09-01-2014, 11:51 PM
I was going to stay out of this debate, but now that my name has been mentioned I suppose I should comment, even though I am no longer a congress organiser.
I hope the motion is passed on Saturday - it won't do any harm, and may do some good.
If a working group is then set up, I hope it will include people with relevant practical experience (procedural, technical, and, in chess terms, legal) - I'm sure it will.
The working group will then, in due course, report back with its findings. If they find the idea has merit and is feasible, they should identify the kinds of equipment that will need to be used, and should also draw up guidelines / a code of practice for organisers to follow if they wish to allow remote participation in their tournaments.
But if any particular tournament organiser chooses not to have remote participation in his/her event, then that's how it will be - there can be no compulsion.
Some organisers may choose to allow remote participation, and I think we'll all be interested to see how things go and what problems (if any) are encountered. Other organisers will look at their venues and at the effort (and cost?) involved in setting up remote access, and will choose not to go down that road. There must be no criticism of organisers who make the latter choice, or we could end up losing tournaments - and then everybody is worse off.
In short, the idea is worth looking at, but until the working group reports back any hopes or fears people may have are really just speculation.
I hope the motion is passed on Saturday - it won't do any harm, and may do some good.
If a working group is then set up, I hope it will include people with relevant practical experience (procedural, technical, and, in chess terms, legal) - I'm sure it will.
The working group will then, in due course, report back with its findings. If they find the idea has merit and is feasible, they should identify the kinds of equipment that will need to be used, and should also draw up guidelines / a code of practice for organisers to follow if they wish to allow remote participation in their tournaments.
But if any particular tournament organiser chooses not to have remote participation in his/her event, then that's how it will be - there can be no compulsion.
Some organisers may choose to allow remote participation, and I think we'll all be interested to see how things go and what problems (if any) are encountered. Other organisers will look at their venues and at the effort (and cost?) involved in setting up remote access, and will choose not to go down that road. There must be no criticism of organisers who make the latter choice, or we could end up losing tournaments - and then everybody is worse off.
In short, the idea is worth looking at, but until the working group reports back any hopes or fears people may have are really just speculation.