PDA

View Full Version : ACF code of ethics



SHump
07-12-2009, 04:17 PM
I see there is a version of the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007) on the ACF site (under http://www.auschess.org.au/constitution/index.html). I wanted to reference this [under general tournamane tules, something like: "The tournament organiser, arbiter and players shall abide by the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007)"], even print it out in A3 and stick to a wall for a tournament, for all to see.

So 2 questions:
1) Does anyone have a clean version, without the bolding?

2) Does anyone have any comment that it is a good idea or not to reference this set of ethics?

CameronD
07-12-2009, 07:05 PM
The CAQ has a code of ethics (not sure of CV)

Why not make a club code of ethics




I see there is a version of the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007) on the ACF site (under http://www.auschess.org.au/constitution/index.html). I wanted to reference this [under general tournamane tules, something like: "The tournament organiser, arbiter and players shall abide by the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007)"], even print it out in A3 and stick to a wall for a tournament, for all to see.

So 2 questions:
1) Does anyone have a clean version, without the bolding?

2) Does anyone have any comment that it is a good idea or not to reference this set of ethics?

MichaelBaron
07-12-2009, 07:07 PM
Cameron, Does every single club has time and resources to write a code of ethics of their own?

CameronD
07-12-2009, 07:11 PM
Cameron, Does every single club has time and resources to write a code of ethics of their own?

They could just copy their states with any small modifications

Desmond
07-12-2009, 07:49 PM
They could just copy their states with any small modificationsWhat would be the point, when they could just adopt the state code.

Denis_Jessop
07-12-2009, 09:40 PM
I see there is a version of the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007) on the ACF site (under http://www.auschess.org.au/constitution/index.html). I wanted to reference this [under general tournamane tules, something like: "The tournament organiser, arbiter and players shall abide by the ACF code of ethics (last amended 23 July 2007)"], even print it out in A3 and stick to a wall for a tournament, for all to see.

So 2 questions:
1) Does anyone have a clean version, without the bolding?

2) Does anyone have any comment that it is a good idea or not to reference this set of ethics?

I drafted the Code for the ACF a few years ago. The bolded passages are later amendments as far as I can recall. They really shouldn't be in bold except for the headings and the website version is not mine. Unfortunately, I recently had a hard disc crash with my computer coupled with a crashed back-up drive so I don't have the data at present.

The code is based on the FIDE Code of Ethics with some provisions for local matters. The ACF adopted the Code for ACF events and recommended that State Associations adopt it. Constitutionally, the ACF doesn't have power to make it binding except in ACF events but there is no reason why a club could not use it, or an adaptation, if it wished. I think the ACF would be happy to see that done.

DJ

SHump
07-12-2009, 10:51 PM
Thanks DJ. I can retype it, it is only a few pages. Perhaps call it the Scott code of ethics :D and refresh it for a more modern look...

I guess also check the cross references in it to the current FIDE rules, but unless anyone has any objections, just refer to it as the ACF COE, and make it (the pdf - to maintain consistency!) available royalty free to all that want it.

Kevin Bonham
08-12-2009, 12:00 AM
Thanks DJ. I can retype it, it is only a few pages.

Unnecessary. Highlight all text, left-click "copy" and away you go - without bolding.

Pasting on the forum creates issues with line breaks; to get a copy without the line-breaks (unlike that below), just Paste Special into Word as Unformatted Unicode Text.

A copy without line breaks (or any other formatting) is attached in Word.


