If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
$120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
$120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
Just to pass on some of the sentences said in the latest article on the website Spraggett on chess - to our discussion:
"The most remarkable aspect of the unaccounted for 120,000 dollars (over a two year period) is that AGM minutes and OCA records indicate that not a single serious question was ever raised about the Trillium money and what it was spent on...was the OCA Executive sleeping? (and with whom?)
This past week a perversely OCA-biased CFC Executive report into Mr. Thorvardsson's actions was released to the public. This report all but awards Mr. Thorvardsson a medal. (www.chesscanada.info/forum)"
:)
Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
In many aspects the OCA is simply highly ineffective in it's role, and ultimate responsibility for that has to sit with the president Chris Mallon. Of course, Chris was highly ineffective in his role as CFC president so I don't know why people expect him to suddenly develop some management competance now.
It's comedic actually hearing Chris ponder what on earth people expect him to do with respect to Trillium ( this is leadership ? ).
People might not like Barry's project but he did the legwork and the OCA has been incapable of getting that far as long as I have been aware of them. If Trillium is fed up well what has the OCA done to clear that up since ? What effort has the OCA made in any capacity to develop new revenue streams rather then just take in the member tax they are handed every year ?
Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
Given that we sat through a combined minimum of six hours of discussion about this issue at the last two AGMs I don't see how anyone could ever say it wasn't seriously discussed.
Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
I think the whole exercise brings into question the existance of the OCA. Chris in case you don't understand your role I would say specifically you have responsibilities in two areas :
1. Addressing the suggestions of unethical behaviour in your organization.
2. Managing the Trillium process which you seem far too content with to end badly.
With respect to number one, there are other situations that have come up that make a Trillium-like situation seem inevitable. For example,
when the kids went to Greece for WYCC the OCA decided to subsidize 2nd and 3rd place finishers at CYCC in the amount of $400 or $500.
However, even though it was a very small group the players were not informed officially, and only a portion of the players got money, including
a board member's son.
With respect to number two, the Trillium project was a pilot that was a welcome change from the OCA's usual lack of success addressing marketing and promotion of the game. This area is very important to the report card on the usefulness and success of the OCA as an organization. Now what we see is a complete void in this area again under your leadership. It seems maybe the Trillium project was less
about the OCA's efforts and more about Barry himself getting things done.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Wednesday, 23rd December, 2009, 06:19 PM.
1. Addressing the suggestions of unethical behaviour in your organization.
2. Managing the Trillium process which you seem far too content with to end badly.
1. I've stated flat-out that illegal behaviour occured - if not under the laws of Ontario and Canada, then at least under OCA by-laws. This seems obvious.
2. Trillium told Hal Bond they considered the matter closed. I chose to believe them.
Just to pass on some of the sentences said in the latest article on the website Spraggett on chess - to our discussion:
"The most remarkable aspect of the unaccounted for 120,000 dollars (over a two year period) is that AGM minutes and OCA records indicate that not a single serious question was ever raised about the Trillium money and what it was spent on...was the OCA Executive sleeping? (and with whom?)
This past week a perversely OCA-biased CFC Executive report into Mr. Thorvardsson's actions was released to the public. This report all but awards Mr. Thorvardsson a medal. (www.chesscanada.info/forum)"
:)
Kevin Spraggett has very good web site and I always enjoy reading it. As far as disappearance of $120K, we have a case of a single greedy person who hired himself and paid wages also to himself without informing anyone else. Now, what you recommend we should do about this?
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
During the course of the grant, the OCA executive ( less President Barry Thorvardson ) passed a motion of censure against Barry for his handling of the grant, and breach of the OCA Bylaw. But they did not apparently ask for his resignation at that time, because they had no one who was willing to take over as President.
Then after the grant had run, the OCA Governors passed a motion banning Barry from ever again holding an OCA office - a fairly strong censure.
The OCA Action Committee that investigated the Trillium Grant issue ( and the problems with the 2006 Can. Closed in which Barry was involved ) came up with little, and there has been general condemnation of the report as inadequate. Also, current OCA President, Chris Mallon, was always lukewarm at best re pursuing this matter at all, and has recently stated that he now considers it more or less closed.
I believe the members of the committee do not wish to reopen the matter - they feel they did what could be done. Trillium wants nothing more to do with this grant, and has refused to give the OCA any grant documentation, including the Thorvardson Final Grant Report, even though it was the OCA's grant. Thorvardson has said he gave all documents he had to OCA, and OCA denies receiving any, or at least any relevant documentation. If Barry has a copy of the final report, he is refusing now to provide it to the OCA.
Given this situation, the OCA has been stonewalled trying to obtain any documentation to evaluate Thorvardson's performance under the grant. Trillium is not even saying whether they are or are not happy with how the grant was handled - they had a meeting with VP Hal Bond at the time they had some questions, and we do not know whether they were satisfied with the explanations provided. Anyway, it appears they want this grant to just go away.
My opinion - though distasteful, and it was a very, very large grant for the OCA, it must be let go into the bins of history, as a bad OCA experience.
Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
Dear Chess Talk readers;
Spraggett's story is untruthful. My VP report below was filed for the 2008 OCA AGM. At the 2009 AGM Barry received a lifetime ban. Most recently he was replaced as a Chess Foundation Trustee.
