Hi, a few questions about memberships to ACF/FIDE

[Firegoat7]

what serious coin does chess contribute to govt coffers?

Think about it AC. How much tax is the Australian government receiving from all these chess companies? And we get zero dollars in return?

[HydraTED]

Reiterating what I have already said. Clearly, you do not seem to understand the bigger picture. If you believe that a major reason Australian chess does not get any Federal or State support from government is because of a preconceived cultural bias against chess, then you should simply resign from all ACF positions.

Says a foul-mouthed lunatic who threatens people with violence on the internet and was thrown out of a tournament for fighting. Your grudge-ridden supposed opinion is irrelevant.

Leaders with a defeatist belief system should NEVER hold office and how could anybody seriously trust what they are saying.

Understanding the difficulties we confront is not defeatist, it is realist. Reality is something you will never understand as you are always spouting theoretical garbage as if you were eternally trapped in an undergrad sociology class.

It is annoying that you seem to genuinely believe that any discussion about ACF funding ought to revolve around you and your myopic opinions on the subject.

It would be annoying that you make this groundless false claim, except that your biased stupidity is not worth being annoyed about. I am just making the point that your discussions about the ACF almost always sooner or later do end up revolving around me, and that your view of the ACF is overwhelmingly dominated by your hatred of one person - your beef with me colours most of what you say about it. In this case, before I entered this discussion, you had already started whinging about money being spent on sending me to Congresses, a subject you have constantly whinged about in the past.

In the bigger picture it is much more important for Australian chess to have International quality chess tournaments then send Bonham,Wastell etc or whoever is flavour of the month overseas to vote at Fide meetings.

"Flavour of the month" is a rather stupid expression for you to use given how long we have been in our respective positions. Only trivial amounts of money (the odd registration fee here and there) have been spent on sending Gary overseas as he pays his own travel and accommodation costs.

My opinion is that Australia should not send any chess bureaucrat overseas and that includes team captains without Olympic funding.

Once again your supposed ideas are incredibly stupid. You would cause us to perform disastrously at Olympiads (team captains play a very important role that it is hard to play as a player) in a vain attempt to force people who do not care to fund our team.

And Australia has no place or right, to vainly suggest it should influence Fide decisions or appointments if it cannot run International quality chess tournaments. Australia has never held a World Championship match.

So what? Half of the top 10 chess countries in the world have never held one.

Australia has never held a chess Olympiad.

So what? Only a handful of countries outside Europe have held one. Only one has ever been held in Asia.

How anybody could argue that it is more important to send officials overseas then run the Australian Open properly is unforgivable.

Again a false dichotomy as no-one is arguing this. The two things don't have anything to do with each other.

Clearly the ACF belief system is in trouble. We have a once in a generation group of talent in this country and the ACF would rather support its own officials then these talented young players.

Again nonsense. Indeed you are the one who wants to destroy their Olympiad experience by not sending captains. And you have always hated juniors anyway.

How are you this naive?

Typical frothbot mimicry tactic - after I show up how naive it is, forcing it to change its position, it then groundlessly accuses me of the same thing.

Here is how it ought to be done. The ACF leadership should talk to the Liberal and Labor parties in this country and explain that they will recommend that their membership vote for either party based on what outcomes they can deliver for chess. The party that offers the most benefit to chess is the one the ACF leadership support as public policy. The ACF should then publicly advertsise its considered position on the matter in the public sphere. Power should be utilsed for the public good.

Political parties, unlike you, are not totally stupid. They would be easily able to determine that the reach of the ACF's position announcement would be likely to be a few thousand people at most, and that chess players are about as easy to herd as cats.

You are an incredibly negative and self interested person.

Says the one who is whinging negatively as usual and always in love with his own worthless "opinions".

I seriously doubt you would ever be able to argue a position where you cut your own funding because it was the right thing to do.

I do not even vote on decisions concerning my expense reimbursements. If someone competent, stable and lacking serious conflicts of interest wanted to take over my admin officer and delegate position and was willing to pay their own way they could have it. But so far the only (2) people wanting to contest my position have been either known to be clueless or else obviously conflicted.

In another organisation that I have worked for for nearly 30 years someone suggested making me a Life Member, which would mean I no longer had to pay membership fees. I told them I did not want it because it would not be right for me to receive it while still serving on the committee.