ACF CODE OF ETHICS
[last amended 23 July 2007]
1. Introduction
1.1 The proper conduct of the game of chess and of chess events depends on
everyone involved observing
1.1.1 the rules and conditions currently applying to the game and event; and
1.1.2 the highest standards of fair play and good sportsmanship.
1.2 Disputes arising during a game or event are to be resolved according to the
FIDE Laws of Chess and any other rules or conditions then applicable to the game
or event.
1.3 This Code applies to -
1.3.1 a person playing in, or organising
1.3.1.1 an event of which the winner is eligible for an Australian title as
defined in the ACF By-laws for ACF Tournaments; or
1.3.1.2 a Grand prix event; or
1.3.1.3 any other game or event conducted by or for the ACF; and
1.3.2 a person having an ACF Rating who plays in an event outside Australia or
on the internet, whether as an official representative of Australia or not.
1.4 It is strongly recommended that affiliated associations and bodies and their
affiliates adopt the Code for their purposes.
1.5 This Code is to be read subject to the FIDE Laws of Chess 2001.
2. The Purpose of the Code of Ethics
2.1 The purpose of this Code is to ensure, as far as practicable, that the game
of chess is played in Australia, and by Australian players overseas or on the
internet, in a sporting and fair manner.
2.2 1 Articles 12 and 13 of the FIDE Laws of Chess 2001 respectively deal with
the conduct of players and the role of the arbiter. Those provisions are the
primary authority on the matters with which they deal. The Preface to the FIDE
Laws recognises that "the Laws cannot cover all possible situations that may
arise during a game nor can they regulate all administrative questions".
2.2.2 Likewise, it is impossible in this Code to define exactly each
circumstance or standard of conduct expected of players, officials and
spectators involved in a game or event or to list everything that would amount
to a breach of this Code and lead to disciplinary action. Persons otherwise
uncertain of the conduct expected of them should contact the arbiter or
organisers of the event.
2.3 The following provisions of this Code, while not exhaustive, identify
conduct that is of such a character as to attract censure and the manner in
which it may be dealt with.
3. Breaches of the Code of Ethics
3.1 This Code is breached by a person who commits any of the following acts.
3.2 Subject to Article 12.7 of the FIDE Laws of Chess 2001, repeatedly or
grossly violating the FIDE Laws of Chess or the rules or conditions applicable
to a particular event.
3.3 Cheating, or attempting to cheat, during a game or event.
3.4 Pre-arranging, or attempting to pre-arrange, the result of a game or event.
3.5 Withdrawing from an event without valid reason.
3.6 Failing to comply with normally accepted standards of courtesy and chess
etiquette.
3.7 Engaging in misbehaviour of a personal nature that is generally unacceptable
by normal social standards.
3.8 Engaging in violent, threatening or other unseemly behaviour during, or in
connexion with, a game or event.
3.9 Making unjustified accusations towards other players, officials or sponsors
of an event.
3.10 Participating in an event under a false name or while under suspension.
3.11 Persistently refusing or neglecting to play against a specific person
against whom he is paired.
3.12 Engaging in conduct likely to injure the reputation of the ACF, its events,
organisers, participants or sponsors.
3.13 Being an organiser, tournament director, arbiter or other official of an
event
3.13.1 failing to perform his or her functions in relation to that event in an
impartial and responsible manner; or
3.13.2 failing to take necessary steps to ensure the proper conduct of the
event, or games in the event, according to the FIDE Laws of Chess and the
tournament rules or conditions.
3.14 While representing Australia in a team or delegation, either as a player or as an
official, behaving in any manner likely to disrupt the performance or preparation of
fellow team or delegation members.
4. Complaints and Penalties
4.1 All complaints concerning the behaviour of players during an event must be
made to an arbiter of the event who may impose an appropriate penalty.
4.2 Any player who, either in the capacity of player or spectator, engages in
behaviour in contravention of paragraphs 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 or 3.8 may be forfeited
one or more games depending on the severity of the offence.
4.3 Other complaints or reports of an alleged breach of this Code may be made to
the ACF Council which shall consider and decide the matter.
4.4 Any player or spectator acting in contravention of this Code can be excluded
