| |
Main
Date: 20 May 2007 21:26:08
From: samsloan
Subject: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
I am in Denver, CO awaiting a change of planes. I am taking a few
minutes to report some highlights of the meeting just concluded.
Of utmost interest to this group, the Executive Board voted NOT to
accept the resignation of Terry Winchester from the Forum Oversight
Committee and voted NOT to accept the resignation of Grant Perks as
chairman of the Audit Committee. Thus Mr. Winchester and Mr. Perks are
required to hold those positions for the rest of their lives.
Bill Hall presented a budget which showed a loss for ficsal 2007-2008
of $105, 973. Fortunately, Bill Goichberg saved the day by changing
the numbers to report a surplus of $50,027.
At a meeting of the USCF Executive Board on May 19-20 in Stillwater,
Oklahoma, it was reported to the board that Susan Polgar had violated
the trade name rights to two major chess events, by holding the "Susan
Polgar National Open Chess Championship for Girls" and the Susan
Polgar World Open Chess Championship for Girls" in violation of the
rights to hold events by similar namees by the USCF. It was also
reported that Susan Polgar is negotiating to move the Denker
Tournament of High School Champions to Lubock, Texas although she does
not hold the rights to that event.
At a meeting of the USCF Executive Board on May 19-20, 2007 Sloan
advocated an immediate reduction of personell costs of $80,000 but
this was rejected by the board. Sloan did succeed in having a proposed
raise for all employeed of 3.2% cancelled.
Sam Sloan
|
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2007 07:53:14
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
[quote="SteveTN"]You failed to address this point.
[b]
Sam Sloan first brought up the post, expressing the opinion that it
should not have been removed.[/b]
You didn't see any ethical problems with an opponent of Truong/Polgar
bringing up the topic of this post that was extremely negative toward
Sloan's opponents? Is that correct?
And you did not see any problems with a political member of a
political body discussing the disposition of a post negative to the
opponents of at least two members running for re-election and that
post's disposition by a non-political body?[/quote]
Your point is invalid because I have consistently advocated that ALL
posts should be restored and none should be removed, other than ads
for Viagra and other purely commercial postings.
I used Jerry Hanken's posting as an example because he is a political
opponent and is campaigning actively against me, so I could not
possibly be biased.
Otherwise, I would have brought up Harry Payne's thread which is
perhaps a better example of the problem and still has not been
restored.
Also, as proof that I am not in favor of censorship, you, as SteveTN,
have posted hundreds of attacks on me on my FIDE-chess Yahoo Group and
I have removed or moderated none of them. Phil Innes is attacking me
today and almost every day recently and I am not moderating him. Even
Paul Truong has often posted there under various names and I have
never moderated him either.
Over the past five years since 2002 no posting has ever been removed
from my group except for commercial spam and postings by the one
banned user.
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2007 15:45:16
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
Also, as proof that I am not in favor of censorship, you, as SteveTN,
have posted hundreds of attacks on me on my FIDE-chess Yahoo Group and
I have removed or moderated none of them. Phil Innes is attacking me
today and almost every day recently and I am not moderating him. Even
Paul Truong has often posted here under various names and I have never
moderated him either.
**Sam Sloan continues to talk about himself, except of course, not with
anyone else - he is talking about himself with himself. He views questions
from other people about his own behavior as 'attacks', while, without any
irony, continues to pose questions about other people with such supposition
:: fact ratio, as would make an 8 year old fall down in helpless lhter.
**What is attacked, if that must be the term, is the level of interrogation
Sam Sloan offers to any subject that is not entirely his own, and which is
often so daft on its face as to be wince-making.
**Just to maintain some semblance of coherence in Sam Sloan's ever changing
attention, in this instance, it is not WHO should speak, as a matter of
'free-speech', but HOW any speech is conducted, which is instead a matter of
'responsible' speech.
**It is not possible to actually discuss this matter with Sam Sloan, since
he is by his behavior incapable of figuring out the difference, and such
heady adult stuff for him has to be deposed here as an attack, or banned
outright. Neither does Sam Sloan agree with the rest of the board that this
is any issue for USCF, and he ignores them too, voting the other way.
