11-07-2013, 09:29 AM
One of my rare forays into the world of the discussion forum, so here goes.
I realised that as soon as I was appointed Chairman of the standards Committee I would become a controversial figure. This assessment was based on observing the treatment given to my predecessor. In fact, the Phil Thomas unpleasantness generation machine was started up and aimed at me even before my appointment was confirmed at the 2012 AGM. Well, nobody loses any sleep over that but I do feel that various facts should be stated here to avoid misunderstandings amongst the many people who read this forum.
MICHAEL HANLEY'S RESIGNATION
Michael's original report, the one he emailed to the whole world, ended with:-
Please accept my resignation from the end of the council meeting, as I can no longer be associated with such an organization.
I have contacted my colleagues in Holyrood to inform them that I am no longer involved with this organization.
Most readers would interpret that as having a certain ring of finality.
At the Council Meeting, Michael was unable to substantiate his allegations and he undertook to issue a revised report. I have no information on whether the revised version has been distributed as widely but it concluded with:-
My membership of CS ran out on the 1st July, I will not be renewing it after the way [edit] ......[end edit] have been treated.
The complete, revised report is here (albeit redacted in the final paragraph).
Recently, I was asked about the removal of Michael's name from the various lists and replied:-
When a membership falls due for renewal I email the member to remind him/her and to express the hope that they will continue to support Chess Scotland. Some members, pay up immediately and I update that day the membership records as displayed on the website. Some members ignore me and then I wait a month and send another reminder, in this case I leave membership status unchanged meantime. The third category is where a member lets me know that they will not be renewing membership and, again, I update the membership list that day by deleting the relevant name. There is a corresponding change to any listing as a Chess Scotland Registered Volunteer for PVG related purposes. This is an automatic process which does not require any thought or consideration. All coaches and arbiters on the lists must be Chess Scotland members and if their membership lapses, they are immediately removed from the relevant list/s. (There is a separate process to add the person's name back onto the Registered Volunteer list if they reinstate membership at a later date, the details depend on the time which has elapsed.) Michael Hanley came under the third category, decision to not renew, and he was processed accordingly, there was nothing overzealous or particular to his case. The only unusual aspect was that in Michael's case he had also resigned as a Director.
In summary, Michael was treated no differently from any other member who decides not to renew membership. In my years of Membership Secretary, I cannot recall ever having briefed Council or sought their approval in operating at individual level the mechanical process of membership renewal and/or cancellation. Equally, Council has never shown any interest in the membership list at individual level. On the other hand, at an aggregate level, every piece of statistical information I can think of is published on a monthly basis here.
CANCELLATION OF MEMBERSHIP, COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT
If Council wishes to authorise each and every cancellation on an individual basis I would have no problem with that, not sure what value that would add and may be rather embarrassing for some of the individual non-renewers but certainly no problem to implement. Before adopting any such new procedure, please bear in mind that many members who decide against renewing take their decision for a whole variety of different, personal reasons. It is also the case that many lapsed members do in fact renew their membership again at a later stage. I would therefore suggest that the existing, low key approach of leaving the Membership Secretary to operate the system is more member friendly but, as I say, a formal ratification by Council of each and every cancellation could be implemented. Bureaucrats love bureaucracy.
In this regard, I would have only one request, namely that the Membership Secretary should be given contact details for Council because the current incumbent has no information on who is, or is not a member of Council.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Because Michael's original report had been sent to so many people, there was quite a bit of comment, questions were asked about Michael's status within Chess Scotland. After various discussions involving a number of people, it was decided that an announcement should be made. It is a moot point whether the recent news panel was a more or less effective approach than using the discussion forum. The decision to issue a notice on the recent news panel was taken jointly by the President, Executive Director and Membership Secretary. The actual wording used was agreed by the same three officials. I was given the short straw of posting the notice to the home page because Andy was so busy at the Scottish Championships.
Again, I would have no difficulty in implementing the suggestion that potentially controversial announcements on the home page (but not the forum?) should be vetted and authors named. The obvious question is who watches the watchmen? At least I managed to resist the temptation to resort to my schoolboy Latin but, on a serious note, I suggest that the membership should be able to trust the combined resources of the President, Executive Director and Membership Secretary. Despite all the ballyhoo being generated on the discussion forum, we are simply well-meaning volunteers working for the good of chess as a whole.