from games or events to which it applies for an appropriate period.
4.5 Any arbiter or other official acting in contravention of this Code can be
excluded from performing the functions of arbiter or official in, or in relation
to, any event to which this Code applies for an appropriate period.
4.6 A complaint against a player or official under paragraph 3.14 will only be
considered if made by another player who alleges he/she was adversely affected, or if
adverse mention of a player's behavior is made in a report to the ACF by that player's
team captain or equivalent delegation official.
4.7 A player who is found to have contravened paragraph 3.14 can be excluded from
representing Australia in some or all events for an appropriate period.
4.8 A penalty under paragraph 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 or 4.7 shall be imposed only by the ACF
Council after proper inquiry in accordance with the principles of procedural fairness
in which anyone alleged to have breached the Code is told of the allegation against
them and is given the opportunity to present their case in reply to the allegation.
5. Appeals
5.1 A person penalised under by-law 4.1 or 4.2 has such right of appeal (if any)
as is conferred by the rules or conditions governing the conduct of the event.
5.2 A person penalised under by-law 4.3, 4.4 or 4.5 may appeal the decision
within 7 days of being notified of it.
5.3 Appeals, stating the grounds thereof, shall be accompanied by a $50 appeal
fee which shall be refunded if the appeal is upheld.
5.4 Appeals shall be on the basis that there was a material error or omission in
the making of the decision that has disadvantaged the applicant.
5.5 The ACF shall appoint a person known as the ACF Appeals Tribunal Convenor
(ATC) who shall be either an ACF Honorary Life Member or a former ACF President.
5.6 The ATC shall appoint two other persons, each being either an ACF Honorary
Life Member or former ACF President or Deputy President to form a three person
tribunal (the Appeals Tribunal) with the ATC.
5.7 The Appeals Tribunal shall seek and consider such information as it
considers appropriate and its decision shall be final.
5.8 The Appeals Tribunal may decide that the decision appealed from -
5.8.1 stands; or
5.8.2 is revoked; or
5.8.3 is varied as decided by the Appeals Tribunal.
6. Guidelines for the Application of this Code
6.1 A person is assumed to be aware of the FIDE Laws of Chess, any other rules
or conditions applicable to an event in which he is a player, spectator or
official and of the provisions of this Code.
6.2 The following observations are made as guidelines to assist in the
interpretation of the Laws of Chess and of this Code.
6.3 Art.6.13b of the FIDE Laws of Chess 2001 permits a player to stop the clock
in order to seek the arbiter's assistance. An example is given of the case in
which a player promotes a pawn but the required piece is not available. Another
obvious instance is where a player seeks a ruling from the arbiter on a matter
arising under the Laws in the course of play.
6.4 Art.12.5 of the FIDE Laws of Chess 2001 forbids the distraction or annoying
of the opponent in any manner whatsoever. One example is given, namely,
unreasonable claims or offers of a draw. Other conduct that may be regarded as
within the prohibition includes excessive adjustment of pieces under Art4.2,
persistent sloppy placement of pieces, talking within the hearing of the
opponent, unreasonable physical action such as staring intently at the opponent
or using exaggerated facial expressions or gestures. It is irrelevant that the
conduct in question was not intended to distract or annoy. If the conduct is
involuntary, such an an attack of hiccups or a fit the matter should be handled
by the arbiter with particular discretion and diplomacy.
6.5 It is not permissible for players or spectators to talk either to themselves
or each other within the hearing of players who are seated at the board as such
conduct is likely to disturb those players. The conduct of conversations in a
language other than English should be avoided in any event as it may more
readily be thought to be a discussion about a game in progress such conduct
being forbidden by Art. 13.7.
6.6 It should be noted that, while Art.9.1a prescribes the correct way to offer
a draw, any other draw offer is also valid. However an offer made otherwise than
in accordance with Art. 9.1a may amount to distraction or annoyance of the
opponent and so infringe Art. 12.5.
6.7 Normally accepted standards of courtesy and chess etiquette referred to in
para. 3.6, above, include treating the opponent with respect and resigning, or
receiving the opponent's resignation, with good grace.

