Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
11:37 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General PCCC is no more a part of FIDE |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | | (101) Posted by Dejan Glisić [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 10:15]; edited by Dejan Glisić [09-03-29] |
Reply to 100: The fourth type of people in world of chesscomposition are those who pay membership and do nothing.
The fifth type are "mouses", they solve or analyse chessproblems at their home, and nothing more, as hobby, instead of fishing or looking TV. I know one of them who solves problems only while fishing. Croatian ultimate-fighter Mirko "Cro-Cop" Filipović is hobby solver, he usualy solves in plain. Maybe they are not part of your world of chesscomposition, but I like them too, I think that they are interesting. Membership doesn't metter. :-)
O.K. Maybe the "mouses" could be in your type "Contemplators".
| | | (102) Posted by Valery Gurov [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 10:34] |
Dear Dejan,
All "fans" of a composition listed by you concern the third type.They are fine and remarkable people! We it is indifferent - is FIDE or not, but we as it is indifferent - is PCCC or not :-). How the situation developed, we will not affect them. I spoke only about those people which are interested in decision.
| | | (103) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 15:27]; edited by Jacques Rotenberg [09-03-29] |
Let's say some simple things :
In any case, nobody can dissolve PCCC but PCCC itself!
Nor FIDE, nor Selivanov, nor anybody else have such a power.
If FIDE with a true decision of its committee wants no more relationship with PCCC, for example does not want, for any reason its name to be recalled on the so called "FIDE Albums", so the PCCC will have to find a new name for these books.
Also PCCC will have to change the wording of its statutes were FIDE is recalled
Now, if anyone declares that PCCC does not exist any more, or must disappear, or what else. The only sense it makes is that he puts himself out of the PCCC.
| | | (104) Posted by Dejan Glisić [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 15:56]; edited by Dejan Glisić [09-03-29] |
Dear Valery, O.K. I understand. But I forgot the sixth type: managers who only want to earn some money from chess composition. I can see them in FIDE, among chess managers, somethimes even among chessproblemists. One thing is sure: they are always near the money, they have some instinct. :)) It is O.K. if they want to help our society, to make better conditions for our activities, but if they care only for their own profit, it is very bad. I see such a managers in FIDE, in some national federations. When money come into chess composition, all of managers are chess composers or chess composition organizers. :))
Dear Jacques, you are right, about the name of Album FIDE. FIDE isn't owner of the Album. Album of Chess Composition or Chess Composition Album could be nice, not chessproblem, not problem chess, not composition chess (what is that?!?!) :-)).
| | | (105) Posted by Guy Sobrecases [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 18:56] |
I don't feel that this is rude to talk about PCCC as a "married virgin" as Andrej did with humour (even if I do not think that this metaphor reflects the situation).
What is rude is perhaps what some want to do with this "married virgin".
| | | (106) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Sunday, Mar 29, 2009 22:43] |
Some additional comments
1. Why do we need any kind of Commission at all?
I see two possible answers
a) so that we feel united
If this is the main reason, then nothing needed to be done. This feeling can be easily supported with any status of commission and with any results of its work.
b) so that together we can do things we are unable to do separately
I can only hope that this is the main goal for commission's existence and that this will be taken into account in all commission's decisions.
2. to Harry Fougiaxis (82, 98)
Here is my point of view.
For FIDE PCCC _was_ an internal FIDE Commission. For us the result was, for example, that all our competitions and titles were almost automatically approved by FIDE and, what is much more significant, as a result by all the chess world. The I.Leong's statement shows that FIDE no longer wants to have such a commission, but at the same time does not want to lose a working chess organization. So the decision mainly concerns the change of PCCC status. The new status suggested by FIDE is about equal to the status of national chess federation.
3. to Kevin Begley (94)
I am much less thinking about relations with FIDE than about relations with world of chess as a whole. Unfortunately, FIDE is currently the only organization which represents it. And so, breaking any ties with FIDE is almost the same as breaking ties with chess.
4. to Torsten Linß (96)
a) You are partially right, by here I am speaking about well known persons who had many times acted before our eyes. I think this experience allows to make probability estimations.
b) This "title" intended to represent the opinion of people who like chess, but have absolutely no interest in composition. If possible bad kind of scenario is to happen, I'll be inside the SSoOC, together with everyone else.
5. to Hans Gruber (99)
We in Russia may not understand democracy well, but we quite well recognize bureaucracy when we see it. And we know quite well that if one ignores bureaucracy, then the bureaucracy soon strikes back with unexpected force. Partially, this is what is going on now.
Composers too much relied on PCCC Presidium in bureaucratic problems and missed the moment when Presidium itself had become the citadel of bureaucracy. I, personally, have a lot of questions to Presidium and Uri Avner, but they all are of the same nature: why _nothing_ was done when _something_ should have been done.
