| |
Main
Date: 03 Jun 2007 03:27:11
From: samsloan
Subject: Polgar screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
The following has been posted on the Susan Polgar blogspot this
morning. It is at
http://uschess.blogspot.com/2007/06/call-for-peace-and-unity-for-sake-of.html
Since she re-posts much of what is here to her own blog, I see no
reason why we cannot re-post her words over to here:
Sunday, June 03, 2007
A call for peace and unity for the sake of chess
Since I announced my candidacy for the USCF Executive Board, my life
has been turned upside down. It is one thing I would not recommend my
worst enemy to do. I am being harassed, threatened, insulted and
attacked just about every single day. And that is a good day.
I would like to thank the countless of you who called me, emailed me
and posted supporting messages. I really appreciate it. This election
is not about me. Believe me, volunteering 4 years of my time to be
treated like a caged animal is not something anyone would look forward
to. But I made my decision to run because I had to. I had no choice. I
cannot stand looking in from the outside and see what is being done to
our sport. It is disheartening to me.
I have achieved everything I set out to do and more in chess. I could
walk away from this sport and be proud and content. But I cannot. I
owe it to chess, the sport that gave me so much in the past 34 years.
I owe it to all the people who have supported me over the years. I owe
it to the countless parents I met, people who sacrificed so much to
give valuable opportunities to their children. I owe it to the
thousands of players I faced or made acquaintance with over the years.
I owe it to my children as a chess Mom. I cannot leave seeing the
current state of the USCF. I will fight for its welfare and integrity
with every ounce of energy that I have.
I have been bombarded with calls, emails and posts in the past 24-48
hours from friends and supporters, expressing their anger and outraged
with the recent post card and email that they received from the USCF
President Bill Goichberg and Continental Chess Association. I
understand that the message was quite insulting and demeaning. It is
disappointing. I understand that every tactic is being used by some
people to win this election.
However, I urge all of you to show respect to Mr. Goichberg. He has
done a lot for US Chess and the USCF over the years. Hatred and
animosity will not help the USCF. It will only further divide the
membership and further weakens this federation. I ask you to rise
above them. We will address the issues while they deal with politics.
We have a strong vision while they are still seeking for the light at
the end of the tunnel. We will win because we are more qualified, more
passionate and more energetic, and not because we can scream louder or
destroy more.
If we do not do things differently, we would just be joining their
path of failure and destruction year after year. Let's show them our
voice with our votes and not insults. Let's unite and do the right
things for the sake of US Chess and the USCF. Thank you for your
support and thank you for doing the right things.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
Posted by Picasa
Labels: EB Election, USCF
posted by SusanPolgar @ 6/03/2007 02:59:00 AM 0 comments links to
this post
Saturday, June 02, 2007
The distasteful tactics
On a recent Alaska chess cruise I had the great pleasure of meeting
both GM Polgar and FM Truong. I was most impressed with their passion
for chess. On Friday June 1, I received a rather odd orange and black
postcard in the mail from Bill Goichberg that was quite derogatory
toward GM Polgar's and FM Truong's campaigns for the USCF Executive
Board, claiming that the 2 were running "negative" campaigns.
Several thoughts come to mind. For one, I'm not positive, but isn't it
a bit negative to say that others are negative? For another, who is
paying for these postcards - mailed at the "presorted first class
mail" rate! More to the point, why is someone going to such great
expense to attack 2 accomplished candidates and relegate them to the
"Other Candidates" section of the postcard, as if to trivialize them?
And when speaking to fellow chess players, isn't it customary to refer
to players by their earned titles?
Then too, who gave my USCF membership name and address for use in a
direct mail campaign, and do all candidates for office have access to
this list? Did all USCF members receive this same postcard? Forgetting
(if one can) the direct attack on 2 fine candidates, something
suspicious is afoot. Even a class B player like me can see one move
deep!
Posted by Jeff Leach, Frederick MD USA
Saturday, June 02, 2007 2:27:00 AM
Here are some of posts by the supporters of candidates endorsed by Mr.
Goichberg:
If I was Bill Goichberg, I would ban Susan Polgar from the USCF. We
don't need a woman in charge. It would be a tragedy if she and her
team win. What does she know about chess politics? Nothing. How can
she make deals with people who have been in the system for decades?