[antichrist]

............


Understanding the difficulties we confront is not defeatist, it is realist. Reality is something you will never understand as you are always spouting theoretical garbage as if you were eternally trapped in an undergrad sociology class.


.............

Gee this sounds similar to IdleDim's post 24 on CC

What matters more, and is unwavering, is the mandated framework of analysis, and the mandated meta-narratives that inform it. Students these days are required to 'interrogate' texts as representations of class, gender, ethnicity and cultural identity.

[Firegoat7]

Says a......... travel and accommodation costs.

Irrelevant nonsense ignored.

You would cause us to perform disastrously at Olympiads (team captains play a very important role that it is hard to play as a player) in a vain attempt to force people who do not care to fund our team.

There is absolutely no proof that a team captain improves performance. It is obviously a tradition adopted from sport. If it is a "necessary expense" then it should receive funding from the federal government.

So what? Half of the top 10 chess countries in the world have never held one.

Do these countries get zero government funding?

So what? Only a handful of countries outside Europe have held one. Only one has ever been held in Asia.

Do these countries get government funding?

Again a false dichotomy as no-one is arguing this. The two things don't have anything to do with each other.

This is your opinion, but not mine.

Again nonsense. Indeed you are the one who wants to destroy their Olympiad experience by not sending captains.

Melodramatic nonsense...nobody wants to "destroy the Olympiad".

And you have always hated juniors anyway.

Patently untrue. I have consistently argued that juniors should receive no special consideration in adult events.

Political parties, unlike you, are not totally stupid. They would be easily able to determine that the reach of the ACF's position announcement would be likely to be a few thousand people at most, and that chess players are about as easy to herd as cats.

Just resign. You have no understanding of how large the chess economy is in this country. Here is my free suggestion.
Pay! yes pay somebody like GM David Smerdon or IM Vlad Smirnov (suitably qualified) (Mates rates of course ) to conduct an economical impact study on the benefits chess provides for the Australian nation/state. Once you have the projected figures (which will be in the millions easily), put out that Chess deserves better recognition in Federal and State budgets.

I do not even vote on decisions concerning my expense reimbursements..... I told them I did not want it because it would not be right for me to receive it while still serving on the committee.

Listening to you talk about yourself is boring. Nobody even cares less if you vote on the matter or not. You simply confirmed what I had already stated "...I seriously doubt you would ever be able to argue a position where you cut your own funding because it was the right thing to do. " Imaginary rambling stories about not becoming a life member in unnamed organisations simply does not cut it as a theoretical position in relation to why the ACF needs to pay for people like you to attend Fide meetings.

[george]

Hi All,
The ACF did make a realistic effort to launch a bid for the Chess Olympiad. I went to the Bled Olympiad in early 00's in my capacity as ACF President specifically to identify costs and if politically Australia had a realistic chance of winning the rights to host an Olympiad. The expenses for my trip were jointly covered by ACF and Australian Major events ( Adelaide Office). In addition Australian Major events sent one of their officers to Bled as well for 4 days.

Australia's suggestion of putting forth a bid was greeted with respect by FIDE and there was support from Asia. I spoke to people who had run Olympiads before and got stats , figures and costs which totalled about 10,000,000 dollars in 2004. However there was much angst from the traditional chess power houses about coming to Australia for an Olympiad - I speak Russian so had no communication difficulties .

I put together a cost/benefit analysis report for Australian Major Events to be submitted to the then SA Government for analysis as the key to starting anything was getting $1,000,000 input from SA Government , $50,000 to be used immediately to setup a basic office and select an appropriate team to form a submission to FIDE. This cost/benefit analysis and eventual submission to SA Government was in the end rewritten by Australian Major events which I agreed with and it was submitted.

That year there were three major funding submissions to go to the SA Cabinet - none of them were approved.

To have a go at trying for an Olympiad was one of the major reasons I went for the job of ACF President. I was elected unopposed and the ACF Council was very positive in giving me a shot at the Olympiad dream.

At no stage was I ever going to be on the final Olympiad organising team - I would have had some say obviously in the selection of the Steering Team but I was not after a job in the Organising Team.

So to say that the ACF has not had vision or tried to look at / achieve big picture success re Olympiad is NOT CORRECT!

