It may or may not be desirable to make FLG a division of IIBGF, but it isn't impractical.
dorbel is correct, poor usage of words on my part and an extremely poor explanation as to why I think it not desirable, so I'll elaborate:
--FLG has been successfully
running for 10 years in its present format, which relies more on player good will and self-accountability rather than rules and regulations. There is something to be said for not
drastically changing something that has been this successful, especially if it requires adding more requirements.
follows that if the FLG is integrated into the the IIBGF in some manner, that FLG adopt IIBGF rules and regulations, otherwise there is no point in integrating.
Some of these rules, which would most certainly affect FLG player participation in a drastic manner, are as follows:
1) no anonymity
I can see that some people might value anonymity, but why they should do so isn't clear to me. What is the point of it? If you enter a live tournament you don't normally do so under a false name and wearing a disguise.
In today's world its quite clear why some value online anonymity and the reasons aren't necessarily nefarious. News reports are rife with reasons why people do well to exercise caution in guarding their online privacy, but that's a separate subject.
Simply put, requiring one to register in FLG with their given name will affect participation, especially 'newbies' who may look at FIBS "shouts" and decide they don't want some of those dysfunctional online personas knowing who they are as one of them very well might be a Ted Bundy or Son of Sam looking for the next victim.
As far as anonymity and the IIGBF goes, it currently would be quite easy to thwart the system if one really want to and register as Clint Eastwood, Kate Middleton or Blunder Moon--ok, not that
obvious--as none would be the wiser. Currently, no photo id and proof of current address by submission of a utility bill are required for IIBGF registration. (I trust I haven't given Leonardo or Zagloba any ideas here.) And if that ever became a requirement it would be quite easy to photoshop, which would leave the IIBGF no recourse but to require those that register to submit by mail an original notarized
copy of your passport and utility bill.
Backgammon cheats are not going to play in the FLG-- there is no financial incentive and I can't see someone cheating for the prestige of winning as the tourney is rather a quiet in-house affair.
Requiring FLG to register with their given names will reduce participation.
2) recording and sending in all matches played to the TD
It is trivially easy to record a match file and email it in.
Yes, its easy to do, but that is not the point. Its an extra burden I suspect many currently in FLG would not be willing to do and they would just drop out.
3) advising the TD if they wish to withdraw from a tournament and severe penalties of 12 month and 5 year bans from all IIBGF events if the withdrawal is deemed unwarranted, including a player that "silently" withdraws. (see Section 6 of IIBGF rules)
This is currently one of the good points of FLG in that players drop out for one reason or another, either temporarily or permanently, and the pools go on will little fanfare. Some players that have dropped out over the years come back and re-enter with no hassle. Yes, its technically unfair if a player plays only half the participants in pool and then drops out before playing the others, but no one has complained about it and the pools go on year after year.
4) voluntary match forfeits are not allowed.
I know of some instances in FLG where Player A has forfeited a match with Player B because of issues, either real or imagined, they have with Player B. Also, FLG grants forfeits if an opponent fails to respond to an email invitation to play. Though this forfeiting is technically not fair, it works for FLG and the players play on.
Many of the current FLG players in the lower Bronze and Silver pools--and I dare say even some from the Gold and Master pools as well--would drop out completely from the FLG rather than comply with all the IIBGF rules, not because they have some sinister purpose or want to cheat, but they like the way it is now and would not want to jump through more hoops in order to play backgammon in a less formal league that has fewer rules or requirements.
The main reason I would give for keeping the FLG the same and not
integrating it into the IIBGF is that the FLG in its current less structured and less formal state will continue to draw new players the more formalized and structured IIBGF will not.
Leave the FLG as it is and don't tinker with a successful model.
Perhaps Tomawaky could regard the FLG as a feeder system
for the IIBGF. Keep FLG like it is but promote
the IIBGF to FLG players. (Put links to it on the FLG site, send simple promotional emails to players, etc.)