Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Comments on Chess X-Pose's "analysis".
I believe this "analysis" is not an analysis but an attempt to distort perception by hiding pertinent facts. And hiding is not X-pose yes? Please see these 2 references.
Here and here.
Surely a very major issue that needs to be addressed in any analysis with integrity is to answer the question of who is allowed to vote? A simple mental maths problem would be if the previous committee was not allowed to vote then Encik Zuhri would have won by a landslide from the State Affiliates. Just subtract their numbers from 20. Encik Zuhri got 20 votes. What would the votes for the incumbent have been if the committee was not allowed to vote for the "committee"?
But as I have been saying the past few days, the chess community needs to move on from the AGM and find ways to work with the new committee so that past abuses will not reappear in this new committee. The genuine voices representing the dissatisfaction and grievances of the vast majority of the chess community needs to be recognised from the vote count. Not the voices of that very small minority with the hidden agendas that have stifled the growth of Malaysian chess for too many years.
An analogy would be if the government was to elect the government. Shouldn't it be the people that elects the government?
ps: Has anyone also wondered who gave Eddy the detailed breakdown on votes? Who would do that and for what reason? What would be Eddy's benefit from trying to distort the perception of the results of the AGM?