Does she want to change things because it's 2007? There's nothing
wrong with the USCF. Bill Goichberg, Sam Sloan, Joe Channing, Don
Schultz, Randy Hough and Beatriz Marinello are great board members. I
don't want to see any foreigner running this federation. This is my
country. I'm proud to serve my country and send those immigrants back
to where they came from. The USCF needs people like Stephen Jones, Joe
Lux, Don Schultz, Mike Goodall, Sam Sloan and Jim Berry. They're born
and raise in the USA and they know how things work.
Friday, June 01, 2007 3:52:00 PM
Reelect Don Schultz, Sam Sloan along with Joe Lux and Stephen Jones!
We don't need any foreigner running the USCF. They should go back to
to where they came from.The USCF was fine before she got here and it
will be fine after. No changes are needed.
Friday, June 01, 2007 1:36:00 PM
Go back to where you came from. Leave this board and the USCF alone.
We don't need a Hungarian running the show.
Friday, June 01, 2007 1:40:00 PM
|
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 15:18:35
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Polgar screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
Has anybody else noticed the irony in her posting this morning?
She writes an article entitled:
"A call for peace and unity for the sake of chess"
and then she proceeds to attack everybody who is not on her slate.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 09:49:11
From: Rob
Subject: re:Sloan's screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
On Jun 3, 10:26 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> http://uschess.blogspot.com/2007/06/call-for-peace-and-unity-for-sake...
>
> Susan has not posted a link from her own blogspot to "Rob Mitchell's"
> blogspot, where he makes the following claim:
>
> Rob
>
> * Age: 48
> * Gender: Male
> * Astrological Sign: Virgo
> * Zodiac Year: Dog
> * Occupation: Insurance Agent / Songwriter
> * Location: Nashville : Tennessee : United States
> * Wishlist
>
> About Me
>
> I am happily married to the most wonderful woman in the world
>
> Nice to hear that, but you know the rules, which are that all claims
> made must be subject to verification and proof.
>
> Therefore, to establish the validity of your claims, I will need to
> sleep with your wife.
>
> Surely you will not object. Why should you?
>
> By the way, does she do windows?
Are you sure it's really me? You have such a problem knowing who I
really am.
And why the sexual equilivancy of a persons worth or if they do
windows or would do meanial housework?
You views of women is obviously one that is both demeaning and sexist.
I relish the chance to meet you in person or over a chess board... oh,
but you are afraid to play me at the chessworld web site.
When will you answer questions about your use of children and women as
simply sexual objects?
Rob
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 20:47:29
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: re:Sloan's screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
Pete Tamburro, Officier of CJA, has writ:
>
> Ah, Mr. Innes...
>
> You are, as usual, beneath contempt, for the way you twist and spin
> things
> in your little missives (used that word for your benefit so you know how
> to
> spell it the next time)
Mr Tamburro refers us to the [L] missus, a message, that is intended to be
hurled, thrown or ejected, and likes his American spelling. Why I am beneath
his contempt, beyond his parochial spelling is hereforth displayed:-
> to simply create reactions of an emotional nature from
> your intended targets. So, I will explain this as simply as possible for
> your
> benefit.
Mr Tamburro has exempted fron his consideration what I did write, [he
snipped all of it!] so explains to me, upon his own and personal sympathys,
what his own own idiosyncracy demand of him - and as such is as absent from
the issue as his own president, the guy who showed up here in defence of
Monroi, while not stating that he was a paid agent of such company.
While that person amused us then with his massive duplicity [until forced
into admission of his status in writing by direct and insistent inquiry to
it] and then banning those who pointed it out without the slightest demurrer
from cja officials... ;)))
> 1. Mr. Goichberg is the president of the uscf for better or worse. He
> will
> have to act in a leadership capacity with a newly formed board.
This is an advocacy postion, where is the journalist? Is Mr. Tamburro
writing as such? This would mean, at a minimum that some benefit to those
'led' would be examined.
> Whatever you
> think of him as being unacceptable does not address the reality of the
> fact
Mr. Tamburro has not the balls to actually cite whatever I did say, so
entertains us with his strawman appreciation in his paraphrase of what I
wrote.