How could this happen you may ask? The biggest deception tool in Barry's arsenal the story that "the best is yet to come". The York region grant was a pilot project which if successful had reasonable chances of rolling out province wide. There was also a second grant, based on Nevada tickets if I recall, which would be an indefinite annuity. Couple these promises of gold with a lack of forthrightness and an opportunity is created. Sad but true.
It's not clear to me what a second report was supposed to achieve. The Trillium folks told be point blank that they would not consider recovering the money.
OCA Vice President’s Report, 2007-2008
Before proceeding to the heart of my report, I would like to congratulate a number of Ontario players who have distinguished themselves over the board during the past year. Nikolay Noritsyn earned the IM title at the 2007 Canadian Championship, where Raja Panjwani and Michael Barron both earned their FM titles. Great job, lads! Yuanling Yuan continues to impress everyone and most recently scored an awesome 6.5/9 to take silver at the recent Pan Am Women’s Championship. I hope Yuanling can join the women’s Olympic team where she will gain some vital experience and help move Canada up the rankings.
Unfortunately, there have been very few positive developments within the OCA this past year. Most of my energies has been consumed with the issue of the now infamous Trillium grant to the OCA.
In August of 2007, while pursuing the matter of OCA rebates to the various leagues, I learned that more than 90% of the Trillium grant’s salary budget was paid directly to OCA President Barry Thorvardson. This is contrary to our constitution and contrary to Trillium regulations.
The appointment was made without notice to the OCA Executive. After consulting with the Board, I asked Barry to tender his resignation and he refused. OCA Secretary Mark Dutton was moving to BC, and my availability was reduced due to new CFC duties. Given the weakened state of the Executive, and the absence of an apparent successor for Barry, it was decided to censure the President for his actions and defer the matter to the AGM.
On May 9, 2008 I attended a two hour meeting in Toronto with President Thorvdarson at the request of Trillium Regional Co-ordinator John Pugsley and Inga Lubbock, who worked with Barry on the original application. Their concerns included alleged use of Trillium funds by the CFC, deliverables under the grant, and payment to an OCA board member for staffing costs.
Barry and I convinced the Trillium officials that none of the grant money was used by the CFC. Barry provided explanations for why the deliverables in York Region were less than expected. They questioned these explanations at some length before moving on.
We then discussed the staffing question. Both Pugsley and Lubbock were adamant that board members are ineligible for such funds. They would not have approved the grant had they known that such a move was contemplated. Ms. Lubbock further expressed disappointment that the grant did not result in employment for someone who resides in York Region. They also questioned the governance of the OCA and requested copies of the minutes of the meetings at which Barry was hired. Such minutes do not exist.
At this point I made it very clear that the OCA Executive had not approved Barry’s appointment, that it was discovered in August 2007, he had refused to resign when asked, that he had been censured by the Executive and that further actions were left to our AGM. The Trillium personnel accepted this answer and look forward to learning the outcome of our Annual Meeting. They advised that the file was “red flagged” for the staffing irregularity, and no further actions were contemplated by Trillium.
Among other things, our future success with Trillium will depend on a demonstrated improvement in OCA governance. While new chess projects are not necessarily doomed with respect to Trillium, it is inconceivable that Barry Thorvardson’s name will adorn a successful Trillium grant ever again.
Had Barry resigned as President AND been approved by the Executive to staff the Trillium grant, he would only be accountable to us for its deliverables. Sadly, neither of these critical steps was taken, and we must still hear from Barry exactly what work was performed in exchange for the $90,000 paid to him.
I file this report with great regret. Notwithstanding the Trillium grant, I believe that Barry has been an energetic, positive force in Ontario Chess and I thank him for his service. It is time for new leadership in the OCA and I wish the incoming Executive every success.
Respectfully submitted
Hal Bond
Vice President, Ontario Chess Association
Re: $120,000 disappears into thin air and no questions asked!
So there is action undertaken by the OCA after all. The actions were just not made public.
And as these matters remained "hidden", some entities created issues out of it. The public was not sufficiently informed of what was going on.
Whether Mr. Spragett's allegations were true or not, what is important is that Mr Spraggett brought out this matter to the public. And this is his main contribution to this issue.
As for Mr. Posylek, we appreciate the effort for bringing out this matter to chess talk. Even if the $ 120,000 is not accurate, Mr. Posulek gave us idea of the magnitude of this missing money.
Mr. Armstrong, thank you for your input on this matter.
Mr. Bond's further explanation of OCA actions and status of this issue is well appreciated. Mr. Bond's presentation of the VP Report provided evidence that OCAdid take actions after all, citing attempts to contain the damage.
For all chess governing bodies in Ontario, or Canada, there should be transparency and verifiability of their activities through its published reports.
Lastly, thanks to Mr. Spraggett, Mr. Posylek, Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Bond for addressing public concerns on this matter.
We continue to hope that "the best is yet to come".
Merry Christmas to all!!!!
Happy holidays to all!!!!
Last edited by Erwin Casareno; Thursday, 24th December, 2009, 03:50 PM.
Also, current OCA President, Chris Mallon, was always lukewarm at best re pursuing this matter at all, and has recently stated that he now considers it more or less closed.
Actually, I recently stated that I considered the matter effectively closed over a year ago .
Tweet
Comment