SHump
08-12-2009, 12:09 AM
Thanks KB - of course! I could also use adobe tools as well to copy the pdf into something else, but hey, job done!

I am attaching a pdf version that looks a bit 'nicer', just FYI anyone. I fixed the numbering around 2.2 (there was no 2.2) and I checked that the numbers in that section were not being referenced anywhere else in the doc.

As far as other states etc having their own CoE, I can see there is scope for this. For an event that does not fit under the list given in 1.3 (this code applies to...), then an event organiser COULD just say that the ACF CoE applies for this event, but then those pedants amongst us may then read 1.3 and say, hey "our event is not listed here"!

So perhaps to save each of us having a separate CoE, if the ACF CoE in section 1.3 included "and other events that reference this Code" (almost in place of 1.4, as 1.4 is really a recommendation not a useful use of the code as such). A downside of this is that it then opens up the CoE to perhaps things that the ACF had not intended, for instance do we really want or need the ACF council/ATC involved in a dispute at a local club championship? So in typing this out, I realise that it becomes a matter of SCOPE, so that makes say a state body's version more 'local' and relevant. So having come full circle, I could see that the ACF would NOT want this particular CoE to apply to all Australian chess events, with good reasons. And thank you to those that have gotten this far with my thought processes.

For me organising a Grand Prix event, I have no such worries, as the GP is mentioned in 1.3.1.2 (yay!) - sorry, just that selfish streak coming through.

Denis_Jessop
08-12-2009, 12:31 PM
Actually all the ACF constitutional documents should be available in proper formatted text on the site and in PDF downloads for convenience but this hasn't happened yet. It's a jolly nuisance to go to the site to check a provision and be confronted by a PDF. At present we have the worst of all worlds with some docs as plain text (not formatted) and others in PDF. I raised this aeons ago but it's still the same and now we have technical problems as well.

DJ

antichrist
08-12-2009, 08:01 PM
Are these codes worth the paper they are written on. We all know about the NSWCA Code fo Ethics. It may be in their constitution and on their website but according to Bill it is only for decoration and is meaningless. Remember the St George Comp controversy.

Like the rights of individuals under commo China.

Bill Gletsos
08-12-2009, 08:12 PM
Are these codes worth the paper they are written on. We all know about the NSWCA Code fo Ethics. It may be in their constitution and on their website but according to Bill it is only for decoration and is meaningless.You are delusional.
Please quote where I supposedly said that.

antichrist
08-12-2009, 08:27 PM
You are delusional.
Please quote where I supposedly said that.

You certainly implied that, probably in ST George thread. I am sure you can find it.

I expect Peter Parr will have a different view.

Bill Gletsos
08-12-2009, 08:38 PM
You certainly implied that, probably in ST George thread. I am sure you can find it.Your claim is false, I never implied it.

SHump
09-12-2009, 02:22 PM
I have done some tinkering with the CoE, based on the FIDE 2009 laws (the old CoE referred to the 2001 laws). See attached for edits, mostly picked up by the word compare function. I defined Article to mean an article from the Laws, and 'Code item' to mean a numbered para within the CoE (for consistency). And I renumbered, for the relevant current FIDE laws, the article references. Comments most welcome..

antichrist
11-12-2009, 04:11 PM
Your claim is false, I never implied it.

I forgot what your response when I was quoting that some action should be taken in line with Code of Ethics. Now on NSWCA website I could not Code of Ethics but are probably still some there somewhere. I notice that the code of ethics are not mentioned in the rules - so that is why they are only decorative and meaningless. That may have been your response that because not in rules ...

Bill Gletsos
11-12-2009, 04:38 PM
I forgot what your response when I was quoting that some action should be taken in line with Code of Ethics. Now on NSWCA website I could not Code of Ethics but are probably still some there somewhere. I notice that the code of ethics are not mentioned in the rules - so that is why they are only decorative and meaningless. That may have been your response that because not in rules ...Enough of your rubbish.
Just because your memory is so poor that is no excuse for you continuing to attribute statements to me that I never said.

antichrist
12-12-2009, 12:16 AM
Enough of your rubbish.
Just because your memory is so poor that is no excuse for you continuing to attribute statements to me that I never said.


http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=265465#post265465

Getting back to our favourite subject - can you see how Bill reakons the Code of EThics has nothing to do with NSWCA constitution? Seems the very opposite to me.

[offtopic material deleted - mod]
--------------------------------------

But i have been unable to find the post where this refers to.

MichaelBaron
12-12-2009, 08:49 AM
In the light of the Tkachev case and quite a few of Australia's top players being excessive drinkers I am curious, whether there is something in the Code of Ethics about turning up at a chess tournament drunk?

