| |
Main
Date: 11 Jul 2008 21:57:51
From: samsloan
Subject: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
"Hoist by His Own Petard" is a term perhaps derived from Shakespeare
which means to be caught in one's own trap.
http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/hoistbyoneso.html
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.html
What is happening to Bill Goichberg, current USCF President, is a
perfect example of this.
When I won election to the USCF Executive board in July 2006, even
before I had taken office, Bill Goichberg went into a wild frenzy of
trying to ensure that either I would not be able to take office, or I
would not be able to be effective in office and/or would be defeated
when I tried to be re-elected to the same office.
Goichberg did all this, even though I was no threat whatever to his
hegemony and indeed I had been his long-term supporter.
Here are a few examples:
1. Sam Sloan was due to take office on August 13, 2006, so, starting
on July 31, 2006 Bill Goichberg wrote a series of five letters to the
USCF litigation attorney Michael Matsler asking Matsler how to stop
Sam Sloan from taking office or how to remove him from office
immediately after he had taken office. Matsler replied to each of
these five letters and his legal bill was a bit less than $1000 for
each letter, so the total bill paid by the USCF was a bit less than
five thousand dollars.
2. At the beginning of the 2006 delegates meeting but just prior to
the start of the regular meeting, a change in the by-laws was made and
passed to effectively give the delegates the power to remove Sam Sloan
from the board during the meeting. This was done just a moment before
Sam Sloan was due to take office. However, the plan did not work
because few delegates were willing to sign the petition to recall a
person who had just been elected. Ironically, it is this provision
originally passed to try to remove Sam Sloan from office which is
planned to be used to try to remove Paul Truong, Susan Polgar and Bill
Goichberg from office during the forthcoming meeting in Dallas. This
is an example of Bill Goichberg being hoist by his own petard.
3. Bill Goichberg refused to appoint Sam Sloan as liaison to any
committee. Usually the liaison appointments are divided up equally
among the board members.
4. Bill Goichberg did not allow any of the first board meetings when
Sam Sloan was on the board to be transcribed and broadcast, thereby
violating the by-laws, so that the general membership could not find
out what was really going on at those meetings.
5. Bill Goichberg refused to hold any of the board meetings in the
Crossville office while Sam Sloan was on the board, since Sloan was
constantly complaining about the waste and mismanagement of the
Crossville office.
6. Bill Goichberg directed the Chess Life Editor not to publish the
name of Sam Sloan in Chess Life magazine except as a routine listing
of all board members, so that when Chess Life columnists submitted
articles for publication with Sloan's name in them, that name was
deleted by the editor.
7. In order to bring about Sloan's defeat for re-election, Goichberg
groomed Polgar for a position on the board even though Goichberg knew
that since 2002 Polgar and Truong had been scamming the federation out
of large sums of money. In November 2003, while Goichberg had been
Acting Executive Director, he had paid Polgar $13, 358.56 without
telling the board about it, in defiance of a directive from Tim Hanke,
who was then VP of Finance, who said =93do not pay them a penny=94. Also,
Goichberg knew of a variety of other scams pulled by Polgar and
Truong, including their demand that they be paid $50,000 for training
the Womans Chess Olympiad Team, when that training was of no value and
consisted of Paul Truong telling the woman chess grandmaster what to
do during their menstrual periods.
8. Even though Goichberg knew that Polgar and Truong have a long
history of scamming the federation, he allowed a picture of Polgar to
appear in every issue of Chess Life magazine for a year and free ads
for the Susan Polgar Foundation to appear in every issue of Chess Life
magazine for a year. Also, Susan Polgar was given a cover story on
Chess Life magazine of her kicking a football after she had won a
patzer unrated exhibition tournament held in connection with the World
Cup of Football.
9. All of the above was designed to create in the minds of the chess-
playing public the impression that Susan Polgar was achieving great
things in chess, whereas in reality Polgar was retired as a chess
player and had not played an internationally rated game of chess since
2004 and had only played in two rated chess events since 1996.
