AGM nominees

Retd.LoyolaCpt

As the time for entering AGM nominations and motions has passed, I would like to announce that a number of ICU members and I will be running for a range of positions on the ICU committee. Our ticket is listed below:

Chairperson: John McMorrow. Nominated by GM Alex Baburin
Vice Chairperson: GM Alex Baburin. Nominated by Gerry Graham
Secretary: Richard Gould. Nominated by John McMorrow
Treasurer: Shane Sheedy. Nominated by John McMorrow
Ratings Officer: David Murray. Nominated by Gordon Freeman
Development Officer: Rory Delaney. Nominated by Jonathan O'Connor
Public Relations Officer: Carl Jackson. Nominated by Killian Delaney
Tournament Director: Gerry Graham. Nominated by John McMorrow
Membership Officer: John Cassidy. Nominated by Carl Jackson
Women's Officer: Hannah Lowry-O'Reilly Nominated by Jonathan O'Connor

We will not be running against the current Junior Officer or FIDE & ECU Delegate.

We will be issuing a full manifesto and list of policies in the coming weeks but for now I can give a quick summary of what we'd aim to do:

- Support tournaments, organisers and clubs

-Grow the game; with a focus on university and women's chess whilst continuing and expanding upon the work done by previous executives in Junior chess.

- Establish a fundraising committee and put a greater emphasis on finding sponsorship in general; both for ICU and individual tournaments. We feel that we are currently too reliant on subs and should be taking some of the burden off members.

- Develop lasting and strong relationships with the MCU, LCU and UCU as well as the clubs of Connaught.

Ficheall

As a matter of general principle, is it wise to run as a group under some sort of collective banner? A cautious voter might not want to vote in an entire group of people with the same mindset.

Also, most of the positions are largely unnecessary in the sense that even with a completely laissez-faire policy from these committee members, the chess events of Irelnd would run smoothly.. but a notable exception might be the Webmaster - absent from your ticket - a position which, in the wrong hands, could actually be damaging to Irish chess..

Ficheall

Also - you might want to check that Richard is eligible to run, as he is not a 2014/2015 ICU member. I know he's UCU, and also ICU for 2015/2016, etc, but still.

I'm curious about that one, as I suspect that if he's eligible to run (as a 2015/2016 member but not a 2014/2015 one) then I should be eligible to vote at the AGM (as a 2015/2016 member but not a 2014/2015 one). I tried posting a comment on the irishchessunion.net blog to enquire about that, but to no avail.

reunion

Ficheall wrote: »

As a matter of general principle, is it wise to run as a group under some sort of collective banner? A cautious voter might not want to vote in an entire group of people with the same mindset.

Also, most of the positions are largely unnecessary in the sense that even with a completely laissez-faire policy from these committee members, the chess events of Irelnd would run smoothly.. but a notable exception might be the Webmaster - absent from your ticket - a position which, in the wrong hands, could actually be damaging to Irish chess..

I think running under the same banner is significantly better. With clear defined goals you can actually review the executive and know how effective they are. This is what Pat did last year with his team - they promised transparency. We got secrecy so Pat's word is meaningless and his promises lies. If he had run by himself, he could argue others on the executive were holding him up so that's why transparency wasn't implemented.

Some of the positions are unnecessary (at least to attend executive meetings) so if it's a team, you know these positions will run smoothly and you have a good communication and trust.

Webmaster isn't an executive position (after the EGM) so won't be voted in at the AGM.

Ficheall wrote: »

Also - you might want to check that Richard is eligible to run, as he is not a 2014/2015 ICU member. I know he's UCU, and also ICU for 2015/2016, etc, but still.

I'm curious about that one, as I suspect that if he's eligible to run (as a 2015/2016 member but not a 2014/2015 one) then I should be eligible to vote at the AGM (as a 2015/2016 member but not a 2014/2015 one). I tried posting a comment on the irishchessunion.net blog to enquire about that, but to no avail.

