Full Version: Council meeting
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
It is done that way as there are quite a few long documents. Better than having multiple files to download
It means people can read the Word documents without having to download a 631k PDF - seems fair enough to me.
There seems to be an obvious solution to me... do both!

We can't be that hard up for space on the site and there is an obvious preference for it (however small).
Its just because some devices do not have the software to enable to unzip
all windows platforms have built in extracting utilities also you could use self extracting files. However I dont believe for a moment any files of the type you're talking about require compression War and Peace would be a relatively small file unless you're taking pictures! I would also like a copy of the motion(s) when they are available
If someone wants me to e-mail the files to them, then please contact me at the usual address but I do not intend to either combine into a 20 odd page document nor put up separate links. With the length of some of the files, other parts will be lost
The zip file under discussion contains four documents.

Three of these documents are quite small, and take up a negligible amount of space.

The fourth document, taking up about 90% of the file, is a proposal to introduce a new system for selecting Juniors to represent Scotland in international junior events.

It is my purely personal opinion that this proposal is not proper for Council, but should be discussed at the Chess Scotland AGM.

My reason for holding that view is that the proposed system concerns primarily the following people:
- the Junior International Director;
- the team of selectors for junior international events;
- the juniors who are in contention for selection to represent Scotland;
- and the parents/guardians of those juniors.
Few of the members of Council are actually among these concerned people. And while all CS members are entitled to attend Council meetings and express their views, only Council members may vote at Council meetings. I think everybody affected by the proposal should be able to vote on it, and therefore the proper forum to discuss it is a general meeting, not a Council meeting.

As I say, that's my pesonal opinion - and I'm no longer either a Council member or a member of the team of selectors, so whether the proposal is discussed at Council or not and whether it is approved or not has no direct impact on me.
I must agree with Donald on some of this.
The matter of Junior selection and the effectiveness of the Standards Committee is appropriate for the AGM and it should be discussed there too. I would welcome contributions from parents, chaperons, Steve Mannion Snr, junior players etc there.
The selection document is here:-

I have just skimmed over the document and and certainly agree with much of what Donald says about the need for a more public debate about its contents. Whether this is simply to ensure that those affected know about the changes or that input from those with relevant experience is obtained (e.g. the use of grades, especially when it seems that players may be compared based on 'grades' that have been derived using different methods.)

I do think that the document needs to be treated and considered at two levels - 1. Principles/Aims 2. The Practicalities. The first needs to be agreed (or just understood) before discussing the latter.

Personally I have long advocated the use of squad system and basing selection on a player's relative strength amongst his international peers rather than simply relative to his Scottish peers so I am in favor of these aspects of the proposal. But have some issues with the practicalities eg I would caution against too strong an emphasis on 'live grade' because it is NOT a grade - it is an estimate of a grade i.e. it is an estimate of an estimate of a players strength. We all fall in to the trap of assuming that the player with a grade of G+x is better than player with grade G - this is clearly true if x is sufficiently large enough but how big does x need to be, especially for a 'live grade' ?

It goes without saying that basing a players rating on their five best events is clearly going to produce a biased result!

Anyway I need to read the document in full and consider carefully be for commenting further.
I haven't read any of the documents yet so I cannot comment on the content.

What I will say and this is a general point - there are far too many people who are content to wait rather than change. CS's decision making process is far too slow at present. I applaud anyone who puts their time and efforts into trying to change chess in Scotland for the better and can survive the snail's pace of decisions in CS. That is all.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8