Is it worth entertaining this nonsense further as if any impartial
perspective is canvassed?
> that there will be a board with a president that must find some way to
> work. His
> actions with this postcard do not help that. That was the extent of my
> point.
In more direct words - to the point of not what helps Mr. Goichberg, but US
chess, Mr. Tamburro has nothing to say!
> 2. Whether someone who benefits from chess in some financial way should
> be
> on the board is a legitimate issue,
As raised by me! Not by you, bucko! So what you got to say?
> one specific to Mr. Goichberg and Ms.
> Polgar. However, there has always been that situation in the USCF and it
> has been
> discussed for years. It is apparently accepted by delegates and voters.
"discussed" - ROFL! WHAT? was discussed about it?
You, Pete Tamburro, do not 'discuss' the matter I raised, you even
elimninate them, while posturing her ein public that you answer them! How
absurd is this level of correspondance. You even lead all this vague shiot
by declaring that your interlocuter is 'beneath comtempt' - though -ROFL -
not beneath spin.
Talk to me like a man, if you are one, or do the other thing. I read enough
above to not need to read futher about your 'concerns'.
Phil Innes
> 3.As far as Sam is concerned, you seem upset I would civilly address him
> and
> seriously entertain his thoughts. I have had some long conversations with
> him and he has always treated me respectfully, and the one time I took
> offense
> to something he said, he straightened it out. I took his latest post on
> the
> Goichberg mailing without regard for the things he does that I don't
> approve
> of. The issue at hand was not Sam, but the post card.
> 4.And, of course, your usual diatribe against the CJA. Funny you should
> bring that up. I still challenge you who are so concerned with our
> interests to
> actually show up at a meeting and find out the truth. The US Open will be
> a
> journalist's delight in terms of what's going to happen there. You should
> be
> there for all sorts of reasons. BTW, we have received an unusual number of
> inquiries from people who publish in English, but not in the US who would
> like to
> be in our awards competition.
> 5.The CJA (btw, I am not an officer as you claim, just the drafted chief
> judge) does not take an official position on this current mess. However,
> individuals in leadership positions are active. Jerry Hanken was key in
> producing a
> very successful US Championship. Randy Hough is on the policy board. I
> was
> chief teller these past two years. I will be participating as a delegate
> and
> co-sponsoring an ADM and fighting like hell to get some answers. I show
> up. I
> fight my battles at the meetings. I don't think adding to the hot air on
> the
> internet has ever solved a whole lot, so I don't participate very often
> in
> this venue. Sitting at a keyboard and passing judgment on everyone may be
> your
> sole form of entertainment, but I have a to many other chess writing
> assignments, books and lectures to do that are simply what I choose to
> spend my time
> on.
>
> 6. The reason I didn't comment on the independent arbitration issue is
> that
> I was not aware of it. I don't, as with most people, go to your site.
>
> 7.You accuse the CJA of being liars. Easy to do hiding in a house in
> Vermont. Come down to Cherry Hill and be a man and do it face to face. I
> rather be
> an accused liar than a demonstrated coward.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's free at
> http://www.aol.com.
>
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 08:26:55
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Polgar screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
http://uschess.blogspot.com/2007/06/call-for-peace-and-unity-for-sake-of.html
Susan has not posted a link from her own blogspot to "Rob Mitchell's"
blogspot, where he makes the following claim:
Rob
* Age: 48
* Gender: Male
* Astrological Sign: Virgo
* Zodiac Year: Dog
* Occupation: Insurance Agent / Songwriter
* Location: Nashville : Tennessee : United States
* Wishlist
About Me
I am happily married to the most wonderful woman in the world
Nice to hear that, but you know the rules, which are that all claims
made must be subject to verification and proof.
Therefore, to establish the validity of your claims, I will need to
sleep with your wife.
Surely you will not object. Why should you?
By the way, does she do windows?
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 08:01:52
From: Rob
Subject: Sloan's screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
On Jun 3, 8:35 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Meanwhile, so far this morning, no comments have been posted to
> Susan's latest screed.
>
> Take a look athttp://uschess.blogspot.com/2007/06/call-for-peace-and-unity-for-sake...