[HydraTED]

Irrelevant nonsense ignored.

It's not irrelevant at all. If you were a respected person in the chess community then one might at least bother asking why you hold these opinions. But you're not, you're just a joke, and if you don't provide a reason for any view you claim to hold then there's a high chance it's insincere and a 100% chance that it hasn't been thought out.

There is absolutely no proof that a team captain improves performance.

The burden is on you to show they don't. Team captains perform roles in deciding who will play in which round and communication with officials. You can't choose not to have one, the issue being only whether they are also a player. But if they are also a player then the player has their time and energy taken up with captaincy roles, has to make decisions regarding draws for other players during their own match (perhaps while playing) and has to make decisions about whether they themselves will play a given round (in which they have a conflict of interest).

It is obviously a tradition adopted from sport. If it is a "necessary expense" then it should receive funding from the federal government.

And this is just more of your pointless idealism. The issue isn't what you think is morally desirable (though any claim by you that anyone "should" do anything rings hollow given your frequent violation of reasonable social norms), the issue is what we do in the real world. And your suggestions are silly and counterproductive.

Do these countries get zero government funding?

Do these countries get government funding?

It's irrelevant. You chose to measure Australian chess performance by demanding metrics, according to which leading chess nations are a failure (as usual you didn't think it through). What this actually shows is that government support does not automatically lead to hosting Olympiads or World Championships, so these are stupid metrics to apply for nations generally let alone Australia.

This is your opinion, but not mine.

What you claim to be your opinion is irrelevant.

Melodramatic nonsense...nobody wants to "destroy the Olympiad".

I said "destroy their Olympiad experience" and you misquoted it as "destroy the Olympiad". Therefore you were attacking your own misquoting and the nonsense was all yours. Try reading what you are quoting next time instead of just rushing in to attack it and you might make less of a goose of yourself in the future.

Patently untrue. I have consistently argued that juniors should receive no special consideration in adult events.

You have argued this because you hate juniors. Of course, someone as hypocritical as you will never be entirely consistent about this (your praising of juniors from one specific club was noted before you were banned from it) but I well recall how you would whinge about talented juniors even being praised.

You have no understanding of how large the chess economy is in this country.

Again you are wilfully missing the point and jumping from one whinge to another in your usual goalpost-shifting fashion. The issue was not the chess economy, it was the political reach of the ACF.

Here is my free suggestion.

Any free suggestion from you is considerably overvalued. If there was any risk of you being taken seriously it would be in the ACF's interests to offer you money to shut up.

Pay! yes pay somebody like GM David Smerdon or IM Vlad Smirnov (suitably qualified) (Mates rates of course ) to conduct an economical impact study on the benefits chess provides for the Australian nation/state. Once you have the projected figures (which will be in the millions easily), put out that Chess deserves better recognition in Federal and State budgets.

Again you have adopted my suggestion to focus on positive strategies instead of negative ones. But for starters, only some politicians are dim enough to be suckered by a study showing economic benefits that is conducted by a person with a vested interest, for a body with a vested interest. Commissioning an independent study might have more credibility.

Listening to you talk about yourself is boring.

Because the facts are always boring to you when they don't suit your incoherent frothing. But if you are so easily bored by me correcting the record then here's a big hint you're unable to grasp because you are stupid: stop talking about me!

You simply confirmed what I had already stated "...I seriously doubt you would ever be able to argue a position where you cut your own funding because it was the right thing to do. " Imaginary rambling stories about not becoming a life member in unnamed organisations simply does not cut it as a theoretical position in relation to why the ACF needs to pay for people like you to attend Fide meetings.

Unfortunately for you it is not imaginary (but I'm not your research assistant as to what organisation it is). Nor is two sentences "rambling", though I realise it exceeds your attention span. As a typical example of how inattentive and stupid you are, you fail to realise that the point of this example was not directed at justifying funding. It was directed at your groundless and gutless claim that I wouldn't know when to turn down a supposed benefit.

The other thing you're too stupid to grasp here is that I don't benefit from these overseas trips personally - far from it. They take up time when I could be working, costing me income. Almost every day is taken up by meetings leaving very little time to see anything of the countries visited. It would certainly be in my best interests financially to not go on them. I go on them to serve the interests of Australian chess and I sacrifice enough to do so without having to pay all the costs involved as well.

