Abstaining from ranking

[Darkson]

Again, I'm am NOT asking for my historical games to be deleted, I am objecting to the NAF gathering data on me after I have left.

[mawph]

but you'll be attending events which are part of the organisation. In order to have a solid footing, shouldn't you avoid all tournaments associated with the NAF?

The equivalent analogy is somewhat along the lines of a collection of private members clubs. You are a member, but then you leave the membership and wish them never to record your attendance again. Then you keep turning up to various of their clubs as the +1 of a current member, but ask them each time to ignore your presence and not record that you are in their club again (analogy may be somewhat stretched...).

A tournament doesn't have to be NAF sanctioned, its a private club, which I'd say is fair that they can record who is coming and going. If you don't want to be recorded, don't attend.

[Vanguard]

Again, I'm am NOT asking for my historical games to be deleted, I am objecting to the NAF gathering data on me after I have left.

Yes, although the debate has grown a few arms and legs since your initial post, so not all (certainly not mine) replies were directed solely at you.

You can object but I do not believe that it is unreasonable for the NAF to record and retain records of who attends their events. I also do not believe it would infringe the current DPA nor the GDPR.

[Darkson]

@mawph - you don't have to be a NAF member to attend (some) tournaments - some, like the NAFC, insist on it, others, like mine and Sawbbl, don't (or haven't).
In fact, it's only started being widespread that some tournaments have insisted on NAF membership, it certainly wasn't something that happened in the past.
Nor were lapsed members forced to have their games recorded, in fact that was the norm, until someone found out that using their NAF number still worked.

[Dark Duke]

I still don't understand why somebody that doesn't renew his membership is still considered a NAF member. When I stop paying for my Netflix suscription, I stop getting access to its content. It just seems logical to me.

Moreover, if you are only interested in the ranking (as many coaches are, at least in Spain), what is the point of keeping with the annual fee payments? Actually, in Spain we have the opposite problem to the one that originated this change (and I'm talking as a NAF TO). Players are not that interested in renewing! We Spanish NAF TOs have the rule of not uploading results of a member if his membership is expired, because most of them wouldn't be interested in paying the annual fee (and because we thought that was the sensitive thing to do anyway). I really don't understand why our way of working is not correct: you want to get your games recorded? You better have your membership active BEFORE the tournament has started (that's why we manage all renewals before game 1). That way, you can't choose whether your results should be uploaded or not depending on your performance, but at least you motivate many coaches that are not interested in the current gifts into renewing their memberships.

I'll make the request again since my previous post has gone unnoticed: I think the committee should discuss this topic again, considering all national realities, and make an official announcement through the newsletter for all members to know, not only the ones that access TFF.

[sann0638]

How do you check if someone is active? Someone does it manually?

Reasons for paying the fee:
- morals (to support the NAF)
- swag
- login to update details and post in the forum
- appear on the NAF members map

But you're absolutely right, it does need to be consistent. I started working on this during my term, but didn't get as far as I wanted because of stuff.

[Dark Duke]

How do you check if someone is active? Someone does it manually?

We, the NAF TOs, do it manually using the feature on the NAF website (especifically, I export the CSV data to Excel to do it quicker with a formula).

Reasons for paying the fee:
- morals (to support the NAF)
- swag
- login to update details and post in the forum
- appear on the NAF members map

I understand there are reasons for paying the fee despite getting your results uploaded anyway. But the reality in Spain is that most coaches are not interested in paying the fee if they can save it since most of them are only interested in getting their games recorded.

[sann0638]

Agree it's messy. Come on naf committee, pull your finger out!

[Tojurub]

I'm enjoying reading this. I have my popcorn ready and follow the debate to have enough fodder for the committee meeting this month..... I think with all that input we'll head for a new record or meeting time.

[nazgob]

I too look forward to the outcome. I do have another line of thought, which I think is important. I am a NAF member, and i want my games recorded. I play Member A who does not want his games recorded.

Can my game be recorded?

Should my enjoyment of the game and the rankings be diminished because of someone else's request?

I'd like to think that the game could be recorded as being again 'Anonymous Coach', so my ranking could still gain the benefits, but I could see why Coach A would be upset with that. Something for the committee to consider?

[scs.sam]

My two cents worth -

I'm not as militant as Simon on this in that I will keep my membership to the naf etc ... but I understand his reaction - Khorne & Brettonian are complete Bollocks.
Perhaps it's time for someone to form the PNAF - a Pure version of the NAF

[zulu]

I don't think recording of matches should be restricted to only active NAF members. It should be the recording of all matches that have been been played in a NAF Sanctioned tournament. A NAF name and number makes that easier.
If there are people who only sign up for that then so be it, that they can get that for "free" if they really want to. I think many people sign up for the yearly swag and other reasons as Sann posted. Its up to the NAF to sell themselves to members.

