Posts: 207
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
1
Hi
Andy kindly sent me the two elusive posts
The motions come from frustration over the transparency and communication in the process . The AGM is where these should now be discussed.
I am happy to add my own views:
Motion 1 Its a bit late in the day for this. If it was to happen it should have happened at the time the standards ruled - should the policy be reviewed or clarified - perhaps
Motion 2 Its unfair to raise this now- the standards have ruled and as far as I know the issue was not part of the official complaint-I assume time barred. We do need a general policy on this issue going forward though as we should have one - I'm sure it will be raised under AOCB
Posts: 550
Threads: 37
Joined: Nov 2011
Alex Gillies;
Quote:Motion 2 Its unfair to raise this now- the standards have ruled and as far as I know the issue was not part of the official complaint-I assume time barred. We do need a general policy on this issue going forward though as we should have one - I'm sure it will be raised under AOCB
this was discussed in some detail at the last Council meeting and a specific policy has been agreed and will be drawn up and applied to future events.
Posts: 26
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation:
0
It may not be my place but having followed chess scotland agm etc I have to admit that I'm starting to get quite concerned about the state of chess in scotland. I'm not really into any chess politics and as far as I'm concerned only things that I consider important from a personal viewpoint are that congresses can continue to be organised and that yearly grading is carried out. Being a member of chess scotland also helps with FIDE ratings.
I've no idea how long this has been festering but it seems like several active people have been flinging mud at each other and to be honest I don't think either side comes off well at end of it. To make matters worse it seems that half the fights concern issues that have been covered up or are confidential so that any neutral third party can see little else other than open hostility and glimmers of facts/opinions. Unfortunately as it's constantly being brought up efforts to cover it up probably ends up closer to Streisand effect and as incidents don't seem to be getting dealt with to satisfaction of both sides I'm unsure we've got an end in sight. I'm probably overly cynical but I tend to get suspicious and paranoid when things are covered up so while I'm completely ignorant of facts I'm not exactly reassured...
All this infighting to me seems rather toxic and if someone was considering funding chess in scotland they'd flee in an instant after browsing here. Admittedly I don't know all the facts and what I know is guesswork, although if I understand correctly most of problematic issues were things that were previously dealt with by SJCA. If reversing 2001 merger means problems are quarantined it might already be a start.
I'll be perfectly honest and say that I do not want to go to AGM. However I am unsure if I should actually come if things are as bad as they seem and even then I don't know if my presence would help in slightest. I'll also note that it's a shame we're having all this trouble since in other aspects scottish chess has actually done very good work such as getting commonwealth games, strong scottish championships, scottish blitz etc so it's a shame that good work is getting overshadowed. Hopefully at end of AGM whoever is elected will help bring about harmony and stability into game while being inclusive of all factions.
Posts: 289
Threads: 7
Joined: Aug 2011
Quote:BTW Andy, sorry you didn't opt to run for that HD post you asked about (presume too late now?) I think you'd have done it well, and been a good addition to the team.
I don't think it's too late is it? I'm fairly sure candidates have been nominated from the floor in previous AGMs, and as it stands I don't think we have an HD candidate at all. Agree entirely that having Andy on board would be a very good thing, although it would make identifying CS directors by name even more difficult.
Posts: 22
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation:
0
I honestly believe that 95% of the Chess Scotland community who read this stuff react in the same manner as Kenny McGeoch's post above. There was also a post from Kevin Campbell a few months ago that i saw which summarised it nicely. Get on with the organising and stop the bickering, then we can finally work out how to bring all the footsoldiers back!
Posts: 370
Threads: 16
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
0
Duncan,
Please read point 4 in my manifesto. I said that Chess Scotland will not move forward until it stops it's infighting.
Steve
Posts: 454
Threads: 52
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
3
Steve
Manifesto Point 4
All very fine words but....
What you do not say is HOW you plan to deal with this issue.
I think I would personally like to see positive proposals and actions rather than ideals. We all know this infighting and bickering has to stop, but so far no one has come up with a positive method of resolving the issue now or in future. I'm sure that talking to people early during the squabble can help a bit, but as has been seen here it doesn't actually stop them posting anyway.