[Firegoat7]

[QUOTE=george;100646]

And Australia has no place or right, to vainly suggest it should influence Fide decisions or appointments if it cannot run International quality chess tournaments. Australia has never held a World Championship match. Australia has never held a Super GM tournament. Australia has never held a chess Olympiad.

This is not opinion, it is fact, Australian chess has never held these type of events. I understand that we don't share the same opinion on ACF funding for officials, and that is fine, but don't start behaving like Bonham and get defensive when people have alternative views.

[HydraTED]

Don't deliberately say that I said things that I didn't say.

Even if he did this, why (according to your lack of a value system) shouldn't he? You do this all the time. In your last post you quoted me as saying something I did not say. Are you going to apologise?

This is not opinion, it is fact, Australian chess has never held these type of events. I understand that we don't share the same opinion on ACF funding for officials, and that is fine, but don't start [..] and get defensive when people have alternative views.

You're just being a control freak here, trying to dictate the course of conversation, something you often accuse others of doing.

[Firegoat7]

It's not irrelevant at all.

Yes It is. You express yourself very poorly on this forum and that is the truth.

The burden is on you to show they don't. Team captains perform roles in deciding who will play in which round and communication with officials. You can't choose not to have one, the issue being only whether they are also a player. But if they are also a player then the player has their time and energy taken up with captaincy roles, has to make decisions regarding draws for other players during their own match (perhaps while playing) and has to make decisions about whether they themselves will play a given round (in which they have a conflict of interest).

Obviously if you want to save on ACF costs then doing away with non playing team captains would be reasonable. Just like if you want to increase ACF costs then increasing officials would be necessary.

It's irrelevant. You chose to measure Australian chess performance by demanding metrics, according to which leading chess nations are a failure (as usual you didn't think it through). What this actually shows is that government support does not automatically lead to hosting Olympiads or World Championships, so these are stupid metrics to apply for nations generally let alone Australia.

As usual you deliberately misrepresent my opinion. Either Australia has a history of hosting World Class chess events or it doesn't- which one is it? Of course you are perfectly entitled to believe that the ACF should spend money on delegates attending Fide meetings. Just as I am perfectly entitled to believe that it is a complete waste of money.

You have argued this because you hate juniors. Of course, someone as hypocritical as you will never be entirely consistent about this (your praising of juniors from one specific club was noted before you were banned from it)

An ACF official should never make such a statement. This is completely dishonest and simply untrue. It is very disappointing that you continue to make these outrageous claims whilst representing the ACF.

The issue was not the chess economy, it was the political reach of the ACF.

If you don't understand the connection then there is no point in any explanation.

But for starters, only some politicians are dim enough to be suckered by a study showing economic benefits that is conducted by a person with a vested interest, for a body with a vested interest. Commissioning an independent study might have more credibility.

Listen. The ACF should talk to GM David Smerdon (a friendly expert) about the feasibility and cost of doing such a project. If he believes it is a reasonable thing that might help secure government funding for a reasonable cost then they should follow his advice and commission a report and yes Independence is important.

stop talking about me!

It is always you who brings up the subject of yourself. Nobody else finds you that interesting!

Unfortunately for you it is not imaginary ..... involved as well.

All this irrelevant nonsense is just you telling a story that you want us to believe. I totally reject all of it. I don't believe you at all. Why should I?

[Firegoat7]

In your last post you quoted me as saying something I did not say. Are you going to apologise?

No because I don't believe what you are saying is the truth. If you think you have been wronged, then I can apologise, but I don't think this is really the case.

You're just being a control freak here, trying to dictate the course of conversation, something you often accuse others of doing.

Totally uncalled for. You either agree with the facts or disagree, there is no in between. Trying to run a Chess Olympiad does not mean you actually ran a Chess Olympiad, there is no in between truth on the fact.

[HydraTED]

Yes It is. You express yourself very poorly on this forum and that is the truth.

Another gutless ipse dixit from a frothbot who writes as badly as the average brainwashed Resistance member.

Obviously if you want to save on ACF costs then doing away with non playing team captains would be reasonable.

