Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What's been going on from Mark Orr's perspective

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Pete Morriss
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Pete Morriss


    Chess_Coach wrote: »
    What is the Mailgun API ?

    Even I know (in general terms) what Mailgun is. I know because Mark kept Executive members fully informed about what he was doing when he upgraded the ICU website and email facilities in 2013-14. And anybody else who was on the Executive that year and who was paying attention would know as well. (I think this is relevant to this thread; apologies if it is not.)


  • Options
    #33
    pawntof4
    Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭pawntof4


    pawnpusher wrote: »
    to clarify the password thing ...in the report He said up a password which gave editor rights to his mates...THAT password was a derogatory one. the first portion of the password was the current chairmans surname and the second portion of the password was an obscence word....For the time that he regained control of the ICU site only he and his pals had editor rights on the site and they used that password to access the site...its all in the report...I am sure all you IT guys will figure it out when you read the report....(but that is derailing...the main offence was intercepting and reading your (ICU members) emails (all in the report))

    patience.

    Do you know when this report will be published or is this another one of those "it'll all come out some day! You'll see!!!"


  • Options
    #34
    anchor4208
    Registered Users Posts: 104 ✭✭anchor4208


    pawnpusher wrote: »
    to clarify the password thing ...in the report He said up a password which gave editor rights to his mates...THAT password was a derogatory one. the first portion of the password was the current chairmans surname and the second portion of the password was an obscence word....

    I haven't seen the report yet (despite pawnpusher claiming that many have seen it). I have verbally been told many of the allegations, and to be honest, they don't appear to me to hold much water. So in the end, does the whole thing come down to the quote above? Has Mark Orr been banned for three years cos he called Pat Fitzsimons a d1ck (or similar)? If so, I better be careful ...


  • Options
    #35
    Pete Morriss
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Pete Morriss


    Even if pawnpusher's claim about the password is true (and I'm not for a moment suggesting that it is), is that really grounds for a ban of the magnitude applied here? And if Mark was indeed accused of using unparliamentary language about the chairperson, that should be a reason for the chairperson withdrawing from any disciplinary proceedings, not pushing it through on his say-so without any independent committee considering the allegations. It looks more and more as if the chairperson's idea of "the best interests of Irish chess", for which he claims to have worked so hard, is really doing everything he can to harm those who threaten his own rather fragile ego.


  • Options
    #36
    anchor4208
    Registered Users Posts: 104 ✭✭anchor4208


    Pete Morriss wrote: »
    Even if pawnpusher's claim about the password is true (and I'm not for a moment suggesting that it is), is that really grounds for a ban of the magnitude applied here? And if Mark was indeed accused of using unparliamentary language about the chairperson, that should be a reason for the chairperson withdrawing from any disciplinary proceedings, not pushing it through on his say-so without any independent committee considering the allegations. It looks more and more as if the chairperson's idea of "the best interests of Irish chess", for which he claims to have worked so hard, is really doing everything he can to harm those who threaten his own rather fragile ego.

    There's two issues here, and while they are linked, they really are two separate issues.
    The first is whether Mark was treated fairly and reasonably by the ICU executive during the disciplinary process. The second is whether he is actually guilty of anything.

    In relation to the first issue, it seems that he was very clearly treated in a manner which is unfair. There are a number of serious flaws in the process
    1. The ICU deviated from the established practise of using an independent disciplinary committee to pursue the case.
    2. The ICU didn't inform the accused that they were taking a disciplinary action against him until after they had reached their decision.
    3. There is at least one member of the executive who has a clear, publicly stated long standing bias against Mark, which is contrary to natural justice.
    4. If there were any crimes, the victims were the ICU Exec, rendering all of them ineligible to be part of the disciplinary process, again under the rules of natural justice.
    5. The appeal process is identical to the original disciplinary process i.e. to the same committee.

    In relation to the second issue, I've yet to hear of any issue of any significance that might justify any kind of a ban. But we're all promised that we'll get to see this report some day, and when we do, we'll be shocked. Sigh.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    spaceHopper
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭spaceHopper


    Ok I've nothing to do with chess somehow the first post caught my eye and i got hooked on this train crash. You stood down even though you build the web site you did it for irish chess and they are the owners of the site. When they asked you for the password you had no right to with hold it. From then on you painted your self as a crank.


