Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Council meeting
Calum MacQueen Wrote:Secondly, why you? It was you, it wasn't anyone else. And it is always you. I've lost count of the amount of people you've fallen out with by directly attacking/criticising them. Considering you've shown blatant disdain towards Chess Scotland by withdrawing your membership, I'm amazed you find the will to come on the board and complain about things such as this.

Reading your last post Calum it is obvious you just want to make something out of nothing by being challenging. One thing we wont do is back off without defending ourselves if you quote the facts wrong.

Both Phil & I did not withdraw membership. We didn't renew. There is a difference. Cant go into details without revealing information that some quarters would feel is confidential.

Calum MacQueen Wrote:I'm amazed you find the will to come on the board and complain about things such as this.

Be amazed then, as so long as there are matters that may be detrimental to some juniors which may or may not include our own son we will challenge. In fact if you look at posts that I have done, where I have challenged, it has always been in my opinion for the good of the juniors. i will not sit back quiet whilst parents get a raw deal, which leads me on to your next quote.

Calum MacQueen Wrote:If you don't want to help Chess Scotland move on as an organisation then leave the volunteers who are giving plenty of their time and effort to help. If you do, get a membership and say something positive about something for once. We recently had your wife ranting about how an extra £5 per head was bad value despite the new digs for the Liverpool tournament didn't have a tramp staying there and the beds had that added bonus of not being laced with the previous visitor's public hair. Trying to criticise everything is just a terrible policy and one we cannot have in a community that is trying to pull together to get the grant back

Giving their time & help? I doubt if there are more than a few in the volunteer chess community that give more volunteer hours than us. Last weekend at the Primary Individual was from 2pm Friday until 8pm Sunday when we got home - that is a Chess Scotland event by the way. We have also helped run the joint branded tournaments for Chess Scotland/SJC. We are not like many that like to say on this noticeboard, & elsewhere, how things should be run but don't actually do anything themselves.

If we criticise, there is a reason. As for the grant that is not our fault. I have personally tried various channels trying to get sponsorship for not only Juniors but the Scottish Championships & Commonwealth. As well as both of us sourcing important venues in the past.

As for your quote regarding Liverpool you have omitted part of the facts. Paul booked the new central hostel in 2011 in good faith & therefore like anywhere including Premier Inns you have no control over other guests that may stay there. So yes, the new venue was quoted as being better but it came at a cost. It wasn't 'just £5', that may have been the difference to the cost to one junior - see below

Quote : - Liverpool Quadrangular
by Jacqui Thomas » Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:11 am

Its good to know everyone had such a good time, produced some good results & very well organised by David & his helpers.

robin moore wrote:
I am hearing some really good things about Liverpool particularly regarding the accommodation and meals arrangements compared to previous years.

If you are making comparisons you should also point out that for parent & child it was £218 this year where as last year, current managements first year it was £160 & prior to that £130. So on that basis one might expect it was better.

Jacqui Thomas

I wouldn't say my post was a rant or recent & cannot see how on earth it has anything to do with Phil so why are you now attacking me out of the blue.

Calum MacQueen Wrote:Just as a little post script, do you not think it's deeply, deeply inappropriate to bring up this example considering the email that recently went around. The one you clearly know about considering the only person to be CC'ed into the original email was your wife?

How can you say that meeting motions cannot be debated. Shouldn't be a motion if that is the case. By the way I was one of many on that email distribution list (not cc'd as you state) & you may find it surprising but all our our emails go into the same inbox.

Finally, 'wife', I have a name, I wouldn't want you to get accused of attacking anonymous persons on the board.


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)