AGM nominees

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.

ovinelover

reunion wrote: »

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.

The chess playing population of Munster? All of them? Or just the eighteen souls present at the AGM? Or even all of them? I'm reminded of Dev saying that when he wanted to know how the people of Ireland felt about things, he need only examine his own heart.

Lecale

Sorry, but did you actually take 5 minutes to read what you've written here? I struggle to imagine why choosing the wrong option in a form should be something to care about. It also strikes me as odd that you are querying who registered him. Are you trying to tell us that the IP is logged, and that you know who registered him?

must have a jest

Who knows how deep this scandal of Richard Gould and his two pin numbers goes? A lot of Ulster players haven't joined the ICU for years. And they are quite open about the fact that he joined the ICU to run for office. So did he register himself or was he registered by John McMorrow? Perhaps another member of McMorrow's team registered him (that would be seriously abnormal). Because in the context of everything that has happened in the ICU this year, this issue is really, really, super-duper important.

(Note to boy98: I am being sarcastic)

Ballynafeigh Chess

I might be able to shine some light on the problem with duplicate numbers and registration of Richard Gould though this will depend on the reader not wearing a tinfoil helmet and declaring an election conspiracy.

The Ulster Chess Union took advantage of the national arbiter’s course with the intention of eventually having 12 – 15 National arbiters amongst the UCU membership. To avail of this course membership of the ICU is a fundamental requirement. When Richard registered with the ICU site it administered a second number as was the case with others who had a lapsed membership of two years or more. Once Richard had rejoined he decided that he wanted to be involved more deeply with the running of the ICU and bravely put his hand up for election which as a reward was subsequently chopped off at the elbow by the current board.

So no conspiracy or underhand shenanigans just a member wanting to help out and being refused the entitlement of being judged by his peers.

rob51

ovinelover wrote: »

The chess playing population of Munster? All of them? Or just the eighteen souls present at the AGM? Or even all of them? I'm reminded of Dev saying that when he wanted to know how the people of Ireland felt about things, he need only examine his own heart.

Just the people present at the AGM who represented almost all the clubs in Munster from memory. They voted overwhelmingly for the motion so there is no reason that all the other Munster chess players think differently. The vote wasn't unanimous but since Gabriel was there and he has been the subject of several of this Executive's crusades that would have been why the vote was merely overwhelming.

Are you suggesting that the actions of the Executive were consistent with the ICU Constitution? Because that's the issue. Do you have confidence in an Executive which ignores its own Constitution?

RQ_ennis_chess

rob51 wrote: »

The vote wasn't unanimous

I thought that vote was unanimous. I was sitting near the front of the room and the treasurer was counting votes and I was sure he said votes against - none for that motion? Maybe I misheard one as none? Anyway I guess the count will be in the minutes of the meeting

reunion

rob51 wrote: »

Just the people present at the AGM who represented almost all the clubs in Munster from memory.

Yes the members present at the AGM voted for the motion with no one voting against the motion. Did the whole room vote for the motion? I can't remember. Does everyone in Munster support the motion? probably not. Were all clubs represented at the AGM? No.

Just to be clear, an AGM represents the members (and clubs) regardless of the numbers present. In this case, the MCU AGM represents the opinion and views of all chess players in the Munster region. So yes, all the chess players in Munster have said, they demand an apology from the ICU over this matter.

rob51 wrote: »

The vote wasn't unanimous but since Gabriel was there and he has been the subject of several of this Executive's crusades that would have been why the vote was merely overwhelming.

Gabriel voted in favour of demanding an apology. He wanted the letter (about Gerry personally (not about him being MCU rep)) to be public and that was what he was disagreeing with. Everyone at the meeting eventually agreed that the letter had no bearing on the fact that the MCU can not choose it's own rep (told not to pick a member in good standing) nor were they represented at the last executive meeting.

Sparks

ovinelover wrote: »

just the eighteen souls present at the AGM?

ponders the ratio of AGM-going ICU members to overall ICU members...

reunion

Sparks wrote: »

ponders the ratio of AGM-going ICU members to overall ICU members...

57 members at the 2013-14 AGM out of 948 members (6%)

54 members at the 2012-13 AGM out of 890 members (6.1%)

27 members at the 2011-12 AGM out of 890 members (3%)

No minutes available for the 2010-11 AGM.

37 members at the 2009-10 AGM out of 804 members (4.6%)

Average attendance at the ICU AGM = 4.8%



If we assume 1 in 4 (or 1 in 5) ICU members are a member of the MCU:

18 members at the 2014-15 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (7.6%); 1 in 5 (9.3%).

14 members at the 2013-14 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (5.9%); 1 in 5 (7.4%).

18 members at the 2012-13 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (8.1%); 1 in 5 (10.1%).

Average attendance at the MCU AGM = 1 in 4 (7.2%); 1 in 5 (8.9%)


So the MCU AGM is a better representation of the chess players in Munster than the ICU AGM of chess players in Ireland. Of course, I'd say it would be more like 1 in every 5.5 ICU members are an MCU member, so the % should be higher.

Of course it is expected that the more local you get the higher, the % turnout - if a club of 30 people had ~10% turnout at an AGM, that would be 3 people! it is more likely to get ~40+% (12+).

rob51

reunion wrote: »

57 members at the 2013-14 AGM out of 948 members (6%)

54 members at the 2012-13 AGM out of 890 members (6.1%)

27 members at the 2011-12 AGM out of 890 members (3%)

No minutes available for the 2010-11 AGM.

37 members at the 2009-10 AGM out of 804 members (4.6%)

Average attendance at the ICU AGM = 4.8%



If we assume 1 in 4 (or 1 in 5) ICU members are a member of the MCU:

18 members at the 2014-15 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (7.6%); 1 in 5 (9.3%).

14 members at the 2013-14 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (5.9%); 1 in 5 (7.4%).

18 members at the 2012-13 MCU AGM - 1 in 4 (8.1%); 1 in 5 (10.1%).

Average attendance at the MCU AGM = 1 in 4 (7.2%); 1 in 5 (8.9%)


So the MCU AGM is a better representation of the chess players in Munster than the ICU AGM of chess players in Ireland. Of course, I'd say it would be more like 1 in every 5.5 ICU members are an MCU member, so the % should be higher.

Of course it is expected that the more local you get the higher, the % turnout - if a club of 30 people had ~10% turnout at an AGM, that would be 3 people! it is more likely to get ~40+% (12+).

So Pat Fitzsimons claim in his election manifesto that it was a poorly attended MCU AGM is as accurate as his other allegations.:)