  • Options
    #38
    Lecale
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭Lecale


    spaceHopper wrote: »
    Ok I've nothing to do with chess somehow the first post caught my eye and i got hooked on this train crash. You stood down even though you build the web site you did it for irish chess and they are the owners of the site. When they asked you for the password you had no right to with hold it. From then on you painted your self as a crank.

    I may have missed a post, but I thought he only refused to create an editor account for Colm Daly. Presumably P&Q had admin level accounts? Nothing about pwds...
    Can't say that I would agree with not giving CD an editor account, even if I hated his guts and it was mutual. If you're walking away, it's up to you how fast you go.


  • Options
    #39
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    On the password change, Pat mentioned to me in March/April time (the websites were down at this stage) that the ICU password had been changed to Fitzy****er123 or something like that. So that story has been around the past few months and is quite probably true.

    Maybe not the most upstanding of behaviour, but hardly warrants a three-year ban.

    (For the record, I don't know anything either way about the other comments - viruses, etc)


  • Options
    #40
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    cdeb wrote: »
    On the password change, Pat mentioned to me in March/April time (the websites were down at this stage) that the ICU password had been changed to Fitzy****er123 or something like that. So that story has been around the past few months and is quite probably true.

    Maybe not the most upstanding of behaviour, but hardly warrants a three-year ban.

    (For the record, I don't know anything either way about the other comments - viruses, etc)

    So if they knew what the password was then why didn't they use it? :pac:


  • Options
    #41
    Lecale
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭Lecale


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    So if they knew what the password was then why didn't they use it? :pac:

    Yeah, something doesn't add up there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Ballynafeigh Chess
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Ballynafeigh Chess


    I think if the posts by Mark Orr turn out to historically correct then the next elected ICU board should offer a very humble and very public apology along with the return of his honorary membership.


  • Options
    #43
    spaceHopper
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭spaceHopper


    Lecale wrote: »
    I may have missed a post, but I thought he only refused to create an editor account for Colm Daly. Presumably P&Q had admin level accounts? Nothing about pwds...
    Can't say that I would agree with not giving CD an editor account, even if I hated his guts and it was mutual. If you're walking away, it's up to you how fast you go.

    He said
    I can see that Fitzsimons probably felt frustrated at my refusal
    to let his friend Daly have an editor's login on the main site
    but given why I was resigning in the first place (see first post)" "


  • Options
    #44
    Lecale
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭Lecale


    spaceHopper wrote: »
    He said
    I can see that Fitzsimons probably felt frustrated at my refusal
    to let his friend Daly have an editor's login on the main site
    but given why I was resigning in the first place (see first post)" "

    Yes, this kind of thing says something about Irish Chess! Anyway, we have to note that this so far seems to be a technicality. For example, we know that other people had a login, and really, there is no way for Mark Orr to know if somebody decides to pass over their login to CD. So it seems like an argument for the sake of it - not something you want to have going on in your exec. I would expect that any exec member should have the entitlement of a login (of a certain level), even though they may have no idea what to do with it :) and I would expect other non-executive to have a login too, as is normal - it's nice for tournament organisers to be able submit their own reports.

    In hindsight, previous executives should have made sure that the documentation was already there.
    Political considerations (or more accurately who your mates are) should not be taken into account when choosing who does a non executive post, especially for something that's damn difficult to do.
    If you are going to veto somebody having the position, you can't complain that somebody has been vetoed from having a login. What you can do instead is to go to the school playground when it's not busy; I think Sunday morning is a good time.


  • Options
    #45
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    Lecale wrote: »
    Yes, this kind of thing says something about Irish Chess! Anyway, we have to note that this so far seems to be a technicality. For example, we know that other people had a login, and really, there is no way for Mark Orr to know if somebody decides to pass over their login to CD. So it seems like an argument for the sake of it - not something you want to have going on in your exec. I would expect that any exec member should have the entitlement of a login (of a certain level), even though they may have no idea what to do with it :) and I would expect other non-executive to have a login too, as is normal - it's nice for tournament organisers to be able submit their own reports.

