Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2

[IMarks]

1.2 Motion to create a Working Party to explore the use of live boards and internet to allow players from remote Scottish communities to participate in Chess Scotland congress events.
The logistics and expense of travelling to Chess Scotland congress events precludes a proportion of chess players who live in remote locations of the country from participating at Chess Scotland supported events. Internet is now widely available in many of these remote locations which would allow chess players to transmit played moves to a congress event in real time. It would be possible for a player in a remote location to play a game over the internet and have those moves relayed onto a chess board by a volunteer sitting at a congress board or in time by an automated board as demonstrated in the following video clip <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX37LFv8jWY">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX37LFv8jWY</a><!-- m -->. To ensure fair play the remote player will be supervised by an independent observer such as an arbiter, fellow chess club member etc. Such conditions may also apply to participants within Scotland who cannot attend Congresses for other special reasons e.g. a disability. Although there are a number of potential logistic problems the Working Party will investigate these and make recommendations on overall feasibility.
Proposed : Sean Milton Seconded: Gerald Lobley, David Deary, David Congalton, Calum MacQueen

Laudable enough idea, but since I won’t be at the meeting, may I float a few points out of curiosity?

1. Given the limited number of arbiters currently active in Scotland, how will one be found/chosen/allocated to supervise the ‘remote’ player, and who will pay his/her travel and accommodation expenses?

2. Would a fellow club member be truly acceptable as an independent observer? (Not suggesting anything!)

3. Would players have the option of indicating on their entry form that they would prefer not to play a ‘remote’ opponent? And before someone accuses me of some form of discrimination, I ask simply because I believe that a major part of competitive chess is having a flesh and blood opponent across the board.

4. What happens if the internet is dodgy, e.g. isn’t working at the start of a round or goes down during the game?

[StevieHilton]

It might be an idea to try a tournament with these conditions. It would be perfect for someone like me
I have been playing tournaments using skype for a couple of years now and they are easy to organise. Venues are not always easy for disabled players to negotiate and this proposal may well be a way round this problem.
I would be willing to try this out a tournament here if a congress organiser would be willing to let me try.
I think we need to get practical experience of such an idea, if only to check its viability if nothing else.

[amuir]

Which comes first on the 11th ? AGM or Council meeting
I hope the AGM has enough time for the AOCB this time. I am not sure there will be enough funds for the Olympiad to get everything I want so I intend asking for a show of hands of what should get priority if I have to make cuts.

[Phil Thomas]

1. Given the limited number of arbiters currently active in Scotland, how will one be found/chosen/allocated to supervise the ‘remote’ player, and who will pay his/her travel and accommodation expenses?

2. Would a fellow club member be truly acceptable as an independent observer? (Not suggesting anything!)

I recall much earlier material on this notice board as to who can act as an arbiter. To be consistent with stated CS policy would it not be essential for such a fellow club member to be disclosed - but not necessarily through CS (based upon my personal communications with CRBS).

The working party will also have to bear in mind that players at both ends of an internet game will need supervision with arbiting skills.

[David Deary]

Although there are a number of potential logistic problems the Working Party will investigate these and make recommendations on overall feasibility.

The crucial bit of the proposal is the part I have quoted above. The working party (whoever that may be) will investigate the feasibility (addressing the points Ian made and many more I'm sure...) before bringing a plan to implement/trial it to the next AGM (I would imagine).

In principle, I believe this is something we really should be looking at and the technology is such that it should be easier than say it would have been 10 years ago.

I have to say I am a bit dissapointed that this proposal was not reached at the last AGM as in my view it was one of the more important ones on the order paper.

[David Deary]

Which comes first on the 11th ? AGM or Council meeting
I hope the AGM has enough time for the AOCB this time. I am not sure there will be enough funds for the Olympiad to get everything I want so I intend asking for a show of hands of what should get priority if I have to make cuts.

For clarity, I am assuming AOCB should really be AOCB from the 24th August anything from after then should be ruled out? I ask this as I am conscious of time and I really don't want to be at the Adelphi Centre for 6.5 hours before controlling at Lothians on the Sunday. =o

[Andy Howie]

Which comes first on the 11th ? AGM or Council meeting
I hope the AGM has enough time for the AOCB this time. I am not sure there will be enough funds for the Olympiad to get everything I want so I intend asking for a show of hands of what should get priority if I have to make cuts.

Andy,

is that not down to you as Director to determine what gets cut?

[andyburnett]

Which comes first on the 11th ? AGM or Council meeting
I hope the AGM has enough time for the AOCB this time. I am not sure there will be enough funds for the Olympiad to get everything I want so I intend asking for a show of hands of what should get priority if I have to make cuts.

Andy,

List the things you want to do re: the Olympiad team and then we can give you feedback.

As Andy H states it is ultimately up to you as director, but input from others based on solid information is always useful.

[amuir]

Norway is popular :
We have 2 offers for captaincy so could have mens & womens captaincy but this will mean 12 not 11 people going. This would then reduce GM fees.
So we might the following votes at the AGM by a show hands (no proxies):
1. Matthew Turner : in or out ?
2. GM fees or 2 captains ?
3. Kasparov or Ilyumzhinov ?
Shouldn't take long for these 3 votes.

[Andy Howie]

Well the last one is for me to organise and I am not seeking the decision until the last council meeting prior to the Olympiad