But such a focus on cost-cutting at the expense of ACF goals and with not the slightest need for it would be stupid.

Just like if you want to increase ACF costs then increasing officials would be necessary.

Rubbish; there are always other ways to spend the money.

As usual you deliberately misrepresent my opinion.

I misrepresented nothing - this is just your usual parroting tactic in which once accusations are used successfully against you, you try to throw them back without caring whether your claims have any merit.

Either Australia has a history of hosting World Class chess events or it doesn't- which one is it?

I realise you are remarkably slow but again you fail to grasp that your use of Olympiads and World Champs as examples was demolished by pointing out how many other nations have not held these things either.

Of course you are perfectly entitled to believe that the ACF should spend money on delegates attending Fide meetings. Just as I am perfectly entitled to believe that it is a complete waste of money.

You are legally entitled to believe that, but in no other way are you entitled at this time. There is no moral or rational entitlement to a misinformed opinion.

An ACF official should never make such a statement. This is completely dishonest and simply untrue.

Unfortunately for you it is my view that you are anti-junior, and I can quote an example of you whinging about the praising of talented juniors if I have to.

It is very disappointing that you continue to make these outrageous claims whilst representing the ACF.

It would be very disappointing that you claim I am making them "whilst representing the ACF" when I am actually posting in a private and unofficial capacity - except that we are so used to such stupidity and cluelessness from you that anything else would be surprising.

If you don't understand the connection then there is no point in any explanation.

There is indeed no point in you "explaining" connections you have made up to try to dig yourself out of your hole.

If he believes it is a reasonable thing that might help secure government funding for a reasonable cost then they should follow his advice and commission a report and yes Independence is important.

So now you tell me to listen and then you agree with what I said. Looks like you listened but I doubt you will admit you were wrong.

It is always you who brings up the subject of yourself. Nobody else finds you that interesting!

You can keep telling these lies but you're not fooling anyone. Here's an example of you bringing up the subject of me (post 2) :

http://www.aussiechess.com.au/showth...ike-a-dictator!

All this irrelevant nonsense is just you telling a story that you want us to believe.

Wrong. I don't care if you believe it, because you are so far cooked that your opinion is irrelevant - though anyway, you know what I am saying there was true and are just trying to pretend otherwise in order to troll or because you cannot deal with it. Primarily, I want to ensure that if anyone strays into the thread they are not fooled by your nonsense and are aware that I have referred to a counter-example that they can investigate further if they wish. They are welcome to contact me for details.

I totally reject all of it. I don't believe you at all. Why should I?

Because it will save you from looking foolish and stupid. Not that that has ever seemed to bother you before.

No because I don't believe what you are saying is the truth. If you think you have been wronged, then I can apologise, but I don't think this is really the case.

Are you really so dense and dim that I have to spell this out? I wrote:

Again nonsense. Indeed you are the one who wants to destroy their Olympiad experience by not sending captains.

and you responded:

Melodramatic nonsense...nobody wants to "destroy the Olympiad".

thus misquoting me. Go back and look at your own post 19 and you will see that you stuffed up.

If you think you have been wronged, then I can apologise, but I don't think this is really the case.

You should now apologise twice. Once for the misquote and again for doubting me when I said you had misquoted me. You should know this by now - if you get into an argument about the facts, you lose.

Totally uncalled for.

Of course it is called for, you pitiable mimophant. You were trying to direct george with orders as to how he should post.

Trying to run a Chess Olympiad does not mean you actually ran a Chess Olympiad, there is no in between truth on the fact.

That is irrelevant since I did not disagree with that claim. What I pointed out is your hypocrisy.

[george]

hi all,
Unfortunately I had to moderate a Firegoat7 post on this thread due to needless insulting of yours truly.

[Firegoat7]

Beejeezus George, talk about a total over reaction. Anyways I shouldn't be moderated by an ACF official when criticising the ACF.

Why does George have moderating powers anyway?

[george]

Hi Mr Firegoat7,

Because I am a moderator (doh). I did not moderate because of anything you said about ACF. I cut out the bit where you were abusive towards me.

[Firegoat7]

You are legally entitled to believe that, but in no other way are you entitled at this time. There is no moral or rational entitlement to a misinformed opinion.

I cannot believe that you actually said this on Ozchess. Unbelievable.