Provided you are a member before the list of nominations and motions were published, you would be entitled to vote.

cdeb

I can see Ficheall's point, but I think this is a very positive development. There's some very solid names in there and it seems difficult for for others to hijack the committee and take vacant spots (as last year - though of course they could still get voted on). A group of people coming together to say they're prepared to take the game forward (or at least undo the harm of last year) has to be good. I would have thought there's too many solid names in there for that committee to descend into the debacle of this year.

Tim Harding

It appears that Richard Gould's nomination as ICU Secretary has been disqualified?

cdeb

He's not a current ICU member, and hasn't been since 2004 according to ratings.icu.ie. So presumably that's why?

reunion

cdeb wrote: »

He's not a current ICU member, and hasn't been since 2004 according to ratings.icu.ie. So presumably that's why?

Nope.

He is a member. My guess is he has been a members since before his nomination, probably around the 25th of August.

My guess is they disabled 2014-15 memberships prior to the announcement (of the AGM) and said he isn't a 2014-15 member so the executive said he couldn't run (or something to that effect).

cdeb

Ah right. He wasn't a member at the time of the last ratings list, which was May. So must have joined since then alright.

Is there a requirement to be a member of the ICU for a certain length of time before going on the committee? If not, should there be?

2bts

from icu.ie/icu/constitution#9
9.1 No person shall be eligible to stand for election to membership of the Executive Committee unless that person:
a. Is a fully paid up individual member of the Union; and

reunion

cdeb wrote: »

Ah right. He wasn't a member at the time of the last ratings list, which was May. So must have joined since then alright.

Is there a requirement to be a member of the ICU for a certain length of time before going on the committee? If not, should there be?

Nope no requirement. There shouldn't be either - the AGM can be held in a very big window of time - if it was a set weekend, you could look to introduce something like that.

reunion

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Secretary: Richard Gould. Nominated by John McMorrow

Would you know of any reason he wasn't permitted to stand for election?

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

We will be issuing a full manifesto and list of policies in the coming weeks but for now I can give a quick summary of what we'd aim to do:

Let us know about a full manifesto!

Tim Harding

So is there going to be a battle at the agm to have Gould reinstated as a candidate? Or to reopen nominations? The membership have had no opportunity to vote on the current secretary who has just been parachuted in.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

reunion wrote: »

Would you know of any reason he wasn't permitted to stand for election?



Let us know about a full manifesto!

Hi reunion,

Full manifesto coming today or Monday (as I'm away for the weekend) pending approval from the rest of the ticket.

I received 2 messages from the current secretary about Richard's nomination - Firstly, a receipt of my nomination on 25th of August (which I requested).

The next message I received was on September 1st which stated:
"As you know we have been busy preparing for the EGM and AGM plus various policy matters.
When we went through the list of nominees yesterday to ensure that all candidates were were paid up members for the 2014/15 year
I was informed that Richard Gould was not a member in that year so we cannot accept him as a valid nomination."

Richard is a member for 2015-2016. There had been no option available to sign up for the previous season for quite some time; since July I believe.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

On a side note, last Thursday - Gerry Graham (current Munster delegate - running for Tournament Director as part of our ticket) was kicked out of an executive meeting. Having driven from Limerick to Dublin, the first motion of the meeting was a vote of No Confidence in the Munster delegate. Gerry pointed out that this was unconstitutional, as he can only be removed by a vote by the MCU. This was overlooked.

This issue will be discussed at the MCU committee meeting tonight, as well as at the MCU AGM on Sunday.

Sparks

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Richard is a member for 2015-2016. There had been no option available to sign up for the previous season for quite some time; since July I believe.

From the ICU constitution:

5.1 Membership of the union shall be open to all persons who agree to be bound by the provisions of this constitution and who comply with its bye laws.

If someone can't sign up because the ICU isn't providing an option despite 5.1, then enforcing 9.1 on someone who's signed up for the coming year seems questionable at best.

Given the importance of a Secretary to any team looking to act as the committee in any group (the Chair and the Secretary are pretty much like the right and left wing of an aircraft in terms of their importance in these things), this ought to be addressed before the AGM.

reunion

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Richard is a member for 2015-2016. There had been no option available to sign up for the previous season for quite some time; since July I believe.