Over the past five years since 2002 no posting has ever been removed
from my group except for commercial spam and postings by the one
banned user.
**Being of course, Rob Mitchell, who impartially defended Sam Sloan's
Wikipedia contributions, but a month later when the subject matter was not
convenient to Sam Sloan [questions about Sam Sloan's behavior!] was excised
from this group by Sam Sloan; whose idea of fair play is hereby demonstrated
to be like this:-
a) Sam Sloan raised the objection himself
b) He prosecuted the subject himself, using as his case such fatuous logic
that he didn't know which Mitchell was writing here - and also denying that
the same Mitchell had called him and e-mailed him
c) He judged the process of interrogation himself asking not one other
opinion from any poster
d) He acted as Jury too, and he voted the result all by himself
e) As Judge again, he then condemned said Mitchell to exile from Fide Chess
Mr. Sloan needs to understand that rhetoric is advocacy for whatever point
you wish to draw other's attention to, but philosophy is really a study of
not what you say, but what you do. Mr. Sloan does not even deny the (a)
through (e) above is what he did. He simply ignores the fact that /he/ did
so, since what is wrong about it? What he thinks will impress anyone else
after that little routine is between him and Santa.
Phil Innes
Vermont
--------
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 22 May 2007 12:28:22
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
On May 22, 3:47 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> [quote="rfeditor"]2) Leaving aside the merits of the Denker proposal
> (a complicated question, clearly too complicated for Sam), there is
> some reason to believe that it was[i] initiated[/i] by the Denker
> Committee chairman. Is Sam prepared to take on a more formidable
> opponent, like the Scholastic Council?
>
> John Hillary[/quote]
>
> The Denker Committee Chairman was appointed by the USCF Board, which
> includes me.
>
> We can replace him any time we want and possibly will replace him,
> unless this matter is straightened out.
>
> Sam Sloan
Who is the organizer for the US Open?
|
| |
Date: 22 May 2007 05:40:14
From: Ambassador
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
On May 21, 10:16 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> If Susan Polgar wants to organize her own tournament in Lubbock, Texas
> and call it the "Susan Polgar Tournament of High School Champions" and
> award scholarships to Texas Tech University, everybody will applaud.
> Nobody will object.
>
> However, what she is trying to do here is taking a long established
> tournament, the Denker Tournament of High School Championships,
> grabbing it away from the USCF and converting it into a Polgar
> tournament.
>
> If Arnold Denker were alive today, he would be appalled. He would
> never stand for this.
>
> Similarly, by holding a "Susan Polgar World Open" and a "Susan Polgar
> National Open" she is infringing on the real World Open and the real
> National Open.
>
> It is feared that next she will be trying to take over the big USCF
> scholastic events. For example, she could take the National Elementary
> Championship and call it the Susan Polgar National Elementary
> Championship.
>
> And, she has not even been elected yet. Imagine what havoc she will
> cause if she actually gets elected and is still doing these things?
>
> Sam Sloan
If Susan Polgar wants to organize her own tournament in Lubbock,
Texas
and call it the "Susan Polgar Tournament of High School Champions"
and
award scholarships to Texas Tech University, everybody will applaud.
Nobody will object.
I object you dumb ass. I'll run her out of any public school, and she
can take her perverted game (chess) back to hungry.
You are full of shit, Sloan.
Marcus Roberts
|
| |
Date: 22 May 2007 01:47:15
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
[quote="rfeditor"]2) Leaving aside the merits of the Denker proposal
(a complicated question, clearly too complicated for Sam), there is
some reason to believe that it was[i] initiated[/i] by the Denker
Committee chairman. Is Sam prepared to take on a more formidable
opponent, like the Scholastic Council?
John Hillary[/quote]
The Denker Committee Chairman was appointed by the USCF Board, which
includes me.
We can replace him any time we want and possibly will replace him,
unless this matter is straightened out.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 21 May 2007 21:34:10
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
On May 21, 9:16 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> If Susan Polgar wants to organize her own tournament in Lubbock, Texas
> and call it the "Susan Polgar Tournament of High School Champions" and
> award scholarships to Texas Tech University, everybody will applaud.
