Forums
Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Printable Version

+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 (/thread-831.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - seanmilton - 09-01-2014

StevieHilton Wrote:Sean,
Did you get my private message? I am still awaiting a reply?
I have an interest in this motion being disabled.

Stephen Hilton
Secretary General
IBCA (International Braille Chess Association)

Secretary FIDE Committee 'Chess for the disabled'

Steve, I have received your message but my reply just sits in the outbox and will not send for some reason. Please feel free to send me a direct email and I will forward the reply.


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - David G Congalton - 09-01-2014

Andy McCulloch Wrote:The obvious follow up question springs to mind. Has this tournament been copied and / or continued in subsequent years?

I recall that the Chess Cube site was promoted by someone on the ECF, but I have not heard of it recently.
Hi Andy

At a FIDE level the experiment seems to have been a one off. I don't know whether other "lesser" events in Africa or elsewhere have copied it since. I guess someone could approach the Chess Cube people to ask the question, who knows they may be willing to give it another go if it didn't take off first time round.


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Andrew McHarg - 09-01-2014

Personally, I really like the idea.

The possibility of cheating could be reduced significantly with some fairly basic measures. For instance, a webcam situated in such a way where the player's actions can be broadcast live to the playing centre. And you wouldn't necessarily need a volunteer to make the moves on every board, as one volunteer might be enough (unless there is a time scramble).

But on the whole, it's important to explore some of these kinds of advances. The motion suggests doing so - and that should be supported.


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Ianbrownlee - 09-01-2014

don't forgot you need an existing internet connection in the first place Perhaps a router for multiple use attached to a USB dongle Do the live boards have an Ethernet connection and how are the clocks connected.

I'm sure we would also appreciate any input from congress organisers . For example Donald and Glenys.

Could we organise a remote team for experimenting in the SNCL against a select team just to see how it would work???

As a test could we organise two schools to play each other, say one in Aberdeen and one down here?


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Donald Wilson - 09-01-2014

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.


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - George Murphy - 10-01-2014

Well said, Donald. Balanced as ever.

George


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Mike Scott - 10-01-2014

Quote:As a test could we organise two schools to play each other, say one in Aberdeen and one down here?
The organisers of the UK Schools Champs started to trial playing on-line the year Gillespies stopped participating - will contact them and find out what lessons were learnt.


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - amuir - 10-01-2014

Mike
I learnt that public schools cheat when playing online


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - Andrew McHarg - 10-01-2014

That's a bit of a generalisation Andy, don't you think?


Re: Continuation of AGM - motion 1.2 - davidpgillespie - 10-01-2014

Andrew wrote "That's a bit of a generalisation Andy, don't you think?"

Agreed!

David Gillespie
Full time Student
Member of Irvine Chess Club
Likes the show Family Guy