Discussion about Statement of national federations

[pieter hildering]

with all respect to the letter of the named draughts natonal organisations i am mising some structural advice from them.
in my opinion the first thing to do is to organize a discussion between national bodies about the structure how to continue.
that means the following:
present a new board of directors, including new candidates,this in order to
set up a plan of aproach. as the message of now does not show that aproach we moving to a daeth end street.
further i miss the sence of willing to cooperate with the national bodies not
being consulted. this is not a good start.
asking for the acounts over the last four years in full detail to be analysed
and asking these controlling people to come with the needed changes.
further to split up the international work needed for the future in several regions all with the task to bring up suggestions.
setting up a membergroup for bringing ideas in respect to sponsering
setting up a membergroup for discussing with topplayers about their needs and what we might expect from them in return.
setting up a membercommision who bring the statutes to a hounest real life.
the board should be internationally organized so that no country will be
left without the chance to bring in needed imput.
there are more things on my mind but i think in realizing these first steps
will bring the national bodies on one line again.
there is a lot of work to do so get started

[Alkand]

Brazilian and Mongolian Draughts federations support the Statement .

When i'm reading message from Belarussian DF about approval from Brazil and Mongolian DF i just remember as KNDB (probably) voted for England and Wales ))
It's means that we see new names and.. old style. Nothing new... "Van Beek's team number two"

[Hanco Elenbaas]

This statement deserves to be framed:

• Brazilian and Mongolian Draughts federations support the Statement .

  When i'm reading message from Belarussian DF about approval
  from Brazil and Mongolian DF i just remember as KNDB (probably) voted
  for England and Wales ))
  It's means that we see new names and.. old style. Nothing new...
  "Van Beek's team number two"

[guest]

A comment about the most recent letter from Belarus:

They propose that the financial affairs of the FMJD should be investigated by the financial experts Koyfman and Stokkel.

They should realize that Stokkel is a member of the same club as the (former) treasurer Jaap Bus. Also, Koyfman may be too much involved in the current situation. Thus, it may be better to hire somebody who knows all about financial merits of international organizations, and as little as possible about our game.


I was surprised too see that Belarus wrote such an aggresive letter.
The faxcs in the letter may be right, but I am not sure this is the best way to solve the problem.
The dutch checkers federation may have been a bit (ok, maybe a big bit) arrogant in the past, but I am sure that this can be changed.
I hope that Belarus and Holland become friends again, so that we can muze about the good old days of Peter the great.

Maybe somebody should organize a party with enough vodka, so that all representatives get to know each other a bit better. This would hopefully lead to more understanding between one another.

Bert Zwart

[A.Presman]

Brazilian and Mongolian Draughts federations support the Statement .

When i'm reading message from Belarussian DF about approval from Brazil and Mongolian DF i just remember as KNDB (probably) voted for England and Wales ))

It is difficult for me to keep my opinion inside.
But logo above "Official website of the FMJD" in combination with the crisis force me to some self limitation.
That's why I express myself more freely on other boards (shashki.com) and in private correspondence.
Still being the host of this site I follow some written and unwritten rules. None should publish aspersion which can be (to my opinion) legally persecuted. Therefore I would never allow to publish here interview of Mr. van Beek to Dutch media from 19.05.03. In other cases I help to publish or do not hinder to be published to any opinions even when I fully disagree with it.
Mr. van Beek, Mr. van den Hoek as well as people with contrary point of view did send me just e-mails and asked to publish it on board. And I never refused.
I simply recognize that the Forum system (though it becomes more and more important middle for intercourse) is still difficult for many people to get used with it.
Only twice I had to take extremal measure and deleted a post. Both time I immediately informed a person who published it about reasons and both time I got "agree" and "thank" from the involved one.

Your question about Brazilian and Mongolian federation is a bit offensive for Belarussian DF as it means that you conjecture them in publishing something what is not true.
It is not my job to check it but still I requested and received copy of message from Mongolia about Statement of federation.
> Our federation, the Mongolian Draughts federation is
> fully agree! It can be an official declaration from
> Executive Committee of our federation.

If you would look to the link on your forum
http://www.shashki.com:/modules.php?op= ... 5&start=15
you would not doubt about position of Brazilian federation.

So I agree with Pieter Hildering. Let's begin as soon as possible with constructive part of building the future of the FMJD.
Still there is nothing strange that federations want to show their standpoint to the recent past.

[Jacques PERMAL]

I have translated most of nationals federations posts (here) in french language in Francis Pésente site :
http://users.belgacom.net/gc655101/index.htm

I have asked President of FFJD to release a statement about FMJD crisis. Now he is reading (carefully !!!) all of nationals statements.