SHump
12-12-2009, 08:22 PM
There is nothing specific about drunkenness. But any or all of the following CoE items in section 3 may catch the drunk out:

3.2 Subject to Article 12.8, repeatedly or grossly violating the FIDE Laws of Chess or the rules or conditions applicable to a particular event.
3.3 Cheating, or attempting to cheat, during a game or event.
3.4 Pre-arranging, or attempting to pre-arrange, the result of a game or event.
3.5 Withdrawing from an event without valid reason.
3.6 Failing to comply with normally accepted standards of courtesy and chess etiquette.
3.7 Engaging in misbehaviour of a personal nature that is generally unacceptable by normal social standards.
3.8 Engaging in violent, threatening or other unseemly behaviour during, or in connection with, a game or event.
3.9 Making unjustified accusations towards other players, officials or sponsors of an event.
3.10 Participating in an event under a false name or while under suspension.
3.11 Persistently refusing or neglecting to play against a specific person against whom he is paired.
3.12 Engaging in conduct likely to injure the reputation of the ACF, its events, organisers, participants or sponsors.

It depends on if he/she is a happy and quiet drunk, but being rowdy, threatening, accusing, refusing to play another, etc could lead to them tripping over any of the above items.

Denis_Jessop
13-12-2009, 12:20 PM
There is nothing specific about drunkenness. But any or all of the following CoE items in section 3 may catch the drunk out:

3.2 Subject to Article 12.8, repeatedly or grossly violating the FIDE Laws of Chess or the rules or conditions applicable to a particular event.
3.3 Cheating, or attempting to cheat, during a game or event.
3.4 Pre-arranging, or attempting to pre-arrange, the result of a game or event.
3.5 Withdrawing from an event without valid reason.
3.6 Failing to comply with normally accepted standards of courtesy and chess etiquette.
3.7 Engaging in misbehaviour of a personal nature that is generally unacceptable by normal social standards.
3.8 Engaging in violent, threatening or other unseemly behaviour during, or in connection with, a game or event.
3.9 Making unjustified accusations towards other players, officials or sponsors of an event.
3.10 Participating in an event under a false name or while under suspension.
3.11 Persistently refusing or neglecting to play against a specific person against whom he is paired.
3.12 Engaging in conduct likely to injure the reputation of the ACF, its events, organisers, participants or sponsors.

It depends on if he/she is a happy and quiet drunk, but being rowdy, threatening, accusing, refusing to play another, etc could lead to them tripping over any of the above items.

Of the material quoted, only paras 3.7, 3.8 or 3.9 are likely to apply to a "drunk" person.

There is no general proposition that a player must be sober to play chess (after all how do you define "drunk"). Art. 8.1 of the Laws even allows an assistant for a player who is "unable to keep score" but the reason for the inability is not specified :) .

If you think that this is mere flippancy, it is not: it illustrates the difficulty of trying to make laws that are too specific; something of which lawmakers are well aware.

DJ

Rhubarb
13-12-2009, 02:14 PM
It illustrates the difficulty of trying to make laws that are too specific; something of which lawmakers are well aware.

Denis, I agree that the laws can't be too specific, but I do think the ACF could consider the merits of my proposed additional article:

3.13 Stupid selfish effete green-yoghurt-drinking dickheads named Michael Baron should only be allowed to criticise the ACF if they are not the worst ACF administrator on record.

MichaelBaron
13-12-2009, 02:50 PM
Denis, I agree that the laws can't be too specific, but I do think the ACF could consider the merits of my proposed additional article:

3.13 Stupid selfish effete green-yoghurt-drinking dickheads named Michael Baron should only be allowed to criticise the ACF if they are not the worst ACF administrator on record.

Shitty, Whats criticism of ACF got to do with the question I was asking. I wonder why you took it so close to your heart? Is there any particular person with a drinking problem who wants to turn up drunk at chess events that you are having in mind and feels should be allowed to do so?

antichrist
13-12-2009, 04:40 PM
We can see from my post above that I was under impression at the time, that was not corrected by Bill at the time, that the Code of Ethics have nothing to do with the constitution. will the code of ethics be compulsory to comply with or just decorative?

antichrist
13-12-2009, 04:46 PM
Shitty, Whats criticism of ACF got to do with the question I was asking. I wonder why you took it so close to your heart? Is there any particular person with a drinking problem who wants to turn up drunk at chess events that you are having in mind and feels should be allowed to do so?

