Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2

[Joe Parks]

Andy Muir wrote ......I shall be staying off the noticeboard for a while to stop scoring any more own goals and I will now concentrate on sorting out the olympiad team. Goodbye.

Thank God

[Patrick McGovern]

Andy Muir you could do what you did on the other controversial post and say "joking" and then you would get away with it again

[David G Congalton]

We all make errors of judgement from time to time. Andy Muir is a volunteer. He tries his best to do the International DIrector role and was the only person to stand at the AGM and has said he will concentrate on doing that work. Maybe we should just leave it at that, let him get on with that job, draw a line under things and move onwards.

[harrymarron]

Oh no! No more trying to guess what Andy Muir will say next. What will I do now for fun?

We are all volunteers David so that should not be used as an excuse for this rubbish. Someone should be having a quiet word with Mr Muir before people start taking the hump and make complaints under violation of dignity/sensitivity or whatever (and with some good reason).

[Andy Howie]

Right, as Hugh has said, that is more than enough. Draw a line under it and move on please

[IMarks]

Apologies if this information is already in the public domain, but, nearly a fortnight after the meeting, I haven't been able to find it anywhere.

Who are the members appointed to the working party to look into the feasibility of 'remote' chess? Will they be inviting submissions? If so, is there a contact e-mail address?

TIA.

[seanmilton]

Apologies if this information is already in the public domain, but, nearly a fortnight after the meeting, I haven't been able to find it anywhere.

Who are the members appointed to the working party to look into the feasibility of 'remote' chess? Will they be inviting submissions? If so, is there a contact e-mail address?

TIA.

The Working Party appointed by the AGM to investigate remote participation at CS events are:
Sean Milton, Ian Brownlee, Steve Hilton, Gilbert Alomenu, David Congalton, Andy Mcculoch and Andy Howie.
To date we have created a discussion document to structure the investigation and are presently focusing on the method and technology to be used to enable remote play.
My intention is to post regular updates on progress on a dedicated thread to keep members informed of the working party progress and to invite feedback. The input already received on this forum has been captured in the discussion document and is already included in the decision process. The new thread will start once the basic framework of the remote play model has been formed.

[IMarks]

Sean,

Thanks for this. One thing caught my eye -

To date we have created a discussion document to structure the investigation and are presently focusing on the method and technology to be used to enable remote play.

Am I reading this wrongly? If you're 'focusing on the method and technology to be used', that seems to imply that remote play is already a given, whatever the implications and ramifications.

I raise this point, not to have a dig at the guys on the w.p. who, I am sure, will do a bang-up job, but simply because in my professional life I can scarcely recall a committee/working party that didn't report back with what it was 'supposed' to report back with. I welcome your air of glasnost.

[Matthew Turner]

Ian,
I think you have to start by looking at the state of the technology. There is no point writing a discussion document about the desirability/implications of remote play if it is technologically impossible (or more likely technologically impractical).

[andyburnett]

I hope that the working party also discuss 'opt out' possibilities for players - I haven't the remotest desire to play someone who isn't there physically (if you'll pardon the pun).