ICU constitution wrote:

No person shall be eligible to stand for election to membership of the Executive Committee unless that person:

Is a fully paid up individual member of the Union;

Being a member for the 2015-16 season means he was a member at time of nomination. Once they opened 2015-16 and closed 2014-15, he was valid - if they left 2014-15 open, they could argue that 2015 doesn't start until a certain date (though they never provided a date so this would mean both membership would be valid at the same time). However, by closing memberships for 2014-15 they effectively closed the 2014-15 season and opened the 2015-16 season meaning new memberships for 2015-16 would be valid for nomination at the AGM (And voting). I will note: there is nothing in the constitution that states the season ends 31-Aug and the new one starts in 1-Sep.

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

On a side note, last Thursday - Gerry Graham (current Munster delegate - running for Tournament Director as part of our ticket) was kicked out of an executive meeting. Having driven from Limerick to Dublin, the first motion of the meeting was a vote of No Confidence in the Munster delegate. Gerry pointed out that this was unconstitutional, as he can only be removed by a vote by the MCU. This was overlooked.

This issue will be discussed at the MCU committee meeting tonight, as well as at the MCU AGM on Sunday.

So the current executive have targeted Galway CC i.e. Connaught; now they target Munster?

They do realise that the minutes of this meeting will be made public? it's mandated from the AGM last year!

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Full manifesto coming today or Monday (as I'm away for the weekend) pending approval from the rest of the ticket.

If it said "we aren't the current executive" it's already better than the current executive.

rob51

reunion wrote: »

If it said "we aren't the current executive" it's already better than the current executive.

Just don't promise openness and transparency!!!!

pawntof4

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

On a side note, last Thursday - Gerry Graham (current Munster delegate - running for Tournament Director as part of our ticket) was kicked out of an executive meeting.

Was there a reason given for this? Who tabled the motion?

Danville

Sparks wrote: »

From the ICU constitution:

If someone can't sign up because the ICU isn't providing an option despite 5.1, then enforcing 9.1 on someone who's signed up for the coming year seems questionable at best.

Given the importance of a Secretary to any team looking to act as the committee in any group (the Chair and the Secretary are pretty much like the right and left wing of an aircraft in terms of their importance in these things), this ought to be addressed before the AGM.

We could have a monumental row about this at tha AGM or.......

The new executive(expecting that it will be the John Mc Morrow team) could hint to Eugene that they would like his resignation forthwith, and replace him with Richard.
Should the resignation not be forthcoming, a vote of no confidence would do the trick.
Problem solved with no row!

Sparks

Problem solved with no row!

Yup. On the other hand, the current committee could just accept the nomination given the arguments against it are shaky at best, and let it go to a vote.
That would be the problem solved with no row and without any embarrassment to Eugene or anyone else and without the inevitable mutterings about unfair conduct.

wine and final destination

I'd imagine Gerry Grahams no confidence vote stems from the fact that he is running with this new ticket and they suspect he would leak details of the icu meeting, which is pretty disrespectful to the MCU delegate as he is still a part to the current icu committee. Making him drive from limerick to Dublin for 5 minutes to kick him out is outright boorish and I'd imagine the icu have now lost any support from another whole province. Surely there was a better way to handle this matter? Just yet another poor decision, hard to keep track of them all at this point!

Ficheall

Danville wrote: »

We could have a monumental row about this at tha AGM or.......

The new executive(expecting that it will be the John Mc Morrow team) could hint to Eugene that they would like his resignation forthwith, and replace him with Richard.
Should the resignation not be forthcoming, a vote of no confidence would do the trick.
Problem solved with no row!

Ah now, we can't go throwing votes of no confidence around willy-nilly.

We'd need some evidence to suggest the secretary were as 'inefficient' as the rest of this year's exec.

pawntof4

wine and final destination wrote: »

I'd imagine Gerry Grahams no confidence vote stems from the fact that he is running with this new ticket and they suspect he would leak details of the icu meeting

What could he possibly leak.... what is with all the secrecy surrounding the ICU!

