Website founded by
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions WCCI 2019-21: About a “change of functions” in judging twomovers
You can only view this page!
|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
|(21) Posted by Kevin Begley [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 17:05]|
Your short rant proves even less.
|(22) Posted by Kevin Begley [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 17:22]|
Yes, allegations have been made.
If you don't agree with the accusations made, provide a rebuttal.
That's how it works.
You want a moderator to ban everyone who doesn't agree with you? Come on. You can hold that forum in your head.
If the allegations are true, how is it improper to state them here?
Even if untrue, how is it improper to assert these allegations here in a fashion that requests a rebuttal.
These are not maliciously false allegations.
I think we can all agree on that.
You gain nothing (but tyranny) by censoring speech (or even worse, by banning entire people you don't agree with).
I don't know where this attitude comes from (lately, authoritarianism is breaking out all over), but banning people is the act of a tyrant, and you're better than somebody who makes such an argument.
You are a reasonable person. How is this akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater?
And, even if it were identical, how is it wrong if the theater is on fire?
Kindly explain your position.
What's your argument?
Nobody can accuse your friends of any misdeed in this forum?
Nobody can accuse anyone of a misdeed?
Do you need it submitted elsewhere (if so, why note relay the allegations?)
Why is this forum an improper venue?
|(23) Posted by Kevin Begley [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 18:08]|
A very small segment of my post pertains to the pre-publication aspect.
I still find it troubling, but less sinister than I had imagined. Thank you for clarifying one aspect.
The bulk of my post pertained to a vast number of corruptions which I consider tangentially relevant.
I regret that you were not able to appreciate my long post, but I already addressed the unfortunate length issue (see the end).
If you can express my sentiments in a more eloquent post, I will gladly entrust these matters to you (and if you could elucidate your plan to remedy the corruption, I'd be even more grateful).
I will note that I have been privately contacted by one well respected composer (whose name I am not at liberty to divulge), who agreed strongly with my sentiments, and was gracious enough to thank me for sharing them.
So, while I do appreciate your feedback, please appreciate that you don't speak for everyone here.
I've been through this game many times before. Very few in this community are willing to hear difficult truths.
They'll complain you went on to long, you didn't entertain them enough, you offended somebody (even when you clearly did not, even when they clearly did). Those pesky lamentations don't generally register anymore (too many dishonest parties focused too much on such claims), but I will try to reduce length, where I can, for your sake.
I desire no participation in any of these corrupt title awards (especially the WCCI, which is the most bogus contest of them all).
I do believe (strongly) that new composers should be reminded (often) that many do not (can not) consider this a valid world championship title. Moreover, every composer should be encouraged to refuse participation in all title pursuits (even if they consider it slightly less corrupt than my longer post described).
It would be nice if we could get some clarification on how national financial considerations impact each of these titles (and you can't deny that is a significant source of corruption).
I do hope, for the sake of all, the unnamed WCCI authority will respond here to the troubling allegations made.
I hope they will address
|(24) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 18:09]|
I fully agree with you, I do not see any issues publishing problems at the private site. The problems are anyway already known.
However I do see a problem that the director has been replaced without any notification. As Anatoly wrote, he did write emails questioning this decision but nobody responded. So what else could he do but to post a message at this forum with a hope that someone will take some action. Also, why are the rules broken and two judges are from the same country? It does not make any sense to me.
And yes, I do agree that Kevin's long posts are very annoying for me too. I think that Kevin should start a new post related to his opinion about composing titles and other issues that he mentioned and that are not related to Anatoly's post at all. However I do recommend shorter messages because nowadays nobody has a time to spend the whole evening reading one single message.
|(25) Posted by Darko Šaljić [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 18:32]|
So Jaques, does your post refer to Miša also, or only to us lesser people?
|(26) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 18:53]|
Miodrag, actually I think that the on-topic points raised are important enough to merit serious consideration by WFCC. But as an outsider to its inner working I have nothing more to say about it, I only hope that they will dealt with in satisfactory manner. On the other hand I have too much interest in the matters that I do not want to push too much (being designed judge for fairies, also Slovak...), but in any case for most participants in the activities I try to assume good faith. That is why I believe Anatolij had good reason to come here to explain his situation (as said in my first post), Valerij also has a good reason to publish problems temporarily on his website (as explained in my previous post) and most of the time there is acceptable explanation. But now we probably should wait how WFCC copes with raised concerns. Then, I have expressed in private communication with other composer that as a person with too much interest in the resolution I will not participate, so I was now just trying to point how confused I find the rant about publication of participating problems...
Additionally, I just felt like it is already time to express also my really negative feelings about long comments of Kevin, without attacking the author that might have been unaware of my own sentiment. I have never said my opinion is universal, but on the other hand, perhaps some other people feel similarly, so that some kind of (auto-)regulation might be helpful for overall atmosphere here.
|(27) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 18:57]|
My post refers to posts and not to people.
And what I wrote is clear enough.
I don't intend to go on.
I have no real hope to convince anybody.
My main concern is about moderators, they should not tolerate this.
This is my opinion.
|(28) Posted by Julia Vysotska [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 23:06]|
Just about those words of Juraj: "It would be just good if this was not on the directors website (http://chess-kopyl.com.ua/ua/), but on the official site. But, the official webmaster of the WFCC (Julia Vysotska) has announced that she is very busy, so this might be only a temporary measure agreed between them."
I never rejected publishing entries of WCCI on the official website.
I've got WCCI announcement from Valery & Harry on December, 3rd. Have published it the same day and replied to Harry with a copy to other recipients involved the following:
"The announcement page - https://www.wfcc.ch/competitions/composing/wcci2019-21/
Announced @wfcc home: https://www.wfcc.ch/wcci-2019-2021-announcement/
I've also added a link to the rules in the announcement (https://www.wfcc.ch/rules/)
The question if the entries will be presented online the way as Dmitri Turevski was doing previously?"
My question about entries was never replied. I've got to know that the entries are published on another place from this post.
(Yes, I am overloaded at the end of year. And with my words on JF I wanted to ask composers to care more about how they send their entries to save my time.)
|(29) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Monday, Dec 13, 2021 23:22]|
Julia, thank you for the explanation. I have got wrong impression from what you have published on your website, I apologize.
This makes the whole WCCI situation even more precarious from my point of view as I would expect having the entries published on the WFCC website. (In the past, if I am not wrong, only the first WCCI 1998-2000 materials were published at the director's website and of course, not entries in a currently nice standard form as e.g. in the WCCI 2016-2018.)
|(30) Posted by Kevin Begley [Tuesday, Dec 14, 2021 07:54]|
You (and others) have a valid point about the length (and relevance) of my comments.
I sincerely regret where I have strayed.
While I consider it completely appropriate to raise some tangential concerns, and to remind composers (both frustrated veterans and troubled new enthusiasts) that a complete boycott of problem chess is not necessary (to invite them to join many others in non-participation of this title pursuit, and others like it), I do recognize this is not the appropriate thread to carry on that conversation, and I should have limited those remarks to a single reply. Further, I should have strived for far greater brevity in addressing the matter.
I take responsibility for that error, and I will gladly self-regulate further remarks.
I have grave concerns about erosions of the problem artform caused by inherent corruptions in all title pursuits, but I do concur, this is not the proper thread to address those larger issues. Should the need arise, I may open (or join) a thread specific to those issues, but I'll not comment further here.
Moreover, I am also willing to agree this *may* not be the proper thread to continue addressing the odious atmosphere whereby prominent figures would call for censorship (and outright banning) of any alternative opinions, though that issue is certainly fundamental to this grievance (and I did not introduce it to this thread). I do hope this will be addressed elsewhere, as I regard that attack on free speech to be the gravest threat to the integrity of the problem community (which dwarfs all alleged corruptions in all title pursuits combined).
In my defense, I will say that I am deeply troubled when an enthusiast threatens to walk away from our artform, because of some grievance, and my colleagues here would dare suggest they should be muzzled for it. I empathize, because I've been there myself.
Nothing could be more disrespectful, divisive, and self-destructive (even more than pushing our colleagues off the ledge) than the damning silence from this community in the face of such a betrayal.
All of us should show greater respect to fellow colleagues. We are obliged to consider grievances, in public (whether valid or not), especially in circumstances where a fellow enthusiast is on the verge of complete departure.
I will say nothing further on this grave matter in this specific thread, but this one time only, I am obliged to call upon all of you to remedy this elsewhere.
My verbosity is now remedied (don't expect to read much more from me here).
Now, in another thread, you may all remedy your deafening silence... or not.
As always, I wish you success.
|(31) Posted by Anatoly Vasilenko [Thursday, Dec 16, 2021 16:55]|
Now you can see the updated version of the WCCI 2019-21 announcement, on the WFCC official website:
In it, V. Dyachuk was replaced by another Ukrainian judge, and I have already been thrown out even from the position of reserve judges. This was done, as I understand it, by the decision of the WFCC Presidium. If initially I had some explanation of Kopyl's unethical act, now I can't even imagine what reasons he gave to the Presidium in order to continue my harassment with joint efforts.
Therefore, I want to convey to the community the information known to me, which until today I considered an internal matter of the Ukrainian chess composition:
For some time now chess composers of Ukraine have been receiving substantial cash prizes from the state for high achievements, namely, for prizes in the WCCT, WCCI and FIDE World Cup. By analogy with other sports, awards can be received not only by composers, but also by their coaches.
But the absence of coaches, as such, in our sport did not confuse the leaders of the Ukrainian chess composition. They successfully applied “the principle of reciprocal change", well-known in chess composition. The document of the Ministry of Youth and Sports of Ukraine, which is openly available online, indicates who are the coaches of Ukrainian chess composers who officially represent the country in 2021:
As you can see, the coach of V. Dyachuk is V. Kopyl, and the coach of V.Kopyl is - V.Dyachuk. You can find a number of interesting “reciprocal changes" in this list.
Don’t look for my name among the chosen ones, I like reciprocal changes only on the chessboard. Since Valery initially had no complaints against me, I suspect there was someone else in this chain who was unpleasantly surprised when getting to know I would be on the list of WCCI judges.
That's the way things are with us. Now, everyone can decide for himself if there was any conflict of interest behind my suspension from the list of WCCI judges.
I would only ask you not to associate my announced departure from chess composition with this reason. Chess is far from the main occupation in my life. Long time ago I made a decision the cycle 2019-21 will be the last one for me. I just don't want to leave without saying goodbye :)
Thanks to everyone who took to their hearts these unexpected problems of our art. It means the situation isn’t that bad yet.
|(32) Posted by Kostas Prentos [Thursday, Dec 16, 2021 20:11]|
Anatoly, I was under the impression you officially withdrew your participation in this WCCI as a reserve judge. I imagine Vasil Dyachuk also withdrew (I will not speculate on his reasons) and was replaced. I fail to understand how updating the list of judges constitutes any kind of harassment against you.
Other than that, sharing the Ukrainian list of chess players and composers is very interesting. I had no idea there was such an incentive for composers (and their coaches...!?) in your country. I can see how some of our colleagues may take important competitions, like the WCCI, very seriously, unlike most of us.
Have a great life away from chess composition and I hope that someday you reconsider!
|(33) Posted by Anatoly Vasilenko [Thursday, Dec 16, 2021 21:30]|
No, Kostas, you have a false impression. Perhaps this is due to inaccurate Google translation.
I refused exclusively from the role of a reserve judge, to which I was transferred without my notification and explanation of the reason, and after I had, at Kopyl's request, carried out all the preparatory work to find the judges.
As for the end of my career, I also hope that it will be completed as I planned - after participating in WCCI 2019-21, AF 2019-21 and judging WCCI 2019-21.
Thank you for your wishes. Just like you, I wish that our achievements were appreciated and without deception.
|(34) Posted by Valery Gurov [Friday, Dec 17, 2021 06:56]|
Ну наконец то до мировой общественности стал доходить смысл происходящего, не прошло и десяти лет!
И заметьте - это не российские кибератаки, о которых каждый день вещают западные средства массовой информации :-)))
А украинских шахматных композиторов хочу поздравить, нам в России далеко до такого отношения к нам со стороны власть имущих!
|(35) Posted by Neal Turner [Friday, Dec 17, 2021 14:16]|
On the matter of publishing the WCCI entries - in principle there's nothing wrong with it, but isn't there an issue with the timing?
Surely we should get to see the entries only after the deadline has passed.
Now we could get contenders having the advantage of making their own selections in the knowledge of their rivals' sets.
|(36) Posted by Anatoly Vasilenko [Sunday, Dec 19, 2021 08:21]|
15 days have passed since my first post on this thread. Time enough for Valery Kopyl to give his own version of the reasons for deleting my name from the list of WCCI judges. But he hasn’t given any explanation.
Therefore, I will summarize the situation:
1. After being engaged as one of the WCCI judges, I spent my time and energy to fulfill requests by V. Kopyl and to find other judges for Section A. Long after I had completed his request, and only from the official WFCC site, I got to know my name was deleted from that list. This fact alone is an insult and deceit. I doubt that a person performing such incorrect actions has the right to occupy a responsible post of the WCCI director.
2. Due to the absence of any explanations, I assume my replacement by V. Dyachuk (officially registered as both trainer and student of V. Kopyl), was an attempt to influence the WCCI 2019-21 results and obtain certain benefits, possibly material. The grounds for such a conclusion suggest themselves:
3. The subsequent replacement of me by P. Novitsky, I regard as punishment for uncovering the conflict of interest in the 9th FIDE World Cup. The most sad outcome, however, is to see such punishment approved by the WFCC Presidium, whose members remained silent.
Draw your own conclusions, ladies and gentlemen, what may await us in the future.
Merry Christmas everyone!
|(37) Posted by Kevin Begley [Monday, Dec 20, 2021 04:52]|
Without taking any position on this specific matter, I'd like to ask you a few questions (as a devil's advocate).
1) Do you believe it is possible to select a highly competent director (and judges) for a given genre, without any appearance of impropriety?
2) To avoid ANY appearance of impropriety in all FUTURE WCCI contests, what do you consider the proper remedy?
Has the WCCI an established remedy which must be triggered, or should some new rule be adopted (and, if so, should this new rule apply to FIDE Album judgments as well)?
3) What is the remedy for THIS contest?
Should it be reconsidered entirely?
Should a specific portion by reconsidered?
Suppose (hypothetically) that a consensus were to conclude (without necessarily presuming any untoward motivation on the part of the director, or any judge) that the appearance of impropriety does in fact plague the judgement of this specific contest.
Assume we have no smoking gun that demonstrates a malicious sabotage of this contest's integrity.
(again, the following questions pertain to this purely hypothetical scenario).
In the absence of an established remedy, would it not be similarly improper to retroactively apply a remedy?
Would you agree that no remedy may be possible for such a contest?
If the rules were followed to the letter, but a consensus later decides the contest rules were entirely unsatisfactory, can they alter the verdict (if so, what prevents future generations from nullifying all your verdicts)?
I would suggest that, to some degree, the appearance of impropriety will always exist.
Judges and entrants may share nationality; they may be national rivals; they may be good friends (who have produced many joint efforts); they may be competitive enemies.
Judges may consider a critical entry for a respected composer who is known to be in bad health -- is it not a pretense to suggest this has no influence?
Similarly, I would argue, the upmost self-interest of every judge is to reward fellow judges (whereas no retribution is risked in devaluing the entry of a composer who holds no judge title).
So, if our contests always suffer from some conflicts of interest, to varying degree, and there's no established rule which permits nullification, what is the threshold which triggers an alteration of the verdict? Is there a time limit on retroactive adjustments?
4) Is your continuation (as problem enthusiast) in any way contingent upon the remedy applied in this instance?
While I certainly empathize with your frustrations in trying to correct serious flaws in an artistic endeavor for which you have great passion, I don't understand why you don't come to the same conclusion I arrived at years ago (the WCCI may not be worthy of your participation, given the prevailing mindset which stubbornly refuses any attempt at improvement, but surely that's not why you compose chess problems).
Are you negotiating for the release of your own future problems?
Even if you are 100% correct about everything, such a policy is likely to end badly (for everyone).
I have been right in pointing out many terrible blunders in problem chess. There are a few instances where I am certain my prescribed remedy is absolutely necessary (and delaying that necessary remedy only makes adoption of said remedy increasingly more difficult for the future). Even in these instances, I am yet to see a single suggested remedy adopted.
If my future problems were contingent upon successful advocacy in this generation, I'd have only deprived myself of opportunities to make myself proud (as an improving composer), and I'd have failed to document these blunders for future generations.
Even when nobody can dispute your claim, the problem chess community always finds a way to discard any remedy which requires change (they'll just invoke tradition, and return to ignoring the blunders of recent history and the future blunders which will invoke blunder precedents).
Why not put your trust in future generations?
No more posts
|Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 |
MatPlus.Net Forum Competitions WCCI 2019-21: About a “change of functions” in judging twomovers