Datasets:

---

Recag

/

Rp_CommonC_68

like 0

ERROR: type should be string, got "https://www.ecforum.org.uk/\nWhich Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)\nhttps://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=9730\nRe: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)\nby Mick Norris\nTrue Justin, the ECF doesn't have to vote, but I think we should vote, even if only against the other candidates\nby Carl Hibbard\nCarl Hibbard wrote: ↑\nDavid Sedgwick wrote: ↑\nJustinHorton wrote: ↑\nWhere's \"none of the above\"?\nSorry, I forgot.\nCarl, is it possible to edit the poll?\nI can add it but I think the poll count resets?\nAdded it but yes sorry the counts reset nothing I can do now please vote again.\nby NickFaulks\nIt's not actually compulsory, as I understand it.\nSometimes Delegates accept the free hotel room and airfare and are then marked as absent from the meeting.\nby Tim Harding\nNickFaulks wrote: ↑\nChris Rice wrote: ↑\nI especially like the inclusion of Peru’s Julio Granda, a personal friend of my wife and I. I have no doubt that he will bring a large slice of South American votes with him.\"\nIf Latin America is really in play then we may have a contest. However, Granda Zuniga is a lone wolf and I do not know whether he even brings Peru's vote.\nGM Granda Zuniga is current 50+ Senior World Champion and Zu Chen is of course a former Women's World Champion from China, but for many years now married to an IM (?) from Qatar.\nHowever in view of current sanctions by some Arab nations against Qatar, her presence on the list could (hopefully) cost the Dvorkovich ticket some votes in that region.\nSo on paper it is a strong-looking playing team but maybe with flaws from a political point of view.\nCome on Nigel; beef up your team while there is still time. (I voted for you in the original poll.)\nOtherwise we shall have to vote for Makropolous (and Malcolm)...\nTim Harding wrote: ↑\nCome on Nigel; beef up your team while there is still time.\nHe has done that.\nhttps://twitter.com/nigelshortchess\nTwo perfectly good European additions no doubt, but little political punch.\nedit : Lukasz Turlej, whom I do not believe I know, is a Deputy President of the Polish Federation. Perhaps he has Poland onside?\nby David Sedgwick\nThank you for your help, Carl.\nMy apologies to the 8 - 10 people who need to vote a second time.\nMick Norris wrote: ↑\nI noticed that, but in the end, the ECF has to vote for someone, even if it is the least worst candidate (which would be Nigel in my view)\nAs I understand it, Federations present at the roll call are called up individually to cast their votes.\nHence, there are two ways of abstaining:\nSecretly: you go into the ballot box and spoil your ballot paper, or leave it blank;\nPublicly: you don't enter the ballot box when your Federation's name is called.\nJulie Denning wrote: The FIDE Regulations don't seem to specify what happens beyond a first ballot, but I have put this question to Malcolm who informed me that the bottom candidate drops out. No doubt Nick Faulks can also confirm this.\nNickFaulks wrote: No I can't, but I am pursuing it. After the huge legal costs wasted on haggling with Kasparov's American lawyers in Istanbul on every word of the Statutes, surely this basic point was not missed?\nOn previous occasions when there have been three candidates and none of them has won an overall majority on the first ballot, the third placed candidate has indeed dropped out.\nHowever, the last such occasion was in 1982. As has been pointed out several times, the Statutes have changed considerably since then.\nby JustinHorton\nHeh, fantastic. So a three-horse race with no clear agreement as to how the rules work?\nby Angus French\nFrom the Electoral Regulations chapter of the FIDE Handbook there's this:\nFIDE Electoral Regulations wrote: 3.7 For all elections a majority of the votes cast, not counting abstentions, shall be required. If there is a tie, the voting is repeated until the tie is broken. If three or more persons are nominated for the same offices or office, the candidates that receive 50% plus one of the votes cast, are elected on the first ballot. Thereafter, the candidates receiving most votes on the second ballot are elected to the vacant number of offices. If there is a tie, the voting is repeated until the tie is broken...\n... which doesn't seem clear to me.\nDon't know if anyone has said it yet but (according to the Electoral Regulations) each Presidential Ticket must be nominated by at least five member federations. So: the ECF has until early Tuesday afternoon (3 July, 17:00 Athens time) to decide whether to nominate one of the tickets.\nAngus French wrote: ↑\nSo: the ECF has until early Tuesday afternoon (3 July, 17:00 Athens time) to decide whether to nominate one of the tickets.\nWe don't know whether they have been asked.\nYes I had seen that and there is no mention of a candidate being eliminated after the 1st ballot\nSo 1st ballot you need a majority of those voting\n2nd ballot you just need the most votes\n3rd ballot only applies if the 2nd ballot is a tie\nby Julie Denning\nMick,\nI agree entirely with your reading of the wording, which implies that for the second vote to be any different to the first, some delegates will have had to switch their votes. This is why I discussed it with Malcolm, who gave me his understanding, as I reported previously, that the lowest scoring candidate in any vote dropped out for the next vote - but I agree that this is not obvious from the wording of the Regulation.\nThis presumably means that Dvorkovich has the support of the French Federation. I did not expect that.\nLukasz Turlej, whom I do not believe I know, is a Deputy President of the Polish Federation. Perhaps [Short] has Poland onside?\nIt looks as though Makropoulos may have lost the support of both France and Poland in one day."