Sparks

Ficheall wrote: »

Ah now, we can't go throwing votes of no confidence around willy-nilly.

Actually, that's pretty much true. If the current secretary accepts the nomination, he does so knowing that he may have to work with someone other than who he's currently working with, and with all that that entails given the context. If he thinks he can do that job properly, and agrees to do that, in public, as he's done by accepting the nomination; and the very first thing the new committee did was to say "nope, we think you can't, get lost"; that's not just a slap in the face to him but it's also a bit of a slap in the faces of the membership for not sorting this out at the AGM in the open. It wouldn't be a great way to set the tone for the coming year.

cdeb

Worth noting the secretary's barely in the job a fortnight; bit much to be throwing votes of no confidence about!

reunion

wine and final destination wrote: »

I'd imagine Gerry Grahams no confidence vote stems from the fact that he is running with this new ticket and they suspect he would leak details of the icu meeting, which is pretty disrespectful to the MCU delegate as he is still a part to the current icu committee. Making him drive from limerick to Dublin for 5 minutes to kick him out is outright boorish and I'd imagine the icu have now lost any support from another whole province. Surely there was a better way to handle this matter? Just yet another poor decision, hard to keep track of them all at this point!

Do they not issue agenda's in advance of the meeting? Surely they would have said the motion of no confidence was on the agenda? Typically providing some evidence? or feedback to the MCU? Surely a better course is notifying the MCU committee of their opinions?

pawntof4 wrote: »

What could he possibly leak.... what is with all the secrecy surrounding the ICU!

Funny... Pat and Colm had the same opinion. Amazing how that opinion ceased to exist when they were on the executive....

But I do believe only relevant information should be given out to members - not an overload of pointless drivel.

Ficheall wrote: »

Ah now, we can't go throwing votes of no confidence around willy-nilly.

We'd need some evidence to suggest the secretary were as 'inefficient' as the rest of this year's exec.

Agreed. Eugene could be amazing at the job! However, it'd make more sense for him to withdraw his nomination at the AGM so it's open to the floor. That way himself and Richard could apply and members could decide who they want. If he gets voted in, he gets to stay as the process was fair.

If he doesn't do this of course, (and provided John McMorrow's team wins), they would be within their right to reopen the nominations for the secretary position (not necessarily picking Richard or Eugene).

Of course the slap in the face to someone who can stand for election being denied to run (Richard) could also be reason for him to say: "screw it, the ICU can burn for all I care." So he mightn't actually want to be secretary anymore.

RoundTower

Ficheall wrote: »

We'd need some evidence to suggest the secretary were as 'inefficient' as the rest of this year's exec.

Announcing the agm agenda is part of the secretary's job. If he refused to announce the motions that were sent in by members, that's pretty bad.

Knowing the rules is also important in that job and denying Munster their representation at an executive meeting because their representative doesn't favour the current regime is unquestionably at odds with the constitution.

I expect he'd do an excellent job with different colleagues.

Disclaimer: I'm running on the McMorrow ticket

cdeb

RoundTower wrote: »

Since snipped by the poster

That's really harsh (maybe even approaching the level of stuff previously removed from here)

I don't know what happened with the previous secretary, but the incumbent took up the spot only a couple of weeks ago and to suggest that because - at worst - he's failed to control an out-of-control exec is really unfair I think.

EnPassant

..snip..

Retd.LoyolaCpt

Hi all,

Before I post our manifesto, I just wanted to reply to a few queries/messages above. (Sorry rob51, it will include a section on transparency, although we hope to take the unusual step of abiding by it).

First off, although I wasn't delighted with how the AGM was officially announced only 10 minutes before the end of the 2014-2015 season (which was affectingly toying with the electorates of 14-15 and 15-16 as to which would get to vote), I do not blame Eugene. I have absolutely no problem working with Eugene if that reflects the wishes of the attendees at the AGM.