    In hindsight, previous executives should have made sure that the documentation was already there.
    Political considerations (or more accurately who your mates are) should not be taken into account when choosing who does a non executive post, especially for something that's damn difficult to do.
    If you are going to veto somebody having the position, you can't complain that somebody has been vetoed from having a login. What you can do instead is to go to the school playground when it's not busy; I think Sunday morning is a good time.


    It would be better if the ICU created a chairperson, PRO, secretary, etc. accounts to post rather than an individuals name. But maybe that's a side issue.

    Mark wasn't willing to give CD a login, so he resigned. I think that is perfectly acceptable - he wasn't able to fulfil his duties so he resigned. The question remains, why were there 2 other admins who didn't give CD a login?

    I also note this issue was never a matter for the executive and wasn't discussed at any executive meeting (except Mark's removal).

    Lecale wrote: »
    In hindsight, previous executives should have made sure that the documentation was already there.

    I believe the last secretary requested handover documents for this exact reason. Mark Orr did create a handover document (along with other officers) from what I understand but the incoming executive (i.e. Pat's team) didn't use or respond or take information from this database of information. No point in having a handover document if you aren't going to read it or if you ignore it.


  • Options
    #46
    Lecale
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭Lecale


    Those are good points reunion, but maybe I might take issue with 1 of them. Given how much 90% of those running for exec hate each other, maybe for the official accounts you'll need the format: president2014-2015, secretary2015-2016 .


  • Options
    #47
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    Lecale wrote: »
    Those are good points reunion, but maybe I might take issue with 1 of them. Given how much 90% of those running for exec hate each other, maybe for the official accounts you'll need the format: president2014-2015, secretary2015-2016 .

    I don't think so. Maybe the tag 2014-15 season or something. The minutes will say who was chair or secretary during that term but again, this is a side issue. Not something to consider atm.


    On a side mod note: I can confirm this is indeed Mark Orr (or a very sophisticated imposter).


  • Options
    #48
    anchor4208
    Registered Users Posts: 104 ✭✭anchor4208


    Chess_Coach wrote: »
    I think that Sanichi should publish it in full . But I doubt he or she will.

    It seems to me that Aontas report is full of inaccuracies, and is most likely defamatory. Under those circumstances, why on Earth would Mark publish it. The whole point behind our defamation laws is to prevent lies and misinformation being published about someone, so it would be stupid for Mark Orr to defame himself.
    A far cleverer strategy would be to wait for the current ICU exec to publish the report, and then sue the person who releases it.
    Of course, if the ICU are 100% certain that every allegation in the report is true, then what are they waiting for?


  • Options
    #49
    rob51
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭rob51


    anchor4208 wrote: »
    It seems to me that Aontas report is full of inaccuracies, and is most likely defamatory.

    An interesting thing about the Aontas report is that no one has ever said who actually created it. It keeps being referred to as if it was done by some IT consultancy but I suspect it wasn't.


  • Options
    #50
    pawnpusher
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭pawnpusher


    spaceHopper wrote: »
    Ok I've nothing to do with chess somehow the first post caught my eye and i got hooked on this train crash. You stood down even though you build the web site you did it for irish chess and they are the owners of the site. When they asked you for the password you had no right to with hold it. From then on you painted your self as a crank.

    in his opening paragraph he mentions that the websites were his babies... so if he was the father ...who was the mother? or was he the mommy? (this is humour ...reunion might take offence)

    but your synopsis is accurate space hopper..... His feelings of betrayal and anger stem from his misguided sense of ownership of the ICU website. It will be good to understand why he conveniently omitted to explain why he received the ban.... *snip*


  • Options
    #51
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    pawnpusher wrote: »
    but your synopsis is accurate space hopper..... His feelings of betrayal and anger stem from his misguided sense of ownership of the ICU website. It will be good to understand why he conveniently omitted to explain why he received the ban.... *snip*

    The ICU omitted to explain why Mark received a ban. Mark didn't ban himself, the ICU banned a HLM in secret. They have a ton of explaining to do.

