AGM nominees

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.:)

cdeb

MCU membership stuff split to here

RoundTower

Statements from Shane Sheedy and Rory Delaney on the campaign site. A fantastically experienced chess administrator, and the treasurer of an investment fund.

RoundTower

Gerry Graham has also written an election statement. Gerry brings his expertise organising the best-run tournaments in the country as well as his previous experience in serving on the ICU Executive in several different roles. Most recently he was re-affirmed by the Munster Chess Union to be Munster's representative on the committee.

reunion

RoundTower wrote: »

Most recently he was re-affirmed as the MCU members' overwhelming choice to represent Munster on the committee.

This is untrue he was not the MCU members' choice (overwhelming or not) - the MCU rep is not a position to be voted on. The MCU rep is chosen by the MCU committee - as the MCU rep's purpose is to report to the MCU and express MCU's views on the ICU committee.

He could however be the MCU committee's overwhelming choice (and I think he would be) but only someone on the MCU executive committee could say that.

RoundTower

thanks, I've edited the post to clarify that.

Mustafa Chess

RoundTower wrote: »

Gerry Graham has also written an election statement. Gerry brings his expertise organising the best-run tournaments in the country as well as his previous experience in serving on the ICU Executive in several different roles. Most recently he was re-affirmed by the Munster Chess Union to be Munster's representative on the committee.

Fairy tales are always amusing to read. One could write a book or two laying bare the baloney, bluster on offer here but the omissions alone are telling enough.

He is not a member of the executive anymore. The ICU have no confidence in this person to be on the committee. if the MCU would have wanted their delegate to be a member of the committee then they could and should have respected the ICU and appointed a new delegate. It is their right alone to appoint whomever they wish, AS IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE ICU EXECUTIVE TO REJECT SUCH A DELEGATE. Instead it has all gone along such predictable lines in which the appearance that Munster chess is a fiefdom of Gerry Graham and the MCU sub servant to his wishes has considerable validity.

People act like his minions and stooges but they are dragging down chess in Munster and doing great damage to the best interests of ICU members in Munster.

Likewise, the group attempt to grab power and positions in the ICU executive not for the benefit of the organization or it's members is pretty clear for those who wish to see things as they really are, and the dangers this presents are grave.

Put simply, if people like what they see in here then they can figure out how things would be done under a regime that doubtless will conduct it's affairs in the same or similar fashion as is done here. If people are happy with that then they should indeed vote for this so called "ticket" and not complain later when things go backwards and belly up and we will then see who is accountable.

Amazing how the amount of ignorance and misinformation gets recycled here.

General theme seems to be that that people who don't know much of anything about all a manner of things keep spouting nonsense and actually think that anybody in any position of responsibility or authority would take their cue from anything wrote here by anybody.

In reality people are so badly informed and manipulated that it is more akin to a comedy and circus. Mob rule and mob mentality will not be allowed to prevail regardless.

Pete Morriss

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

AS IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE ICU EXECUTIVE TO REJECT SUCH A DELEGATE.

Mustafa Chess should try reading the ICU Constitution: there is no such right.

I have read both the ICU Chairperson's letter to the MCU (which has been widely leaked by a supporter of the current Executive) and Gerry Graham's response, and it is clear that what were involved here were, at most, the sort of minor misunderstandings that often occur on any committee and which could easily have been resolved quietly by the ICU Chairperson if he had been minded to do so. He was not so minded, but preferred to find an excuse to create a confrontation with the Munster delegate and the Munster Chess Union in general. The hatred displayed in Mustafa Chess's post here indicates the mood that has been dominant on the Executive this year; the members have a chance at the AGM next month to ensure that this mood of hatred and confrontation continues no longer.

brilliantboy

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

People act like his minions and stooges but they are dragging down chess in Munster and doing great damage to the best interests of ICU members in Munster.

As an ICU member in Munster I feel that chess in Munster is heading in absolutely the right direction, thriving even, and anyone I spoke to in Ennis this past weekend was of the same opinion. And that is despite the best attempts of the current ICU executive to obstruct and interfere in the running of many local tournaments.

reunion

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

He is not a member of the executive anymore. The ICU have no confidence in this person to be on the committee. if the MCU would have wanted their delegate to be a member of the committee then they could and should have respected the ICU and appointed a new delegate. It is their right alone to appoint whomever they wish, AS IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE ICU EXECUTIVE TO REJECT SUCH A DELEGATE.

Funny, I don't see that in the constitution that the executive can reject a delegate.