> Nobody will object.
>
> However, what she is trying to do here is taking a long established
> tournament, the Denker Tournament of High School Championships,
> grabbing it away from the USCF and converting it into a Polgar
> tournament.
Sam I do not follow your leaps in logic. She was asked by members of
the Denker family to do this so as to associate it more closely with
SPICE.
> If Arnold Denker were alive today, he would be appalled. He would
> never stand for this.
Maybe, maybe not. I think his family is better suited to know what was
on his mind.
> Similarly, by holding a "Susan Polgar World Open" and a "Susan Polgar
> National Open" she is infringing on the real World Open and the real
> National Open.
No.
> It is feared that next she will be trying to take over the big USCF
> scholastic events. For example, she could take the National Elementary
> Championship and call it the Susan Polgar National Elementary
> Championship.
Who fears it Sam?
> And, she has not even been elected yet. Imagine what havoc she will
> cause if she actually gets elected and is still doing these things?
>
> Sam Sloan
Yeah? Something might actually get done and that would make others
really look bad,wouldn't it?
Rob
|
| |
Date: 21 May 2007 20:16:29
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
If Susan Polgar wants to organize her own tournament in Lubbock, Texas
and call it the "Susan Polgar Tournament of High School Champions" and
award scholarships to Texas Tech University, everybody will applaud.
Nobody will object.
However, what she is trying to do here is taking a long established
tournament, the Denker Tournament of High School Championships,
grabbing it away from the USCF and converting it into a Polgar
tournament.
If Arnold Denker were alive today, he would be appalled. He would
never stand for this.
Similarly, by holding a "Susan Polgar World Open" and a "Susan Polgar
National Open" she is infringing on the real World Open and the real
National Open.
It is feared that next she will be trying to take over the big USCF
scholastic events. For example, she could take the National Elementary
Championship and call it the Susan Polgar National Elementary
Championship.
And, she has not even been elected yet. Imagine what havoc she will
cause if she actually gets elected and is still doing these things?
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 22 May 2007 12:22:18
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
"samsloan" <samhsloan@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1179803789.266594.118090@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> If Susan Polgar wants to organize her own tournament in Lubbock, Texas
> and call it the "Susan Polgar Tournament of High School Champions" and
> award scholarships to Texas Tech University, everybody will applaud.
> Nobody will object.
>
> However, what she is trying to do here is taking a long established
> tournament, the Denker Tournament of High School Championships,
> grabbing it away from the USCF and converting it into a Polgar
> tournament.
>
> If Arnold Denker were alive today, he would be appalled. He would
> never stand for this.
O, ARNOLD, I HARDLY KNEW YE
Good Grief! I didn't know Arnold /very/ well, but he liked to write to me,
quite often out of the blue and with his own volunteered emphasis, so I
think I knew him /enough/.
What he would want, as far as I can measure, is for some chess to be played,
and since in this instance the issues are
(a) the Denker name is not to removed or changed
(b) that the best location for continuation of the Denker is at issue, and
(c) the Denker approached Paul Truong to investigate location, not the other
way around
(d) that USCF has itself [!] claimed to 'own' the Denker [!] while
(e) failing to fund it so that other than rich kids can attend, and
(f) can't match other offers that would /substantially/ fund the Denker so
that
(g) the best young players could take part
Well... I think I have a fair sense of what Arnold would like with his own
bequest to the nation!
And clearly, what anyone would like is not always achieveable, but the art
of business management is the ability to negotiate the real world of the
possible - here are the options:-
Here we seem to have two levels of possibility; a better than current one,
matched against a theoretical and declining one.
---
A GOOD DEBATE?
The rest of this is about ownership and control, and chess-as-property, not
an address to what benefits the kids or public exposure to the game - which
many people think is why USCF was established. On that topic, not a word!
It would be fair to compare the two - and that at least would provide a good
debate.