>
> It says "0 Comments"
>
> This is obviously because their new policy is not to allow any
> comments to be posted until after they have moderated them. Susan and
> Paul are probably still in bed at 9:30 AM and therefore have not had
> time to go through the comments that have been posted overnight.
>
> Would somebody please call and wake them up, so that we can see what
> their minions are saying?
>
> Sam Sloan
Why not you, Sam? DO just talk all the time. Do something.
Rob
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 06:35:00
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Polgar screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
Meanwhile, so far this morning, no comments have been posted to
Susan's latest screed.
Take a look at
http://uschess.blogspot.com/2007/06/call-for-peace-and-unity-for-sake-of.html
It says "0 Comments"
This is obviously because their new policy is not to allow any
comments to be posted until after they have moderated them. Susan and
Paul are probably still in bed at 9:30 AM and therefore have not had
time to go through the comments that have been posted overnight.
Would somebody please call and wake them up, so that we can see what
their minions are saying?
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 05:56:10
From: Rob
Subject: Sam admits sending post card?June 3, 2007
|
On Jun 3, 7:08 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> [quote="Mulfish"]Please note that, at least last night when I looked,
> all those negative posts had passed Susan's moderators and remained
> up. That's not 100% censorship.
>
> It's hard for me to imagine any USCF officer sending out a postcard
> like the one described. I would find it easier to believe if a few of
> the people saying they received such a card would give their name
> instead of posting anonymously. Can anyone who has seen the postcards
> confirm their contents (no, don't post the contents).
>
> But even then, someone who hates both Goichberg and the Truongs could
> try to take them both out with one postcard purporting to come from
> him. How many people can you think of who meet that description? If
> Mr. Goichberg did not send it out, I hope he'll come on this forum and
> deny it.[/quote]
>
Really, Sam?
>
> Naturally, I am not happy that Bill Goichberg calls me a "reckless
> attacker",
> However, what is the lowest of the low is when Susan quotes what she
> says are Sam Sloan supporters who write, "Go back to where you came
> from. Leave this board and the USCF alone. We don't need a Hungarian
> running the show."
>
> These are actually quotes from anonymous postings to her own blog
> that, for all we know, could easily have been written by Susan
> herself.
>
> Sam Sloan
S by having a surogate send out the cards you could say above the
ruckus and appear chaste?
Rob
|
| | |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 18:10:26
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Sam admits sending post card?June 3, 2007
|
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 05:56:10 -0700, Rob <robmtchl@msn.com > wrote:
>S by having a surogate send out the cards you could say above the
>ruckus and appear chaste?
>Rob
Say what? Does your keyboard have a short in it?
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2007 05:08:47
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Polgar screed this morning June 3, 2007
|
[quote="Mulfish"]Please note that, at least last night when I looked,
all those negative posts had passed Susan's moderators and remained
up. That's not 100% censorship.
It's hard for me to imagine any USCF officer sending out a postcard
like the one described. I would find it easier to believe if a few of
the people saying they received such a card would give their name
instead of posting anonymously. Can anyone who has seen the postcards
confirm their contents (no, don't post the contents).
But even then, someone who hates both Goichberg and the Truongs could
try to take them both out with one postcard purporting to come from
him. How many people can you think of who meet that description? If
Mr. Goichberg did not send it out, I hope he'll come on this forum and
deny it.[/quote]
Goichberg sent the postcard to at least 3,000 voters, but he did not
send one to me. I am so sad. :( :( (That is the first time I have
ever tried to make a Smiley. Can someone tell me where to find a bunch
of them?)
Note that Susan did not directly quote Goichberg's postcard. Thus,
your statement above, "It's hard for me to imagine any USCF officer
sending out a postcard like the one described", shows your pro-Polgar
bias.
I cannot imaging what objection Susan might have regarding Bill's
actual postcard. Everything Bill writes about Susan and Truong is
demonstrably true.
Naturally, I am not happy that Bill Goichberg calls me a "reckless
attacker", but he has the right to say that. I am not going to go
crazy over it.
However, what is the lowest of the low is when Susan quotes what she
says are Sam Sloan supporters who write, "Go back to where you came
from. Leave this board and the USCF alone. We don't need a Hungarian
running the show."
These are actually quotes from anonymous postings to her own blog
that, for all we know, could easily have been written by Susan
herself.
Sam Sloan
|
|