ICU constitution wrote:

These bodies are affiilated to the Union and have a right of representation on its Executive

Whether or not the ICU approved of Gerry as the MCU rep, the MCU rep was removed without notice which means the MCU did not have representation on the executive. THAT is the an insult to every provincial union in the country and to the ICU constitution.

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

Instead it has all gone along such predictable lines in which the appearance that Munster chess is a fiefdom of Gerry Graham and the MCU sub servant to his wishes has considerable validity.

People act like his minions and stooges but they are dragging down chess in Munster and doing great damage to the best interests of ICU members in Munster.

The MCU members voted unanimously in favour to demand an apology from the ICU over this matter. That is the current best interests of ICU members in Munster. They also voted that the MCU exec could choose their rep. The ICU members in Munster did NOT vote that their rep had to be approved by the ICU executive.

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

Likewise, the group attempt to grab power and positions in the ICU executive not for the benefit of the organization or it's members is pretty clear for those who wish to see things as they really are, and the dangers this presents are grave.

What dangers would that be? Can you provide proof? How does an election hinder the ICU? How are the dangers "grave"?

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

Put simply, if people like what they see in here then they can figure out how things would be done under a regime that doubtless will conduct it's affairs in the same or similar fashion as is done here. If people are happy with that then they should indeed vote for this so called "ticket" and not complain later when things go backwards and belly up and we will then see who is accountable.

Imagine, conduct under clear rules and an unbiased reporting facility. That would be a very impressive feature of an ICU executive.

Or we can have poorly done accounts, missing officer reports, life memberships revoked and provincial unions without representation. Oh but they do prize draws - though we never found out who won the last thing..

SlowCoach

Hi, that was my fault I should have posted the result.
The copy of Chessbase was won by Des Martin of Naomh Barrog chess club. The draw was conducted during the AGM of Elm Mount chess club.

NubieOne

Someone told me that Mustafa Chess, who posted earlier on this thread, is actually a current member of the ICU executive. I'm not trying to identify the individual here, but verify that this is true. Does anyone know if it is?

I have to say, as a recently interested party in the election rather than the game itself, if this is true, his post reflects very badly on the current executive's knowledge of their own constitution. I've just read the document and as Reunion and others have said, it does not grant the executive the right to "veto" a province's choice of delegate. For a sitting member of the executive publish this (in capitals, no less) is staggeringly poor politics.

My only other comment is that Mustafa Chess seems to be a little over fond of adjectives for my liking !

Sparks

NubieOne wrote: »

Someone told me that Mustafa Chess, who posted earlier on this thread, is actually a current member of the ICU executive. I'm not trying to identify the individual here, but verify that this is true. Does anyone know if it is?

CMod Note: Please note the Terms of Use of boards.ie:

You agree, through use of this service, NOT to use boards.ie to:
...

• identify or speculate as to the identity of any anonymous or pseudonymous user

rob51

Ahh a breath of fresh air to clear away the cobwebs! Crisp analytical fact based logic not the opinion laden drivel posted by most members on this board. Yes indeed Mustafa is back and that must have been a weight off his mind,

Mustafa Chess wrote: »

Fairy tales are always amusing to read. One could write a book or two laying bare the baloney, bluster on offer here but the omissions alone are telling enough.

Likewise, the group attempt to grab power and positions in the ICU executive not for the benefit of the organization or it's members is pretty clear for those who wish to see things as they really are, and the dangers this presents are grave.

In reality people are so badly informed and manipulated that it is more akin to a comedy and circus. Mob rule and mob mentality will not be allowed to prevail regardless.

Could you just clear up one thing for me please? Is this hijack attempt in any way connected to the forthcoming ICU elections where, appallingly, minions and serfs (provided they are ICU members) can nominate and vote for candidates of their choice for next years Executive? I know this can be a very scary experience for the current officers but at least its only one day per year.

Mob rule? Yes indeed, the only difference between mob rule and democracy is that in the latter case the mob follows the rules and uses biros. Inexplicably, in both cases the majority are apparently allowed to have their way.

Strange happenings indeed. Perhaps having the AGM in October so close to Halloween is the problem ..... :eek:

RoundTower

Alex Baburin has written about why he is standing for Vice Chairman.

RoundTower

Carl Jackson has added a piece about how he would dare to improve the role of ICU Public Relations Officer.

Tim Harding

Have you a candidate for Secretary lined up yet?

reunion

Tim Harding wrote: »

Have you a candidate for Secretary lined up yet?

They had, but the ICU rejected their candidate. Maybe he might be willing to stand at the AGM?