I nominated Richard with the understanding that he was a member of the ICU at the time, and as such could be elected - my view has not changed and I think that the members of the ICU have a right to vote for him. I will try to resolve this before the election to save time, for now I have taken him off our ticket pending a resolution.

Some other notes: Pat Fitzsimons nominated Colm Daly for PRO. However, it appears that Colm has declined the nomination. Gearoidin Ui Laighleis Nominated herself for Women's Officer but she didn't appear on the list of nominees - she may have pulled out.

Lastly, I can see that some people have had their issues with the current executive but - aside from personal attacks from the PRO which should have no place in Irish chess - I'm sure they are working toward their vision of how Irish chess should be run. I may not share this vision overall but if our campaign is successful, I hope they'd be willing to work with us to improve Irish chess as prominent icu members; as I will be, should their campaign win.

I hope our manifesto is received well - please contact me with any thoughts or concerns

RoundTower

I apologise for associating the new secretary with the chairman and the PRO. He has an impossible job to do, and he sent me a very prompt reply to my icu correspondence.

Tim Harding

Where on the ICU website(s) can we find the list of nominations for office, motions that will be debated (as opposed to those that won't be) and the agenda?

cdeb

Strangely, that info is for members only on icu.ie, but freely available on irishchessunion.net

So I think this is the info you're looking for.

Tim Harding

Thank you!

checknraise

Has only one motion been made or will the rest of the motions be made available at a later date?

cdeb

It would appear one motion has been made, two others have been rejected by the ICU (presumably unconstitutionally) and that's it.

Any motion would surely need to be sent out in advance to be valid I would presume?

wine and final destination

I understand roundtowers scepticism towards the new Secretary as anything or anyone associated with the current icu exec makes people raise an eyebrow however I agree that this new Secretary has been drafted in at the last minute and probably has no interest in the personal vendettas of some of the current committee. He should be allowed run without being tarnished along with the current exec!

I also feel that en passant comparison of roundtower to a certain PRO is possibly the harshest insult someone could ever throw!😂

Mustafa Chess

I have yet to see a specific set of reasons as to why some clearly misinformed people wish to replace the current ICU executive members.
Exactly what have the ICU executive committee done wrong?

Do we need a new Treasurer? If so why?

Because Shane Sheedy has done so much for Irish chess? He has never served on the ICU executive or any national executive body and is so well known that he is the right person for this position? He is really a better and safer pair of hands than a man with decades of experience and commitment to Irish chess in various shapes and forms. Or was he "put up to this" by a clique who are all about "power" and notions of in the ICU executive. Everybody is sure that the idea here is NOT to seize control of a national governing body and use it as a vehicle for vested interests? That won't happen then?

Do we need a new Vice Chairman? If so why?

Because Alexander Baburin has never served on the ICU executive and thus has no experience and or insight into the workings of the ICU and it's executive committee- perhaps he could have become membership officer or some other post first? His track record as a selector has not resulted in uproar and controversy? <snip>

Why now and why does he want to be on the ICU executive committee?

Do we need a new rating officer? If so why?

Well what if it was the case that David Murray actually put it in writing that he thought that the current rating officer was doing a fine job but that he (David Murray) was just asked to go forward and he felt compelled to do so. Not of course to hijack the ICU and be part of a group who want to gain control for the sake of using the ICU as a vehicle for to further their own interests. Here too David has a passion for and commitment to the best interests of the general ICU membership, and not a select few?

Do we need a new Chairman? If so why?

Because the current Chairman has bent over backwards to reason with and accommodate various people and disparate interests, all the while having to contend with saboteurs and having his hands tied by efforts to sabotage and undermine his efforts to do things PROPERLY in as an impartial manner as possible with due regard for the greater good of Irish chess, the ICU and it's members.

Well it would be easy to go on and on and through every canidate and ask hard questions. Like, many might ask who is John Mc Morrow? But for now I would suggest people ask themselves many questions about the logic and motivations of the various candidates.

Man for man it seems clear that the team nominated by Pat is far more experienced, credible and genuine in their reasons for being on the ICU but I guess time will tell.

