06-08-2012, 11:57 AM
Adam Bremner Wrote:As for a correct time to discuss it, yeah people are probably right. Perhaps now isn't right, but that doesn't mean it should be swept under a carpet.
Not sure if this was directed at me. I wasn't suggesting we sweep it under the carpet but rather why not discuss it in person at a meeting. (Even, the AGM? or after if its too late to add it to the Agenda?) Its evident from the opinions and posts on here that we all care about junior chess so lets channel all this energy on the forum into the good of developing our juniors.
Alan Tate Wrote:Perhaps it is the wrong time to be discussing this, mainly because people lose ALL sense of objectivity when discussing family and chess. And as usual the people who shout the loudest have the strongest opinions and use others to back up their statements. It is rarely useful to have such strong opinions about anything. I have learnt that when I feel very strongly about something it usually means there are other motives at work.... I wonder what they could be?
Oh and please, let's dispose of terms like 'barrier'....
Admin maybe you could move this thread so as not to detract from the important funding thread.
Alan, I introduced the word barrier into the debate as a 2100 requirement would be that. It just doesn't strike me as aspirational. What word would you prefer?
The rest of your post I am not going to respond to as I think it was tongue in cheek to elicit a reaction.
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional!