Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

I wonder if severely restricting the amount of info that non-member chess players can access will have the effect of increasing membership? Might it not simply discourage people – either by giving a very negative vibe, by developing a ‘them and us’ attitude, or by failing to nurture/maintain their interest in what is happening in the chess tournament scene? This could have the effect of cutting down the numbers of different people who use the Chess Scotland website, which surely can’t be a good thing? While having all these new statistics available will surely increase the number of times a certain group of chess players use the website, will it do anything to increase the number of different users? On the other hand, of course, it may increase membership, but I’m not convinced.

Is it the case, then, that a number of members gain twice; they gain access to the website and receive reductions to tournaments. Might this appear as if tournament players are more important than those who play only club/league matches?

The information and statistics is available, why restrict its availability? I’ll say it again, all chess players pay towards their grade through other fees. Why is it the case (as someone, I think, as argued) that paying towards the grading fees in this way (be it through a tournament, league or club) entitles you only to a grade and nothing else – why? Is there logic behind this or is it purely arbitrary? Why stop club/league players having access to grading data - it seems mean-spirited. If money is an issue, then find a different approach. Would a fairer, more inclusive option not simply be to introduce automatic membership for anyone playing graded chess matches, and to generate money through some kind of levy - be it individual, club or league?

Of course, it may well be that I have a particular axe to grind – someone who doesn’t want to part with the membership fee or who isn’t playing enough tournaments to ‘cover the costs’ of the membership fee through lower tournament fees. Or perhaps my 'nose is out of joint' because I can't peruse the site as before. I’d say two things. First, it could also be argued that a number of members partly take out membership because of this fee reduction and, so, too have ‘axes to grind’ Second, maybe hearing non-members’ views is also important.

JR · King Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 447 Location: Edinburgh

http://www.chessscotland.com/csOnline/rankingInput.php

You can still view the old grading database for the time being, not sure if they plan to keep it that way though Razz

To be honest if you are really are interested in knowing what your grade currently is and don't want to pay then just download the grading programme from the website and enter your results as you play, I know I do this anyway just to check the grade is being calculated right.

Detailed grading information has been restricted to members for quite a while anyway so I don't really see why it is suddenly an issue.

AMcHarg · Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 9:59 pm Post subject:

The old system won't be there for much longer JR! Wink

The other issue from the previous post I made about it is that the extra content actually costs Chess Scotland more money to maintain if it's released to the masses. To make much more information available to every visitor requires a more powerful server and if nothing is returned then there will be another financial blackhole in what is already a difficult financial climate.

Sure we could show the live grades without it having such an affect but we do want to actually create a bigger reason for players to become members. Many players whom I have spoken to could not see any real benefit to being a member as they didn't play many tournaments and could see their live grade without membership.

Whatever your reasons though; the membership fees are not great. You'd pay more for entry into a single tournament than it costs for a yearly membership. I think the fact that you now see it as being a burden that you are not a member simply highlights that membership has been given a greater value.

Whether the new system will increase membership or not remains to be seen, I certainly hope so. In any case it won't drive people away; if people are interested enough in their Chess then they will pay the nominal membership fee to access the stats.

I appreciate your opinion, I just don't agree with it.

Very Happy

Graeme Forbes · Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 12:19 am Post subject: Re: The new website

Derek Howie · Bishop Joined: 21 May 2010 Posts: 28 Location: Glasgow

Mike Truran · Pawn Joined: 22 Jan 2010 Posts: 5

It would be a shame if "casual users" like me were restricted as to what we can see. For example, for us "southern softies" the website is a useful way of gauging opinion in Scotland and comparing and contrasting with the way the ECF does things.

Restricting access to grading services seems fair enough to me though. The ECF has been agonising over this however for longer than I care to remember!

robin moore · King Joined: 03 Jul 2009 Posts: 164

I feel I will be in the majority here as I am a member because I simply love playing chess and want it to be financially supported and successful in Scotland at all levels. I don't think it is too much to ask to pay around 5p a day to become a member and I really appreciate the new website and the work involved in creating and maintaining it. Thankyou !

Robin.

arf · Bishop Joined: 11 Feb 2009 Posts: 27

As mentioned above by others. I have the same opinion and am a member in order to support Chess Scotland. It'd be a bit of a personal disaster for me if Chess in Scotland were to die away.

Mike Scott · King Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 676 Location: Edinburgh

Stuart

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

I’ll not respond to individual points – this is too cumbersome, allows the main points to be lost and for the issue to be personalised.

What is the bais of the approach being adopted?

Fairness?

All adults who play graded games already contribute to the costs in various ways. Why is it fair/logical that paying grading fees only entitles you to a grade for the year and nothing else? Who has decided that this is what the grading fee entitles a chess player to? And why? This is arbitrary.

Increase income/increase membership (For this discussion, I assume that the former depends on the latter)

Has Chess Scotland done any analysis that suggests this will increase membership significantly (I suppose, to the extent that the increases will offset any negative effects of taking this approach)? Will such a ‘forcing’/’direct’ method work?

Increase the vibrancy/well-being of chess in general?

Most of the responses seem to come from members. This is partly what I’m trying to say, the attitudes give off an air of exclusivity and restriction, rather than what will do most to improve the vibrancy of chess. Surely a vibrant, healthy chess scene must include generating as much interest as possible in chess and having as many people as possible sharing the same experience and talking about chess. Surely this means we want as many people as possible accessing the grading data and website? I’m not convinced this approach will do this.

Now, none of us can be sure that our views/predictions will prove right, including me.
What I would suggest though is that there might be a ‘better’ way of doing this:

All people who play graded games of chess should be some kind of member of Chess Scotland
Any necessary costs/income can be covered/generated through a levy/fee at club/league level.
The grading data should be open to anyone.

I’ll finish by saying that, even from its own premise, I’m not sure this approach inspires confidence. It’s not clear to me (perhaps I’ve missed a post/discussion) how this approach was arrived at and on what basis. Were any other options discussed? Surely a ‘trial’ period, to generate interest, would have made more sense – allowing people to see the ‘product’ before forking out. What will the effect be on young chess players – who might not want to take out membership, but might be interested in looking at the stats/data? (I should add that I’m not up to date with the membership situation regarding kids, so it’s not meant to be a rhetorical question!)

Paul Denham · Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 2:07 pm Post subject:

Stuart

As an outsider on the web design debate and grading stuff but as someone who recently renewed his lapsed CS membership and as a volunteer within chess circles in West of Scotland I will hazard a guess at the approach adopted....

Volunteers giving up their free time and effort to do something for the general good of the game adopting the make a decision you feel is in best interests of game and get on with it. If memory serves me correctly, you do some volunteering yourself so you will probably have been in the "make a decision and get on with it" mode more than once in the past.

CS seem to be offering more for the same monies now that 1 month ago so I think that can only help attract increased membership however modest.... don't think giving it away as "a freebie on the front of the paper" would entice people to "donate" more membership fees

Seems to me the "you can't please all the people all the time" argument applies in this case
_________________
It is said that life is too short for chess but that is the fault of life, not chess

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

Despite all the hard work on the new website, I preferred it how it was - a scottish flavour, easy to check top 100 ranked players, and less need to scroll down for information

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

All adults who play graded games already contribute to the costs in various ways. Why is it fair/logical that paying towards grading fees only entitles you only to a grade for the year and nothing else?

In what way does this approach/attitude improve the overall position of chess in Scotland and benefit the chess playing community?

DMB · King Joined: 08 Mar 2007 Posts: 267

Some historical background might help here. CS and before that SCA has operated for 25 years on a mixture of grading fees and membership as a funding source. Compulsory individual membership did not go well when it was tried in the late 1950s when the Spens Cup was abandoned after an attempt to make all participating players SCA members (1959 Not Contested due to the requirement for players to be SCA members http://www.chessscotland.com/archiveresults/spenscup.htm)

Donald Holmes had another shot in the early 1990s on his election to SCA President but was abandoned after some leagues did not support the idea, notably GCL, and threatened to disaffiliate.

Membership was generally seen as a way of buying SC magazine. With the support of most congresses the grading perk of an initial £1 discount to entry fees and then £2 was added to member benefits.

Before the internet members were entitled to find out their latest grade by supplying an SAE and would then be sent a free printout of grading performance. The grading of results outside Scotland was restricted, as now, to those who were members.

So similar to the situation now if you wanted these benefits you could pay more than players who simply paid their club or congress fees.

Until 2002 most players only had one update to their grade with the publication of the annual list in August.

There was a quantum leap forward in 2002 when Alex Bisset came on the scene and the online grading system was developed. There were 100s of hours went into the discussion and correspondence of how to implement and operate the system. We had almost daily updates to the program from an IT professional freely giving his services to the association.
Scotland with a fraction of the financial resources of our much larger southern neighbour is about to celebrate a decade of online grades - while the ECF are still debating how to get started.

Despite high membership support from the most active players the 10k government grant funding of the association is still important in an organisation with a turnover of less than 50k. If you want paid admin, magazine and international representation then you need income.

Enhanced grading services are one of the few saleable products of the association. It would surely be financially naive to give it away for nothing - especially at a time when government spending is threatened with cutbacks and the ECF has already lost their grant.

The new Andrew McHarg updates give us a chance to move things forward again - and again there will be many hours of extra labour to create these new facilities.

However the exact level of what non-members get out of the grading system is something that will be discussed at Council on Saturday - or by members at an AGM.

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

Douglas
Thanks for the reply and information, which is interesting and useful.

Clearly the issue of whether some sort of membership requirement for anyone receiving/maintaining a grade is something not everyone would agree with. However, it is surely worth considering/discussing, and maybe others would also like to join in that debate. I think some other countries have something like this, so it can clearly work.
However, it doesn’t necessarily have to be mandatory membership – income could be gained through some sort of fee applied at club or league level – or indeed simply increasing the grading fees and club fees.

Clearly, with the advances in technology, the possibilities for grading and updates and added information have changed dramatically – so maybe the issue of how things happened in the past/how much information people were given, while still relevant, must take account of these developments.

It’s obvious that a great deal of work, requiring great levels of skill and no little time, has taken place on the development of a high class grading system over the last decade. The whole chess community is indebted to these people. I would add, though, that most of the chess machine runs on the basis of people giving up their time – though in terms of the skill and expertise required and the extent of the benefits for Scottish chess, I’m not trying to compare someone setting up a grading system with running a chess club!

I don’t think I’ve suggested that Chess Scotland should give a way a product like this for free! My concern has been that the response from most people seemed arbitrary and has not considered if this is the best approach – not only in terms of what is fair and ‘best’ for chess in general, but also even in terms of improving revenue in the medium term.