The fiddle-faddle argument about names is brought to you by the same outfit
who allied the Berry name to the national championship ~ that, apparently,
is not any issue, even though the national championship is still
scandalously underfunded - how IRONIC that funding Scholastic levels
championships with the Denker and the Polgar - with AS MUCH - money should
be resented!
This is nothing to do with Mr. Berry as a sponsor, nor is it any criticism
of him. Why should other sponsors of chess not have their names attached to
events? They do everywhere else in the world, even unto Aeroflot. Though
sometimes the name is second to the title... this is all a red herring! A
shoal of 'em!
---
When such spectacularly spun commentary emerges, without any real
comparision to what USCF can provide, what we can sensily debate is a
COMPARISON. And as with issues of public decency of expression, we can do
that on the basis of Who Benefits or Who is Affronted - which is to say
about the Denker - which is better from the perspective of the...
PARTICIPANTS RIGHTS
If USCF politicos cannot compete at this level of dialog and management
praxis to promote the best foundation for the future of chess in this
country as vested in its young players, they should give it up!
But resenting people who can do better is nothing other than whining about
something lost and for which the nation no longer invests its confidence in
USCF. That 'vote' already seems in, and people have voted with their feet,
and walked away from the mess of control-intrigues which continue,
apparently indifferent to what further us.
Phil Innes
> Similarly, by holding a "Susan Polgar World Open" and a "Susan Polgar
> National Open" she is infringing on the real World Open and the real
> National Open.
>
> It is feared that next she will be trying to take over the big USCF
> scholastic events. For example, she could take the National Elementary
> Championship and call it the Susan Polgar National Elementary
> Championship.
>
> And, she has not even been elected yet. Imagine what havoc she will
> cause if she actually gets elected and is still doing these things?
>
> Sam Sloan
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2007 11:31:56
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
PROPERTIES DISCUSSED
> Good post, Gerry (you lurker, you!)
>
> You have it 99 percent right -- all except that "free entry to the US
> Open" part. There is small stipend to each player for completing the
> event (which I suppose might equal the EFs of prior US Opens, when the EF
> was under $100).
>
> If I were a player in the Denker...why would I want to go to a separate
> location...when I could lobby my folks to take me to a much larger chess
> festival (US Open)?
> Your post lays out some really good points:
>
> 1. The Denker event was always conceived as being part of the US Open
>
> 2. It has been held that way for 2 decades and is cost-effective.
What it was, and what it is now, is very open to question and comparison!
And cost-effective means, of course, for USCF, not the players.
> 3. It is undeniably a USCF property -- as administered by USCF under
> Arnold's guiding hand prior to his passing
>
> There is no gain for USCF to allow the event to be separated from the US
> Open..and I say that as someone who used to attend to the details of the
> event.
PERCENTAGES, COMPARED
And there you have it! The subject is completely divorced from its
organisational function. Not a single word from either Gerry Dullea, to whom
Eric Johnson is praising, or the Delegate himself, on what best supports the
chess player.
100% of these messages are about what is best for USCF.
0% of comments have considered why the Denker want to investigate anything!
> From my vantage point, this is another example of a weak USCF board
> allowing committees to have too much power in the system. Yes, committees
> are good for attending to details. But without a strong hand over
> them...you get the sense that eventually the longstanding committee chairs
> think they have complete say over their areas.
WHO'S RANTING?
Eric, Mr. Marketing, Johnson has now subscribed an investigation to
'complete say'. You would almost think that it was Eric and Gerry here who
wanted 'complete say', no? As if they had absolutely no curiosity why an
investigation is taking place, and somehow investigations of the quality of
the Denker = complete control.
> Someone on the board needs to alert the Denker committee that this
> "exploratory move" is not in the best interests of the USCF (owner of the
> property)...and that this is true regardless of how much time and money
> others have invested in the property up to now.
QUALITY CONTROL PROBLEM
I agree that someone on the board needs to alert Denker committee to these
opinions.
There is absolutely no way that Arnold could have joined this discussion
without taking the perspective of the chess player into account - and
indeed - is that not the central issue here?
Who is even going to look at it?
Some people think that if you do own things, then there is a concommitant
level of responsibility that goes with it. If there /is/ a current problem,
who is going to 'own' that? ;))))
WE OWN IT!
