Re: AGM - Patrick McGovern - 20-08-2014
Tommy Lennox Wrote:John Dempsey Wrote:Alan, I have no idea if there have been complaints. What I do know is that passing this motion does not cause an organizational problem for tournaments. And yet there is definite resistance. Having read all 21 pages (lol!) I cannot really get to grips with what the issue(s) is/are for those who oppose the idea. Perhaps it's just a resistance to change (which is already upon the whole chess world anyway).
It's not resistance, It is the Scottish equivalent of the Peoples front of Judea (or was it the Judean Peoples Front) aka the Greenwood Mafia!
) at last some levityas for some other post(s); best left ignored (-|
Re: AGM - John Dempsey - 20-08-2014
One thing that really bothers me in these pages is the position that Edinburgh Chess Club seem to have been put in by this FIDE ruling. These are a great bunch of guys from a club with a major Scottish Chess history. They came up with the idea of running a FIDE rated tournament to both make a wee bit of money for their club and to offer a service to the players in Scotland that simply was not there at the time of inception. They should be backed to the hilt by CS if they decided they want to appeal to FIDE. As their tournament preceded this FIDE legislation there must be a strong case for them to be "grandfathered" in.
I would also suggest that if Steve Hilton, in his position on the FIDE disability committee, were to stand four-square with such an appeal it would go a long way to persuade FIDE that this should be regarded as a genuine exception. How about it Steve? Would you do this if Edinburgh CC needed you to?
Re: AGM - Phil Thomas - 20-08-2014
Phil Thomas Wrote:Can you (Pat McGovern) bring yourself around to agree with my suggestion that one part of the motion should be amended to read
No one has the right to refuse to meet a player against whom he has been correctly paired.
Moderators,
if Pat is unable to do so can I publish some recent real facts about a recent incident in which a player refused to play me and was allowed to get the correct draw changed and obtain a much weaker opponent to play ?
Apparently not he'd rather ignore it the poster.
Sounds like its going to happen again.
Re: AGM - Mike Scott - 20-08-2014
Steve
Quote:Mike,
FIDE rules are clear you cannot bar someone from a tournament because of their disability
The irony of this is that if an event can not take place then everyone is in effect barred from the tournament. Thats not really the sort of equality that I am sure you are looking for.
I do agree with the need to be inclusive, and also the need to be 'unreasonable' to force change through. I would also think that a requirement to use 'best efforts' to accommodate a disabled player could be used as an excuse for not even trying.
Perhaps small events (in terms of number of players) should be granted an exception? I would think that larger events which tend to be held in schools and other buildings would be less affected in any event as the owners of these buildings will almost certainly have had to make them compliant for other purposes.
Re: AGM - StevieHilton - 20-08-2014
John,
At the moment, the Disability committee has been made up to a full FIDE commission by the General Assembly and Congress. There is only one member at the moment, GM Thomas Luther of Germany. Members for this commission are being nominated at this moment by Federations. It would have to be CS that makes the appeal on behalf of Edinburgh CC. I am not on the CS Council