WCDF General Assembly

[Alex_Moiseyev]

I think we moved far from subject to technalities.

Gene Lindsay gave $50,000 to WCDF for 3-moves events. CD annual interest today is 2%-3% or $1,000-$1,500.

If usage stocks allow and guarantee us the same amount or more, then I don't see any problems. But stocks never guarantee us anything.

Every year we have to withdrew money. If we buy stocks - what happened if at the time we need an interest, it's price dropped ??? Then we go to players and say - hey guys, lets cancel all checkers activity this year and wait for another 2 years ???

Even if we keep a principal on savings with minimum interest, and spend $1,000 from principal every 2 years, this would guarantee us that 3 moves QT are secured for another 120-140 years !

In my eyes, we have to agree, that using stocks for Gene Lindsay fund was a bad idea and immediately replace everything. It is very impolite, unethical and immoral to gamble (and satisfy own ambitious) on money of other people.

I am wondering - who was originally an author of this idea and proposed it (and backed) to WCDF ?

The main Gene Lindsay idea and wish wasn't to make a profit (or spend money for nothing), but secure checkers 3-moves events. Remember this. You don't need a financial education to understand a human values.

Alex

[MostFamousDane]

I think we moved far from subject to technalities.

Gene Lindsay gave $50,000 to WCDF for 3-moves events. CD annual interest today is 2%-3% or $1,000-$1,500.

If usage stocks allow and guarantee us the same amount or more, then I don't see any problems. But stocks never guarantee us anything.

Every year we have to withdrew money. If we buy stocks - what happened if at the time we need an interest, it's price dropped ??? Then we go to players and say - hey guys, lets cancel all checkers activity this year and wait for another 2 years ???

Even if we keep a principal on savings with minimum interest, and spend $1,000 from principal every 2 years, this would guarantee us that 3 moves QT are secured for another 120-140 years !

In my eyes, we have to agree, that using stocks for Gene Lindsay fund was a bad idea and immediately replace everything. It is very impolite, unethical and immoral to gamble (and satisfy own ambitious) on money of other people.

I am wondering - who was originally an author of this idea and proposed it (and backed) to WCDF ?

The main Gene Lindsay idea and wish wasn't to make a profit (or spend money for nothing), but secure checkers 3-moves events. Remember this. You don't need a financial education to understand a human values.

Alex

Deep sigh

1. We didn't agree to spend the money! We actually agreed to exactly the opposite. There is absolutely no gambling involved, just common sense long term financial planning as I have explained several times.
2. The money was not set a side especially for 3-move events.
3. Calling somebody "impolite, unethical and immoral" because you don't agree with them shows a complete lack of character and this not the first of completely outrageous posts you have made.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

1. We didn't agree to spend the money!

Yes, but we agreed to spend an interest with no risk to make it.

There is absolutely no gambling involved

Any stock market deal is gambling, even government bonds.

just common sense long term financial planning

There is no long term deal here. Every year or two years we need to withdrew something for 3-moves events.

The money was not set a side especially for 3-move events.

Yes, they were ! Read Gene Lindsay wish again. Maybe Alan Millhone and/or Richard Beckwith can clarify this for us ?

Calling somebody "impolite, unethical and immoral" because you don't agree

But what else I can say ? All these definitions aren't an absolute definitions - right or wrong, but personal. In my eyes - these definitions are correct.

You can say - "going against the wish is moral and polite", and this will be your opinion.

There are many things I disagree with, but only small poprtion of them I call immmoral, unthetical and inpolite - the ones which deserve to be named this way.

I am still wondering - who submitted (and backed) this motion ?

[rich beckwith]

To clarify the one point (which was discussed at General Assembly), Gene's handwritten will simply said (with EXACT wording), "10% to World Checkers And Draughts Assoc. to set up a fund for World Qualifying Tournaments." without further details. <OK, I did have to amend Gene's abbreviation for "Association" to get by the site's filters!>. This is the only physical evidence I am aware of regarding Gene's wishes, and it does not specifically mention or exclude the style of play (3-move/GAYP), although "tournaments" was written in the plural, for what that's worth. I once asked John Webster, his good friend, if he might have discussed this with Gene in 2007, but he knew nothing of the will contents.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Poor Gene, he didn't even imagine how his words could be interpretated. From EXACT Gene wording it is clear (to me), that he wanted TO USE these money (or interest only) for Qualify Tournaments. There is nothing in his will which says anything about "long term investment"

Some players may pass away well before WCDF decides to start spending earnings (if any).

If Gene didn't specify exactly style, it simply means that any event with QT status in WCDF - men, women, youth, 3-moves or GAYP deserve to receive their portion of these money. In addition, non of these money can be used for World Matches.

Regards,

Alex Moiseyev

[john reade]

It was voted at the GA that the Gene Lindsay money should be invested and the interest used to help towards funding qualifying tournaments. Ian Caws has invested the money at 5% interest which should realise about £2K per annum.

[kiwinurse]

Thats a terrible state of affairs, if i was Betty id be contesting this.How can a man leave everything to draughts and not his wife?

[steve]

you can't cut your spouse out of your will.each state is different but the majority will give at least 1/3 to the surviving spouse.what could of happen is they had a prenuptial agreement or more likely not married.to many modern women today think it's only a piece of paper [marriage cert.] but it's nice to have.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Steve, Gene and Betty were not officially married. She was 15 years older than him and they lived together long time and she always being around and travelled with him to all checkers events in USA and abroad. I agree with Alan Millhone that Gene never thought she can ovelive him.

As far as I know, Betty heritated his 1st house where they lived, but Gene also had several other houses and some money as investments and these assets were included into will. She also received his huge checkers library.

Knowing Betty for quite a while, more than 10 years, I seriously doubt she would ever go against Gene will.

Alex

[Ingo_Zachos]

I think this is an inappropriate discussion.
These are private matters and do not belong on a forum about checkers/draughts.
Plz respect privacy and the legacy of a great checker enthusiast.

You may talk about how the money is spent, but to inform the readers of this forum about the private life of a deceased person and to question his last will is just not the right thing to do.


Greetinx from sunny Dortmund,

Ingo Zachos

[tommyc]

Its shocking and disgraceful.....................here here.!!

[kiwinurse]

I think the whole subjects been inappropriate,and if Gene mentioned that he wanted the moneyto be spent on world qualifiers,why not keep it simple and do that?Did he say he wanted it invested and use the interest to fund qualifiers?So whats the problem,and why interpret it differently?