PDA

View Full Version : Cameron De Vere - Code of Ethics breach?



Desmond
18-01-2011, 06:24 PM
From the CAQ email newsletter:


ACF CODE OF ETHICS BREACH

After careful consideration, The ACF has taken the decision to suspend Cameron De Vere from all ACF events and ACF GP events till July 1 2011. Also, as Cameron De Vere is not currently a member of CAQ, he can not play in any CAQ endorsed rated event until he applies to CAQ council to re-join CAQ.

What did he do?

Kevin Bonham
18-01-2011, 08:19 PM
Unathorised withdrawal from an ACF Grand Prix event.

MichaelBaron
18-01-2011, 08:46 PM
Unathorised withdrawal from an ACF Grand Prix event.
I am by no means disputing the punishment. I think unauthorised withdrawals should be punished (unless there is some valid reason such as sudden sickness behind it) but I find it interesting that while they happen quite frequently...few ppl get punished so severly hmm.

Adamski
18-01-2011, 09:07 PM
I am by no means disputing the punishment. I think unauthorised withdrawals should be punished (unless there is some valid reason such as sudden sickness behind it) but I find it interesting that while they happen quite frequently...few ppl get punished so severly hmm.I agree with Michael. It seems an unusually severe punishment, especially since knowing Cameron a bit he would not have withdrawn without good reason.

Kevin Bonham
18-01-2011, 09:13 PM
I find it interesting that while they happen quite frequently...few ppl get punished so severly hmm.

The main reason for that is that it's rather rare for a complaint to be made to the ACF under the Code of Ethics about unauthorised withdrawals; if more were the subject of complaints it is likely more sanctions would be imposed, but that would depend upon the facts of particular cases and the responses received (if any). The irony is that in this case the player concerned has apparently dropped out of competitive chess anyway. I recall that the ACF has imposed some bans in the past for UWDs from the Australian Open or Champs.

The event in question was the Gold Coast Open. The decision was taken at the ACF Council meeting on 15 Nov (from which I was absent due to fieldwork.)

Kevin Bonham
18-01-2011, 09:15 PM
I agree with Michael. It seems an unusually severe punishment, especially since knowing Cameron a bit he would not have withdrawn without good reason.

I think an important lesson from this is that if you have a valid reason for withdrawal you need to communicate that reason at the time you withdraw, as it may very well be accepted, or the issue you are concerned about may be addressed.

Garvinator
18-01-2011, 11:02 PM
Since there has been some commentary I will give the full version to put a few facts in place.

After round three of the 2010 Gold Coast Open, Cameron De Vere handed a note/letter to Chief Arbiter Charles Zworestine, stating that he was withdrawing from the tournament and was terminating his CAQ membership immediately.

Charles Z passed on this note to me as CAQ President. I asked Charles if Cameron was aware that withdrawing from a tournament without good reason is not acceptable and Charles said he had informed Cameron of that.

Cameron's reason at the tournament was that he was not playing well (or words to that effect).

A few days later Charles submitted an unauthorised withdrawal letter to CAQ for consideration.

After a lot of long discussions inside CAQ council, CAQ wrote to Cameron asking him to explain why he withdrew from the Gold Coast Open. He did not reply within the stated time frame, so council then moved on to deciding what to do with the information that was already before us.

The main issue for CAQ was that Cameron had terminated his CAQ membership.

As the Gold Coast Open is also an ACF GP event, council referred him to the ACF as we believed he had breached the ACF code of ethics on unauthorised withdrawals.

The ACF secretary then wrote to Cameron seeking an explanation and Cameron's reason for his withdrawal to the ACF was two fold:

1) Was that he was being directly critised by other players in the tournament. This was his primary reason for withdrawing from the tournament and terminating his CAQ membership
2) That he was unhappy with the venue and being squashed in like sardines.

The Gold Coast Open was held in June and CAQ was still having to deal with this matter in November. The ACF then decided to suspend Cameron from all ACF events and ACF GP events till July 1 2011. As he is also not a CAQ member, he will need to apply to CAQ council before his application to play in rated events again might be accepted.

It should be noted that Cameron changed his reasons for withdrawing from what he said at the tournament to Charles Z, to what he reported to the ACF. The correct course of action for the reasons he gave to the ACF was to report these concerns to the arbiter and organisers for further action.

CAQ was extremely unimpressed by Cameron's decision to terminate his CAQ membership, which could be viewed as attempting to remove himself from possible sanctions. Had Cameron not terminated his membership, then CAQ could have quite easily dealt with this matter and he would most likely be fully able to play in events again by now if he so wished.