The quality of the experience of the players is in question for everyone
except USCF right-or-wrong we-own-it, types, which is so infamous a form of
argument, it does not deserve response, since the WELFARE of those taking
part is not owned as a topic even worth noting!
Something is wrong, and you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Johnson?
Phil Innes
Vermont
> ECJ
>
|
| | |
Date: 21 May 2007 20:32:14
From: Paul Rubin
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
samsloan <samhsloan@gmail.com > writes:
> However, what she is trying to do here is taking a long established
> tournament, the Denker Tournament of High School Championships,
> grabbing it away from the USCF and converting it into a Polgar
> tournament.
Maybe she will do a better job with it than the USelessCF has done.
> If Arnold Denker were alive today, he would be appalled. He would
> never stand for this.
Then again maybe he would applaud.
> Similarly, by holding a "Susan Polgar World Open" and a "Susan Polgar
> National Open" she is infringing on the real World Open and the real
> National Open.
What does that have to do with the USCF? The existing (chess) World
Open is a CCA event. Of course there's also a golf World Open and
a squash World Open, so why not a Susan Polgar World Open?
> It is feared that next she will be trying to take over the big USCF
> scholastic events. For example, she could take the National Elementary
> Championship and call it the Susan Polgar National Elementary
> Championship.
Sounds like a good plan.
> And, she has not even been elected yet. Imagine what havoc she will
> cause if she actually gets elected and is still doing these things?
I don't understand why she's even running. She's in a perfect
position to kick the USCF's ass from the outside and pretty much
replace it, so she should just do that instead of getting herself
tangled up with USCF's paralyzing bureaucracy.
|
| |
Date: 21 May 2007 13:43:50
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
[quote="jacklemoine"]I'll interrupt these attacks on Paul and Susan's
handling of the Denker for a few facts.
1) UTD declined to sponsor scholarships citing that the USCF
disrespected them and violated their agreement. The Denker was left
with no scholarships.[/quote]
This is absolutely not true. More fabrications by Jack LeMoine.
The UTD Chess Program is now run by Dr. Stallings. Tim Redman is no
longer directly involved. Tim Redman introduced Dr. Stallings to me as
his replacement at the US Amateur Team East Championship in Parsippany
NJ. I had lunch with Dr. Redman at that time. (This was the same event
where I received an award for "Shining Light on the USCF".)
Dr. Stallings met with me and the rest of the board for about one hour
yesterday, May 20. He said that the dropping of the scholarships this
year had nothing to do with unhappiness with the USCF. It was an
internal matter within UTD. He said that the scholarships might be
reinstated next year.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 20 May 2007 23:18:23
From: Paul Rubin
Subject: Re: Highlights of the USCF Board Meeting May 19-20, 2007
|
samsloan <samhsloan@gmail.com > writes:
> At a meeting of the USCF Executive Board on May 19-20 in Stillwater,
> Oklahoma, it was reported to the board that Susan Polgar had violated
> the trade name rights to two major chess events, by holding the "Susan
> Polgar National Open Chess Championship for Girls" and the Susan
> Polgar World Open Chess Championship for Girls" in violation of the
> rights to hold events by similar namees by the USCF.
USCF holds rights to Susan Polgar's name?!
> It was also reported that Susan Polgar is negotiating to move the
> Denker Tournament of High School Champions to Lubock, Texas although
> she does not hold the rights to that event.
That sounds logical: if she wants the tournament moved and doesn't
hold the rights to it, of course she'd have to suggest the idea to
whoever has the rights, make proposals and incentive offers, all the
stuff that we call negotiation. If she held the rights rights and
wanted the event moved, she could just move it without having to
negotiate with anyone. So I don't see what point Sam is trying to
> make.
> At a meeting of the USCF Executive Board on May 19-20, 2007 Sloan
> advocated an immediate reduction of personell costs of $80,000 but
> this was rejected by the board.
I think this says that Sam wanted to fire Bill Hall without it
occurring to Sam that a replacement for Bill would then be needed.
|
|