In Ian Rogers recent chess column he describes how 2 players from China were forfeited coz they were smoking outside and were about a minute late or something like that. In contrast to prevous standards when a player could be up to an hour late. what is situation in australia and will it be changed?

Is in last week's or previous week's column, I was barred at time so could not post. see Byron Echo site chess column

SHump
13-12-2009, 04:54 PM
Of the material quoted, only paras 3.7, 3.8 or 3.9 are likely to apply to a "drunk" person.


I think the other items could also apply - trying to cheat while drunk; withdrawing; discourteous; giving a false name, engaging in behaviour.. etc.. but whether or not is or is not applicable is a moot point - basically there should be (is?) enough in there to make an arbiter happy.

However, do we need to define "drunk" as well - do we need RBT devices to blow into, and if it is .05 for driving, perhaps for chess is a higher 'legal' limit the go? Some players may play better with something in their veins besides being ice cool under pressure :D

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2009, 05:01 PM
We can see from my post above that I was under impression at the time, that was not corrected by Bill at the time, that the Code of Ethics have nothing to do with the constitutionAgain this is a totally false claim of yours.

You beieved they were related, I corrected your false impression at the time here (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=140150&postcount=23).

Denis_Jessop
13-12-2009, 07:05 PM
I think the other items could also apply - trying to cheat while drunk; withdrawing; discourteous; giving a false name, engaging in behaviour.. etc.. but whether or not is or is not applicable is a moot point - basically there should be (is?) enough in there to make an arbiter happy.

However, do we need to define "drunk" as well - do we need RBT devices to blow into, and if it is .05 for driving, perhaps for chess is a higher 'legal' limit the go? Some players may play better with something in their veins besides being ice cool under pressure :D

The point about the others, that is those other than the ones I cited, is that drunkenness is incidental to the offence. In those I have mentioned it would be an essential element of the commission of the offence. The need to define "drunk" is a big problem and effectively defeated the criminal law authorities in relation to driving offences. DUI can still be proved by tests like picking up a coin or walking a straight line but effectively to control driving after drinking it has been necessary to employ breathalysers. They measure blood alcohol content not drunkenness. My view is that, in the chess context, it is pretty useless to try to make drunkenness an offence by itself. Instead we just rely on behaviour that infringes the paras cited regardless of its cause. (There have been some pretty heavy drinkers in the history of chess, not least Alekhine.)

DJ

antichrist
13-12-2009, 07:24 PM
Again this is a totally false claim of yours.

You beieved they were related, I corrected your false impression at the time here (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=140150&postcount=23).

Bill from when we were all younger:
The NSW Code of Ethics and the NSWCA Constitution are two entirely seperate and unrelated documents.

A/C
Then what relationship and relevance do they have to each other? It appears it is not against the rules to break the Code of Ethics - is that correct? If the Code of Ethics are/is not mentioned in the rules then they may very well be meaningless. thanks for dragging that up by the way, I had no chance of finding it.

antichrist
13-12-2009, 07:47 PM
If I may get a hint, what power do the ACF Code of Ethics have? Is it in the ACF constitution that states must have code of ethics and that they be effective? It is a federal systsem?

Kevin Bonham
13-12-2009, 09:09 PM
If I may get a hint, what power do the ACF Code of Ethics have?

You could try actually reading them and finding out since that is stated in the code itself.

It codifies the ACF's power to discipline people playing in or organising ACF events (including Grand Prix events), or Australian players playing overseas, by barring them from similar events into the future.


Is it in the ACF constitution that states must have code of ethics and that they be effective?

No, however it is in the Code of Ethics that states are strongly encouraged to adopt the ACF Code and apply it to their own events.

antichrist
13-12-2009, 09:15 PM
What is your opinion on the NSW situation, does the Code have any bearing at all but because not in rules they are just decorative?

Kevin Bonham
13-12-2009, 09:28 PM
What is your opinion on the NSW situation, does the Code have any bearing at all but because not in rules they are just decorative?