Ficheall

Are you suggesting Fitzsimons' team is running under the slogan of "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't."?

cdeb

Pat Fitzsimons had "never done anything for Irish chess" before last year - where "having done anything for Irish chess" seems to be defined as having sat on the ICU exec, regardless as to whether you'd contributed anything or not. Didn't stop the same loudmouths loudly getting behind him. And look how that's turned out.

Alex Baburin has no insights into the workings of the ICU?! Hilarious.

rob51

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

I have yet to see a specific set of reasons as to why some clearly misinformed people wish to replace the current ICU executive members.
Exactly what have the ICU executive committee done wrong?

Do we need a new Treasurer? If so why?

Because Shane Sheedy has done so much for Irish chess? He has never served on the ICU executive or any national executive body and is so well known that he is the right person for this position? He is really a better and safer pair of hands than a man with decades of experience and commitment to Irish chess in various shapes and forms. Or was he "put up to this" by a clique who are all about "power" and notions of in the ICU executive. Everybody is sure that the idea here is NOT to seize control of a national governing body and use it as a vehicle for vested interests? That won't happen then?

Do we need a new Vice Chairman? If so why?

Because Alexander Baburin has never served on the ICU executive and thus has no experience and or insight into the workings of the ICU and it's executive committee- perhaps he could have become membership officer or some other post first? His track record as a selector has not resulted in uproar and controversy? <snip>

Why now and why does he want to be on the ICU executive committee?

Do we need a new rating officer? If so why?

Well what if it was the case that David Murray actually put it in writing that he thought that the current rating officer was doing a fine job but that he (David Murray) was just asked to go forward and he felt compelled to do so. Not of course to hijack the ICU and be part of a group who want to gain control for the sake of using the ICU as a vehicle for to further their own interests. Here too David has a passion for and commitment to the best interests of the general ICU membership, and not a select few?

Do we need a new Chairman? If so why?

Because the current Chairman has bent over backwards to reason with and accommodate various people and disparate interests, all the while having to contend with saboteurs and having his hands tied by efforts to sabotage and undermine his efforts to do things PROPERLY in as an impartial manner as possible with due regard for the greater good of Irish chess, the ICU and it's members.

Well it would be easy to go on and on and through every canidate and ask hard questions. Like, many might ask who is John Mc Morrow? But for now I would suggest people ask themselves many questions about the logic and motivations of the various candidates.

Man for man it seems clear that the team nominated by Pat is far more experienced, credible and genuine in their reasons for being on the ICU but I guess time will tell.

Sorry, did I miss the revolution?? I thought the ICU members were entitled to vote in a new executive just because they want to. it's something to do with democracy apparently. I believe you were very much in favour of that sort of thing last year.

pawntof4

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

I have yet to see a specific set of reasons as to why some clearly misinformed people wish to replace the current ICU executive members.
Exactly what have the ICU executive committee done wrong?

What it boils down to is this: I want to play chess. Following the joint statement from the tournament organisers of the Bunratty Chess Festival, Kilkenny Chess Congress, Cork Congress, Galway Chess Congress, Gonzaga Classic, Limerick Open, Ennis Open and the Mulcahy Memorial how can I be expected to support the current executive?

I don't know that the team running against the current executive committee will do any better but I don't trust the current one at all.

reunion

Now that the chess playing population of Munster are looking for an official apology from the ICU over the unconstitutional actions by the current executive to remove their appointed delegate without notice or consultation with the MCU;

I wonder if the candidates could indicate if they would issue this apology? and if not why not?



Also bad mark for anyone on the current executive as the MCU has stated that they have no confidence in the current executive due to the unconstitutional actions by the current executive.

Tim Harding

If Gerry Graham is elected Tournament Director on the new ticket, who will be the new Munster delegate or will he double up? And if he doubles up, would that give him two votes?

reunion

Tim Harding wrote: »

If Gerry Graham is elected Tournament Director on the new ticket, who will be the new Munster delegate or will he double up? And if he doubles up, would that give him two votes?