So:

1) Cameron decided to withdraw from the Gold Coast Open, stating that he was not playing well and terminated his CAQ membership in the process
2) Cameron was informed that his withdrawal would most likely be reported to CAQ as an unauthorised withdrawal and that further action was likely. He decided to withdraw anyways and did not change his reasons for withdrawing
3) Charles Zworestine reported Cameron De Vere to CAQ council for unauthorised withdrawal
4) CAQ writes to Cameron asking for a reason for his withdrawal. Cameron fails to reply. He later states that he was away during the period given in the letter.
5) CAQ discusses what to do with the information at hand and decides to report Cameron to the ACF under their code of ethics. This decision was in part because Cameron had terminated his membership, making it questionable whether CAQ could take any further action.
6) CAQ reports Cameron to the ACF
7) ACF writes to Cameron asking why he withdraw from the Gold Coast Open
8) Cameron replies with reasons stated above. His response to the ACF was in more detail, but the above summary is sufficient to understand his reasons
9) ACF then discusses the issue and after discussions with CAQ and inside ACF, takes the decision to suspend Cameron till July 1 2011.
10) Cameron does not appeal this decision.

Garvin Gray
CAQ President

arosar
18-01-2011, 11:29 PM
So to terminate one's CAQ membership is a breach of CAQ rules? Can we see that in black and white? It's a bit unclear to me since you just say that CAQ was "unimpressed". You don't cite a specific regulation.

AR

Garvinator
19-01-2011, 12:02 AM
To everyone, I have explained what has occurred and the reasons for the penalty. I will not be discussing this matter any further, especially where it relates to ACF or CAQ procedures. I will certainly not be engaging in any process of trial by bulletin board.

Anyone who wants to know any further information can contact the CAQ secretary at secretary@caq.org.au

arosar
19-01-2011, 12:26 AM
Look Gray, I'm not trying to cause trouble for you blokes. It's just that your explanation is a bit confusing, maybe shaky, I don't know. You say "The main issue for CAQ was that Cameron had terminated his CAQ membership", then emphasising that, "CAQ was extremely unimpressed by Cameron's decision to terminate his CAQ membership" before following with "Had Cameron not terminated his membership, then CAQ could have quite easily dealt with this matter and he would most likely be fully able to play in events again by now if he so wished".

So all in all, this bloke got himself booted out because he terminated a CAQ membership! You actually weaken the ACF's decision and it sounds like you blokes in the CAQ just acted in spite. You couldn't do the guy in pursuant to your rules, so you ran to the big dog.

Now like I said, I'm not trying to cause issues. There are just these holes that need filling in. That's all.

AR

Garvinator
19-01-2011, 01:24 AM
Arosar, I do not believe a word you say. I think you are just a trouble maker and nothing you say is genuine.

Again, contact the CAQ secretary for more information.

Denis_Jessop
19-01-2011, 10:46 AM
I think that Garvin's explanation highlights the fact that criticism of decisions should not be made by people who don't know the facts. Or, in Arosar's case, who don't understand a perfectly clear explanation once it is given. Briefly, for Arosar's benefit, what Garvin is saying is that Cameron's termination of his CAQ membership was an attempt, probably successful, to take himself outside the CAQ's jurisdiction and that the CAQ therefore referred the matter to the ACF which took the action mentioned. Both CAQ and the ACF gave Cameron the opportunity to state his case as required by the rules of procedural fairness.

DJ

Basil
19-01-2011, 02:07 PM
Ban his ass!

Hippies! Wets! Drips! Brains-in-vats! Like life's not hard enough without insular drips flaking their misery all over the floor!

Carry on - you're all doing very well.

ER
19-01-2011, 02:28 PM
Ban his ass!

Hippies! Wets! Drips! Brains-in-vats! Like life's not hard enough without insular drips flaking their misery all over the floor!

Carry on - you're all doing very.

NO sympathy whatsoever for the specific person from me. I remember when a couple of years ago he exhibited an inexplicably belligerent attitude against my person urging other members to block me from the Forum for the simple reason that I barracked for a Box Hill Chess Club Junior during the Australian Juniors Championship held in Canberra. I had shown friendship and sympathy to the particular person before that incident and found it hard to comprehend his animosity against me for quite a period of time which lasted untill his voluntary withdrawal from ChessChat. As far as I am concerned CAQ in particular and ACF in general have much more important issues to consider than spending their precious time to deal with childish and irresponsible actions by some members of the Chess community!

Kevin Bonham
19-01-2011, 02:50 PM
Briefly, for Arosar's benefit, what Garvin is saying is that Cameron's termination of his CAQ membership was an attempt, probably successful, to take himself outside the CAQ's jurisdiction and that the CAQ therefore referred the matter to the ACF which took the action mentioned.

Or that even if Cameron wasn't resigning his membership with that intention, it nonetheless had that effect.