6. to Dejan Glisić (104)
You position is interesting, but I fully disagree with you. There is currently _no money at all_ that can be extracted from composition. If you find three managers црщ will be able to make their living from chess composition., I'll recommend to elect them into PCCC and make everyone else to do what they are saying. Because this will mean they will find a permanent flow of money into chess composition and it does not matter if they will steal 80% of it - the composition society will still have much more money for composers, solvers, competitions, publications and other activities, than now.
| | | (107) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Monday, Mar 30, 2009 09:26] |
QUOTE
I. Leong's statement shows that FIDE no longer wants to have such a commission, but at the same time does not want to lose a working chess organization. So the decision mainly concerns the change of PCCC status. The new status suggested by FIDE is about equal to the status of national chess federation.
This is what I understand too, except for I would call the new status as that of an Affiliated International Ogranisation, and not of a national chess federation.
| | | (108) Posted by Dejan Glisić [Monday, Mar 30, 2009 12:48]; edited by Dejan Glisić [09-03-30] |
Dear Georgy, I was joking (but there is about 50% of truth) abouth the sixth type of chesscomposers. You write about good managers, even ideal managers. Of course, they are always welcome! But I can see some bad managers who want us to bring them money, who told us that we can't organize competitions without them, that we can't participate competitions without their permition and so on. Those are the managers who use their position and their privilegies. I didn't mean on our Andrey. Of course, I believe that our Andrey is not that sort of bad manager! But, if our project depends on one person, it can be danger. Maybe new relationship will work (FIDE advisor - PCCC presidium) but the way that Kirsan decided about our advisor isn't good. Tommorow, Kirsan can send us some bad manager. O.K. I am waiting for PCCC's answer.
| | | (109) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Thursday, Apr 9, 2009 16:21] |
According to informations I got most likely everything will stay mostly the same just with another name.
Best,
Siegfried
| | | (110) Posted by Andrey Selivanov [Thursday, Apr 9, 2009 18:26] |
And who has solved it? The congress in Brazil already was?
| | | (111) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Thursday, Apr 9, 2009 19:06] |
If he would like to say that publically he would tell here, so please let it stay as it is and wait for Brazil.
| | | (112) Posted by Dejan Glisić [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 00:53] |
Is the spring in Rio going to be very hot? This is not funny any more! :(
| | | (113) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 08:33] |
Georgy,
I just take care that you said
"...and it does not matter if they will steal 80% of it ...."
shocking!! and mostly naive!!
| | | (114) Posted by Georgy Evseev [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 09:25] |
To Jacques Rotenberg (113)
I do not understand your reaction
If your have to choose between two cases:
1) No sponsorship at all
2) The manager finds the sponsor, who grants, for example, 1000€, and says that you will receive only 200€
Then it is quite obvious that the second case looks much more promising.
There is well known real-life example - the manager of Mike Tyson (boxing), sorry I do not remember his name. He has become extremely rich but his sportsmen has also received much more money than any other manager could have provided for them. Of course, it does not mean that everyone was happy. On the contrary, several sportsmen went to the court - but the fact stays: they have received much more money than with any other manager.
| | | (115) Posted by Valery Gurov [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 10:31] |
Manager of Mike Tyson - Don King.
| | | (116) Posted by Valery Gurov [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 10:31] |
Manager of Mike Tyson - Don King.
| | | (117) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 11:11] |
From the PCCC site (ICCU):
QUOTE
A PCCC Presidium meeting was held in Bratislava at the end of March to discuss this issue, among others, with the participation of Uri Avner (President), Hannu Harkola (1st VP), Marko Klasinc (2nd VP), Kjell Widlert (3rd VP, via email), Klaus Wenda (HP and advisor) and Günter Büsing (Secretary).
So proxy delegates are sometimes OK and sometimes are not OK! So Kjell Widlert can vote remotely but at the same time delegates from some eastern European countries were not allowed to do this. Where is the democracy here? Why there are different rules for different people?
| | | (118) Posted by Guy Sobrecases [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 11:15]; edited by Guy Sobrecases [09-04-10] |
"obviously much more promising"
Is it really an example to follow, and what we need for Chess Composition?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_King
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/03/sports/sports-of-the-times-is-don-king-s-asbestos-tuxedo-turning-toxic-at-last.html
| | | (119) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 13:15] |
Of course we need that, the bashings with Karpov and the FIDE on the world championships (OTB) were very amusing. Not necessary to mention that Karpov also is a composer (if one counts his one study with Gik, at least) so let's hope for more fun, scandals, separation and cold war!
;-)
| | | (120) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Friday, Apr 10, 2009 17:11]; edited by Vladimir Tyapkin [09-04-10] |
Miodrag, I think PCCC President(or Presidium) is entitled of making decision in between Congresses without consulting delegates.
| |
Read more... | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MatPlus.Net Forum General PCCC is no more a part of FIDE |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
