23-07-2013, 04:48 PM
The approach outlined by andy Howie has to right and is the basis for moving forward. We all recognise that there are occasions when the difference between genuine criticism and personal attacks are somewhat blurred, but actually when we think about it we also know that in the vast majority of cases we know which one it is.
We do not want this forum to be over-regulated or over moderated so we have to be (fairly) sensible. I would like to suggest a few things that we should be able to say.
1. It is unhelpful if you join ChessScotland just before an AGM, just so you can have a vote.
2. We want people to join ChessScotland and there must be a very very good reason for denying somebody membership (the fact they might be awkward or annoying is simply not sufficient).
3. If you have arranged a meeting with someone it is impolite not to turn up.
4. It takes time to write a written apology and if you have received one, don't worry too much if it didn't arrive the exact second you hoped for.
Hopefully, that condensed summary annoys everyone - compromise means nobody gets entirely what they want, but then we move on.
Now for moving on. I believe that we will have young, dynamic candidates for the junior posts at the AGM. If they are succesful they have the potential to take ChessScotland forward, but they might need some help and they certainly don't need the current antagonism. Whoever is elected to the junior posts in August should be able to listen to advice and be able to ask for advice, but they should also be able to rely on support whatever direction they choose to take ChessScotland forward in.
We do not want this forum to be over-regulated or over moderated so we have to be (fairly) sensible. I would like to suggest a few things that we should be able to say.
1. It is unhelpful if you join ChessScotland just before an AGM, just so you can have a vote.
2. We want people to join ChessScotland and there must be a very very good reason for denying somebody membership (the fact they might be awkward or annoying is simply not sufficient).
3. If you have arranged a meeting with someone it is impolite not to turn up.
4. It takes time to write a written apology and if you have received one, don't worry too much if it didn't arrive the exact second you hoped for.
Hopefully, that condensed summary annoys everyone - compromise means nobody gets entirely what they want, but then we move on.
Now for moving on. I believe that we will have young, dynamic candidates for the junior posts at the AGM. If they are succesful they have the potential to take ChessScotland forward, but they might need some help and they certainly don't need the current antagonism. Whoever is elected to the junior posts in August should be able to listen to advice and be able to ask for advice, but they should also be able to rely on support whatever direction they choose to take ChessScotland forward in.