The MCU can elect their own representative so who the MCU rep is would be up to them.

Officers can hold multiple executive positions but will only get one vote.

Tim Harding

Thanks for that clarification. So if Gerry is elected it would be preferable for the MCU to choose somebody else. I agree that would be best as he should be taking a national view if elected.

boy98

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

Hi all,

Before I post our manifesto, I just wanted to reply to a few queries/messages above. (Sorry rob51, it will include a section on transparency, although we hope to take the unusual step of abiding by it).

First off, although I wasn't delighted with how the AGM was officially announced only 10 minutes before the end of the 2014-2015 season (which was affectingly toying with the electorates of 14-15 and 15-16 as to which would get to vote), I do not blame Eugene. I have absolutely no problem working with Eugene if that reflects the wishes of the attendees at the AGM.

I nominated Richard with the understanding that he was a member of the ICU at the time, and as such could be elected - my view has not changed and I think that the members of the ICU have a right to vote for him. I will try to resolve this before the election to save time, for now I have taken him off our ticket pending a resolution.

Some other notes: Pat Fitzsimons nominated Colm Daly for PRO. However, it appears that Colm has declined the nomination. Gearoidin Ui Laighleis Nominated herself for Women's Officer but she didn't appear on the list of nominees - she may have pulled out.

Lastly, I can see that some people have had their issues with the current executive but - aside from personal attacks from the PRO which should have no place in Irish chess - I'm sure they are working toward their vision of how Irish chess should be run. I may not share this vision overall but if our campaign is successful, I hope they'd be willing to work with us to improve Irish chess as prominent icu members; as I will be, should their campaign win.

I hope our manifesto is received well - please contact me with any thoughts or concerns

What do you mean re: Eugene Donohoe? "reflecting the wishes of the attendees at the AGM". You understand that the AGM is not in a position to alter the position of Secretary as their is no alternative to the position. The AGM isn't a mob rule.

Richard Gould, What ICU Number was Richard's application for Secretary submitted under? Because he has two on the ICU.ie/Players Website

ID Name G YOB Fed Ttl Club
6102 Gould, Richard M Randalstown
17632Gould, Richard M 1980 IRL

A historic one (#6102) and a very recent one (#17632).

A Chess player getting a fresh start with a new Rating Performance. Double memberships.... Mark Orr despised that. It reflects badly on the head of the team they don't know what their team is doing or entitled too.

Was it Richard or someone else that told you that Richard Gould was a Member of the ICU? What ICU Number was his application for Secretary Candidature submitted under?

Richard isn't committed to his own history and legacy with the Irish Chess Union.

Their twisting you around their little finger.

Retd.LoyolaCpt

boy98 wrote: »

What do you mean re: Eugene Donohoe? "reflecting the wishes of the attendees at the AGM". You understand that the AGM is not in a position to alter the position of Secretary as their is no alternative to the position. The AGM isn't a mob rule.

This goes back to my initial post where my view was that Richard should still have been included as a candidate, as at the time he registered there was no longer an option to subscribe for 2014-2015. This was still weeks before the official announcement of the AGM. Going by the constitution below, Richard meets all of the criteria to be on the EC.

Article 9. MEMBERSHIP OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
9.1 No person shall be eligible to stand for election to membership of the Executive Committee unless that person:

Is a fully paid up individual member of the Union; and
Subject to rule 9.3 below, has been proposed in writing by a fully paid up member (such proposal to reach the Hon. Secretary prior to the notice of the Annual General Meeting being sent out) for a specific position; and
Is seconded at the Annual General Meeting by a fully paid up member of the Union; and
Subject to rule 7.3 gives at least 7 clear days notice in writing to the Hon. Secretary of the Union prior to the Annual General Meeting of his/her willingness to stand for election otherwise that person shall be deemed not to be qualified to stand.

boy98 wrote: »

Richard Gould, What ICU Number was Richard's application for Secretary submitted under? Because he has two on the ICU.ie/Players Website

ID Name G YOB Fed Ttl Club
6102 Gould, Richard M Randalstown
17632Gould, Richard M 1980 IRL

A historic one (#6102) and a very recent one (#17632).