    *Mod note* There is no proof AT ALL that Mark could read or has read any emails then ones he was requested to read. Unless you are providing proof to back up your statements, I will be providing a ban.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    pawnpusher
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭pawnpusher


    *snip*


  • Options
    #53
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    That is not hearsay
    You know that that's actually the definition of hearsay, right?
    You are literally saying you heard someone else say something.


  • Options
    #54
    reunion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭reunion


    pawnpusher wrote: »
    *snip*

    *mod note* If you want to post that you've read the report, PM me or another mod and verify your identity which should either indicate you are on the executive or you must indicate how you read the report. Or post proof. Mark doesn't have to come on here to deny false claims, you have to proof these claims.


  • Options
    #55
    ComDubh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭ComDubh


    Mark Orr developed and operated a sophisticated ratings system and web site for a period of over 10 years. This would have taken a vast amount of time and effort on his part. ICU committees came and went, but Mark continued to run the systems and improved them year in year out. Like other administrators who work away in the background, he is an unsung hero of Irish chess.

    Then Fitzsimons&Co. got elected and Mark got banned for 5 years. Go figure.

    It's pretty obvious that the ICU won't publish the 'Aontas report' because it is both unprofessional and libelous.


  • Options
    #56
    Pete Morriss
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Pete Morriss


    ComDubh wrote: »
    It's pretty obvious that the ICU won't publish the 'Aontas report' because it is both unprofessional and libelous.

    But somebody seems to have made it available to an anonymous poster to attempt to make (alleged) selective quotations from it to support the executive's decision. One can assume that person wasn't Mark, so must have been a member of the executive. (Unless pawnpusher is just fabricating all of this, of course - but it would only take a one line post from one of the executive members who post here to establish that.) One hopes that there is currently a fevered scramble within the executive to discover who the leaker is and discipline them; but don't hold your breath.


  • Options
    #57
    HaraldSchmidt
    Registered Users Posts: 55 ✭✭HaraldSchmidt


    Sparks wrote: »
    So same question for the third time, how does anyone know what the password was when they're normally put through a one-way encryption?

    The password was only used to do FTP uploads of pgn and Flash PGN Player files from live tournaments. It could also be used to upload PDF files, for later download by visitors to the site.


  • Options
    #58
    Sparks
    Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    HaraldSchmidt wrote: »
    The password was only used to do FTP uploads of pgn and Flash PGN Player files from live tournaments. It could also be used to upload PDF files, for later download by visitors to the site.
    Okay, but again, that doesn't answer the question. If it was an FTP server password, the FTP server would do the encryption. You couldn't just read the password off the disk, even as the admin.


  • Options
    #59
    pawnpusher
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭pawnpusher


    Pete Morriss wrote: »
    But somebody seems to have made it available to an anonymous poster to attempt to make (alleged) selective quotations from it to support the executive's decision. One can assume that person wasn't Mark, so must have been a member of the executive. (Unless pawnpusher is just fabricating all of this, of course - but it would only take a one line post from one of the executive members who post here to establish that.) One hopes that there is currently a fevered scramble within the executive to discover who the leaker is and discipline them; but don't hold your breath.

    patience young grasshopper

    Colors blind; Sound deafens; Beauty beguiles; the enemy of stillness is desire. Eliminate desire, and the truth will become clear


  • Options
    #60
    pawnpusher
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 17 ✭pawnpusher


    reunion wrote: »
    *mod note* If you want to post that you've read the report, PM me or another mod and verify your identity which should either indicate you are on the executive or you must indicate how you read the report. Or post proof. Mark doesn't have to come on here to deny false claims, you have to proof these claims.

    *snip*

    pawnpusher note: I see on another blog an explanation as to a possible reason the Aontas report is not yet in the public domain...to avoid publically humiliating the offender?....(it is very detailed, factual, lengthy and damning)(I think would be there would be a huge public outcry for such a misuse of trust...that's just my opinion).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Lecale
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭Lecale


    *snip*
    As for Aontas, maybe you can use the freedom of information act to access it, rather than speculate on what is in it. Once we see what is written in it, then we can discuss whether or not it is true.


Advertisement