23-07-2015, 08:43 PM
WBuchanan Wrote:Perhaps Derek’s wording is pointed or hasty but you have a point Andy B, about unsatisfactory (for Derek) answers.
Here is Derek’s offending remark:
(Derek) “Or are those members of the CWP who were running the meeting ignoring proxies by introducing motions which were not on the agenda thus preventing those not attending from having their votes registered?”
However, on the eligibility section
1) A motion WAS introduced that was not on the agenda
2) Just prior, Derek’s proxies were apparently ignored (though Andy H may have known they were insufficient, he’ll clear it up I’m sure).
3) Responses to Derek’s queries have been contradictory; for example according to Jim proxies were not ignored and the minutes weren’t wrong - but the minutes refer to the meeting ‘agreeing unanimously’ that his suggestion should fail.
These questions are all fine Walter, but common courtesy would be to contact the people responsible, and give them a chance to explain things first!
I'm certainly not singling out Derek H. for this, but chess in Scotland is rife with bickering and squabbling, much of it very public, and it is this kind of behaviour which detracts from all the positive things which people are trying to achieve.
I know of quite a few people who would love to get involved more in Scottish chess circles, but are put off by the thought of having to put up with basic rudeness and downright trouble-making - what purpose does it serve and who does it benefit?
Perhaps we should take the vote (and forum rights) away from anyone over the age of 16?