I realised that as soon as I was appointed Chairman of the standards Committee I would become a controversial figure. This assessment was based on observing the treatment given to my predecessor. In fact, the Phil Thomas unpleasantness generation machine was started up and aimed at me even before my appointment was confirmed at the 2012 AGM. Well, nobody loses any sleep over that but I do feel that various facts should be stated here to avoid misunderstandings amongst the many people who read this forum.
MICHAEL HANLEY'S RESIGNATION
Michael's original report, the one he emailed to the whole world, ended with:-
Please accept my resignation from the end of the council meeting, as I can no longer be associated with such an organization.
I have contacted my colleagues in Holyrood to inform them that I am no longer involved with this organization.
Most readers would interpret that as having a certain ring of finality.
At the Council Meeting, Michael was unable to substantiate his allegations and he undertook to issue a revised report. I have no information on whether the revised version has been distributed as widely but it concluded with:-
My membership of CS ran out on the 1st July, I will not be renewing it after the way [edit] ......[end edit] have been treated.
The complete, revised report is here (albeit redacted in the final paragraph).
Recently, I was asked about the removal of Michael's name from the various lists and replied:-
When a membership falls due for renewal I email the member to remind him/her and to express the hope that they will continue to support Chess Scotland. Some members, pay up immediately and I update that day the membership records as displayed on the website. Some members ignore me and then I wait a month and send another reminder, in this case I leave membership status unchanged meantime. The third category is where a member lets me know that they will not be renewing membership and, again, I update the membership list that day by deleting the relevant name. There is a corresponding change to any listing as a Chess Scotland Registered Volunteer for PVG related purposes. This is an automatic process which does not require any thought or consideration. All coaches and arbiters on the lists must be Chess Scotland members and if their membership lapses, they are immediately removed from the relevant list/s. (There is a separate process to add the person's name back onto the Registered Volunteer list if they reinstate membership at a later date, the details depend on the time which has elapsed.) Michael Hanley came under the third category, decision to not renew, and he was processed accordingly, there was nothing overzealous or particular to his case. The only unusual aspect was that in Michael's case he had also resigned as a Director.
In summary, Michael was treated no differently from any other member who decides not to renew membership. In my years of Membership Secretary, I cannot recall ever having briefed Council or sought their approval in operating at individual level the mechanical process of membership renewal and/or cancellation. Equally, Council has never shown any interest in the membership list at individual level. On the other hand, at an aggregate level, every piece of statistical information I can think of is published on a monthly basis here.
CANCELLATION OF MEMBERSHIP, COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT
If Council wishes to authorise each and every cancellation on an individual basis I would have no problem with that, not sure what value that would add and may be rather embarrassing for some of the individual non-renewers but certainly no problem to implement. Before adopting any such new procedure, please bear in mind that many members who decide against renewing take their decision for a whole variety of different, personal reasons. It is also the case that many lapsed members do in fact renew their membership again at a later stage. I would therefore suggest that the existing, low key approach of leaving the Membership Secretary to operate the system is more member friendly but, as I say, a formal ratification by Council of each and every cancellation could be implemented. Bureaucrats love bureaucracy.
In this regard, I would have only one request, namely that the Membership Secretary should be given contact details for Council because the current incumbent has no information on who is, or is not a member of Council.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Because Michael's original report had been sent to so many people, there was quite a bit of comment, questions were asked about Michael's status within Chess Scotland. After various discussions involving a number of people, it was decided that an announcement should be made. It is a moot point whether the recent news panel was a more or less effective approach than using the discussion forum. The decision to issue a notice on the recent news panel was taken jointly by the President, Executive Director and Membership Secretary. The actual wording used was agreed by the same three officials. I was given the short straw of posting the notice to the home page because Andy was so busy at the Scottish Championships.
Again, I would have no difficulty in implementing the suggestion that potentially controversial announcements on the home page (but not the forum?) should be vetted and authors named. The obvious question is who watches the watchmen? At least I managed to resist the temptation to resort to my schoolboy Latin but, on a serious note, I suggest that the membership should be able to trust the combined resources of the President, Executive Director and Membership Secretary. Despite all the ballyhoo being generated on the discussion forum, we are simply well-meaning volunteers working for the good of chess as a whole.