A Chess player getting a fresh start with a new Rating Performance. Double memberships.... Mark Orr despised that. It reflects badly on the head of the team they don't know what their team is doing or entitled too.

Was it Richard or someone else that told you that Richard Gould was a Member of the ICU? What ICU Number was his application for Secretary Candidature submitted under?

Richard isn't committed to his own history and legacy with the Irish Chess Union.

If Mark was webmaster at the time, perhaps he would have caught this oversight (who knows) but I'm sure it will be amended in due course.

Richard was a member of the ICU as could be seen from the ICU "subscribed members" page at the time he was nominated. I'm sure the most recent ICU number was used as this was the number with which he was subscribed. I think it is unfair to say he is uncommitted, as I don't believe you know Richard personally. You have to remember that 9 years of rating history have occurred since the UCU broke away from the ICU, perhaps the ICU are issuing these members with new IDs until they figure out how to treat UCU ratings in the interim years.

RoundTower

I've added a statement about my background, plans and suitability for ICU Ratings Officer

boy98

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

This goes back to my initial post where my view was that Richard should still have been included as a candidate, as at the time he registered there was no longer an option to subscribe for 2014-2015. This was still weeks before the official announcement of the AGM. Going by the constitution below, Richard meets all of the criteria to be on the EC.

Article 9. MEMBERSHIP OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
9.1 No person shall be eligible to stand for election to membership of the Executive Committee unless that person:

Is a fully paid up individual member of the Union; and
Subject to rule 9.3 below, has been proposed in writing by a fully paid up member (such proposal to reach the Hon. Secretary prior to the notice of the Annual General Meeting being sent out) for a specific position; and
Is seconded at the Annual General Meeting by a fully paid up member of the Union; and
Subject to rule 7.3 gives at least 7 clear days notice in writing to the Hon. Secretary of the Union prior to the Annual General Meeting of his/her willingness to stand for election otherwise that person shall be deemed not to be qualified to stand.



If Mark was webmaster at the time, perhaps he would have caught this oversight (who knows) but I'm sure it will be amended in due course.

Richard was a member of the ICU as could be seen from the ICU "subscribed members" page at the time he was nominated. I'm sure the most recent ICU number was used as this was the number with which he was subscribed. I think it is unfair to say he is uncommitted, as I don't believe you know Richard personally. You have to remember that 9 years of rating history have occurred since the UCU broke away from the ICU, perhaps the ICU are issuing these members with new IDs until they figure out how to treat UCU ratings in the interim years.

The only answer to any of my questions is that you believe that in submitting his name as a Candidate for Secretary he may have used his most recent ICU number. But you don't know. Then you describe this as an 'oversite' and say that it was up to the Webmaster to 'catch' it. No it isn't up to them, blame won't get you out of this one. Players shouldn't create fresh ICU numbers for themselves. Duplicate ICU Numbers for the same Player is dubious... for a candidate to an Executive position is very dubious... for a Candidate to Secretary of the Irish Chess Union to have two ICU numbers, you team should be told where to get off.

When New Players chose 'New Player' option on the ICU.ie website the site generates new ICU numbers for those Players, established players are prompted with options and they are meant to chose their original number so there is a continuation. It's not the webmasters Role to "catch" duplicate names.

It's clear by the ambiguous reply you gave you never spoke with any of your team before you replied. You do appear to be interested in accuracy in your responses or just the respect in provided correct answer.
It's a pity you're not willing to provide transparent details on who registered Richard Gould with duplicate ICU numbers. You were asked and you refused. (I'll ask again) who created a fresh ICU number for Richard Gould? Was it Richard himself? When Richard competes in a Chess Tournament which ICU number will he use, the fresh number may give him the chance to get a very healthy Tournament performance.

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote:

They're* twisting

I'm glad we agree, that your supporters have you round their little finger.

I would prefer if you could answer those questions honestly. I have more after those ones.