I would put it that if you are signing up for a NAF Sanctioned tournament then that should imply permission to have the game recorded.

[frogboy]

If it we're me i'd make the Rankings what there meant for, to be competitive.

Limit the amount of Sanctioned (Rankings) tournements so they become much more competitive.

The Regional TOs etc could provide lists of agreed number of tournements per country, have a fair amount in each with preference to the larger more established tournements and have them in different citys to allow people every opportunity to attend an equal amount. Big countrys like Australia for example could be devided by state or some other messure of fair division.

There would be a lot less Ranked Tournements but they would be much more competitive, which is what they are all about.

Then all other tournements can still be sanctioned and record games etc. Just not effect rankings.

Its good that the NAF are making steps towards ensuring games played at sanctioned events are recorded i believe that.
But never going to make everyone happy, but ask yourselfs whats the problem, what needs solving and who is more important?
You cant have it both ways at every tournement, TOs just want a simple solution as its hard enough to run an event anyway.

But at the same time you want to increase the membership and appeal to new coaches.

Difficult one that. Serious, not even messing. Its sad to see people get upset about this and pains me to think people fall out over these things as we all at the end of the day, have a good laugh at events. Double skulls reroll double skulls

[Dark Duke]

I don't think recording of matches should be restricted to only active NAF members. It should be the recording of all matches that have been been played in a NAF Sanctioned tournament. A NAF name and number makes that easier.
If there are people who only sign up for that then so be it, that they can get that for "free" if they really want to. I think many people sign up for the yearly swag and other reasons as Sann posted. Its up to the NAF to sell themselves to members.

I would put it that if you are signing up for a NAF Sanctioned tournament then that should imply permission to have the game recorded.

I think there is an in between solution that would be what others have pointed out: all games can be recorded but every game of a non-member and member with the membership expired will be recorded as played against "Anonymous Coach" or a better, fancier name that we can come up with. I presume, names among "Anymous Coaches" wouldn't be recorded at all.

That way, if you are an active member, you get all your games recorded and if you have never been or you are not longer interested in being a NAF member, you don't.

[straume]

I understand there are reasons for paying the fee despite getting your results uploaded anyway. But the reality in Spain is that most coaches are not interested in paying the fee if they can save it since most of them are only interested in getting their games recorded.

In Norway we simply add the difference in the fee when signing up at an event. So Non-NAF pays the difference when signing up at the event. They at the event then get to choose to get a membership included (which in effect is already paid for). So far: 0 people have chosen not to join. Which makes sense. Unless you have some silly beef with a race, or some sort of hate towards the NAF as an organisation, why shouldn`t you? The choice is free swag+matches recorded or no free swag and no matches recorded.

As to the topic at hand it makes a lot of sense that coaches can`t pick and choose which events they want to get ranked so I support this choice. Then again: I agree with Zulu in that getting the matches recorded for free is sensible as is policy (some places) today. A different policy would be tricky to handle, when a TO after the event finds out that 1/3 of the players membership has elapsed. Afterall: Almost everyone likes to get their matches recorded, and those who go against this for their own reasons will take away other peoples fun.

Also; I guess I could come out of the closet as another one working with Data Protection and GDPR. Here is my 2 cents, I hope you are ready with the popcorn, Torstein. The right to be forgotten should mean that Simon here should be allowed to be forgotten. That would mean deleting his name from the records, and some would argue that "Darkson" is also an identifier, which must be renamed. Some would argue that his NAF-number also is an identifier and should be altered, but personally I think NAF would "get away with" removing the name, the e-mail and renaming Darkson to "unnamed0424" or whatever.

Then to my main point: To avoid anyone using GDPR to stay hidden from the rankings the NAF could simply demand that anyone attending a NAF-sanctioned event will have to provide whatever NAF-ID they have been given in the past and informing them the matches will be recorded in the NAF database. If anyone choose to be forgotten they are not allowed in future events. Which is absolutely reasonable. I doubt Magnus Carlsen (the Chess player) would get away with signing up at an FIDE-event without disclosing his name and his ranking.

I think a general problem the NAF (or indeed any organisation) copes with is that there will always be someone screaming about something. Should "Lex Darkson" mean big changes in NAF-policy? No way. This is just one person with a very strong (and imo: silly) opinion.