There is no "situation", this is just you coming up with some nonsense that you claim you think Bill said once although there is no evidence that he actually did.

Of course the NSWCA Code of Ethics is enforceable since the NSWCA has endorsed it and it explicitly states that players can be sanctioned under it. Whether it is in the Constitution or any other set of "rules" or not is completely irrelevant. If it was just for decoration and encouragement then it would not specify penalties.

Denis_Jessop
13-12-2009, 10:29 PM
If I may get a hint, what power do the ACF Code of Ethics have? Is it in the ACF constitution that states must have code of ethics and that they be effective? It is a federal systsem?

Kevin has answered most of this. I'd just add that the ACF constitutionally has no power to tell the States what to do in relation to State affairs. The ACF is concerned with national and international matters. The States are quite capable of looking after their own affairs.

DJ

Kevin Bonham
13-12-2009, 10:37 PM
One thing the ACF can do that affects state and club events where untoward things are going on is refuse to rate them.

antichrist
13-12-2009, 11:15 PM
Kevin has answered most of this. I'd just add that the ACF constitutionally has no power to tell the States what to do in relation to State affairs. The ACF is concerned with national and international matters. The States are quite capable of looking after their own affairs.

DJ
If I may draw an analogy with NSW state govt, things can go haywire (when yo get a lebo and ....... together) and maybe need intervention. This could also happen in chess world and all the money and member ship lost. Could not the membership make calls for intervention without having to wait till next AGM

antichrist
13-12-2009, 11:27 PM
if the rules and ethics in NSW are unrelated, they would have to compliment each other without contradicting in any manner, otherwise would have constitutional problems

antichrist
14-12-2009, 07:06 AM
Shirty3.13 Stupid selfish effete green-yoghurt-drinking dickheads named Michael Baron should only be allowed to criticise the ACF if they are not the worst ACF administrator on record.

M Baron
Shitty, Whats criticism of ACF got to do with the question I was asking. I wonder why you took it so close to your heart? Is there any particular person with a drinking problem who wants to turn up drunk at chess events that you are having in mind and feels should be allowed to do so?
__________________

In the absence of Firegoat 7 I will provide the necessary social context analysis of the different paradigms these victims are playing out.

Shirty comes for a rough, tough, masculine, mascular, homosexual-bashing, decked out in singlet, shorts and thongs, meat pie eating country rugby league NSW Aussie - whereas Mike comes from a sofisticated, soft, nandy pandering, green yoghurt eating,tailored suited, soccer-playing European - where if you were to only fleetigly touch their garment they would immediately hit the ground screaming as if hit by a stun gun.

So the advice of Firegoat would be to become an anarchist, drop all class, ethnic, ethical, social and historical pretentions and probably share a funny cigarette together. Good on you mate.

And if you guys cant revent yourself via rebirthing, detoxing. AA, chicken chow min then you can do a Beaumont/Daft replay with Matt Sweeney as ref!

Kevin Bonham
14-12-2009, 11:03 AM
In Ian Rogers recent chess column he describes how 2 players from China were forfeited coz they were smoking outside and were about a minute late or something like that. In contrast to prevous standards when a player could be up to an hour late. what is situation in australia and will it be changed?

The situation in Australia is that the same applies here unless the tournament director decides otherwise or the event is the subject of an ACF ruling otherwise.

For all Grand Prix events from 1 Jan 2010 onwards the forfeit time is 30 minutes rather than zero.

SHump
16-12-2009, 10:16 AM
I wanted to put in the public domain a version of the CoE that is still in draft, but I think will work for a chess club. I feel it is all about taking ownership at the grass roots level for how players should behave at your club. I have taken the ACF version and refined it to what is appropriate for our club, in terms of scope a club is a lot different to the ACF.. your mileage at your club may vary.

If another club wants to use it 'as is', then feel free.

Technically, I have coded the club name as the 'Subject' field withing MS word, so go to the file properties and enter your club name as the 'Subject', and then update all fields (ctrl-A, right click should give you an 'update fields' option), and voila! (well, that is the theory anyway) - even the header is done that way. Or just to it by the find/replace method if you prefer.