10. In order to bring about the defeat of Sloan and the election of
Polgar, Goichberg caused to be appointed the most rabidly anti-Sam
Sloan and pro-Polgar moderators to the USCF Issues Forum. For example,
Herbert Rodney Vaughn was appointed as moderator. This same person,
Herbert Rodney Vaughn, had been allowed to sit in the 2006 delegates
meeting as a delegate from Ohio without being properly appointed, then
had tied up the delegates meeting with a slew of anti-Sam Sloan
motions including the aforementioned changes in the by-laws to make it
easier to recall a board member. Then this same Herbert Rodney Vaughn
had been allowed to camp out for a week in the USCFs office in
Crossville preparing a 400-page ethics complaint in color against Sam
Sloan using the USCFs office facilities and tying up office staff.
Then this same person was then made moderator of the USCF Issues Forum
just so that he could delete or remove any posting by a USCF member
favorable to Sloan or any posting embarrassing to Polgar and Truong
such as postings asking them whether they were married to each other
or not or what they did for a living of the names of the billion
dollar corporations that Truong claimed he had rescued and saved.
11. Goichberg did of all these things even though he knew from vast
experience that Polgar and Truong were scammers and that Truong was
the Fake Sam Sloan, because they were useful to his purposes at that
time. Goichberg believed that through this, Polgar would be elected
and Sloan would be defeated. Goichberg also believed that Truong would
be defeated. He felt that Polgar would be no danger to him as long as
she was alone on the board.
12. Late in the campaign, Polgar and Truong suddenly started attacking
Goichberg, even though Goichberg had been supporting Polgar up until
that point. This caused Goichberg to withdraw his support from Polgar.
Goichberg mailed 17,000 postcards to USCF members primarily attacking
Sloan but also making critical remarks about Polgar and Truong.
However, by then it was too late as Polgar and Truong were already so
far ahead that even after Goichberg had turned against them they were
elected anyway.
It has been written that a chess master must have a heightened sense
of danger. (I wish I could remember who first wrote that.) Goichberg
is a chess master, or at least he was when he was an active player, so
he should have realized that Sloan posed no danger to him but there
was considerable danger from Polgar and Truong. He should have
remembered that the Hungarian Chess Federation was convulsed by the
antics of Miss Polgar before she moved to America.
Goichberg thought that the result of the election would be that Sloan
would be replaced by Polgar, which would be a good exchange from the
point of view of Goichberg. What happened instead was that his friend
Schultz and Sloan were replaced by Polgar and Truong.
This should make Goichberg afraid that not only might the USCF
collapse but his own CCA might collapse as well. Goichberg should be
trying to rally the troops and solidify the opposition to Polgar and
Truong.
Instead, Goichberg, oblivious to the danger to himself, is now trying
to push through a crazy scheme to make Chess Life magazine not a part
of the regular USCF membership. Even though the Goichberg plan has
almost no support, he is pushing ahead with it relentlessly. Hanon
Russell has already put him on notice that he may be suing the USCF
over this and will likely stop paying the $150,000 per year he agreed
to pay under the contract.
Everybody has been telling him but Goichberg refuses to believe that
making the magazine optional will ultimately result in a complete stop
in the publication of the magazine and the collapse of the USCF, as
tens of thousands of members will decline to renew their memberships.
The likely outcome of this is that Goichberg will be thrown out and
Polgar and Truong will take control of the federation.
In other words, Bill Goichberg will be hoist by his own petard.
Sam Sloan
|
|
| |
Date: 15 Jul 2008 14:55:30
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
[quote="chessoffice"][size=150]When the EB discusses the ED's
performance at Dallas, we will have the audited financials. Why would
we base any decision on an unaudited preliminary worksheet?
Bill Goichberg[/size][/quote]
Because you will recall that last year the office reported a $57,000
loss. However, when the delegate's meeting took place two months later
it had been fixed up to a surplus of $3,000.
We are still wondering where this magical $60,000 appeared from.
Or, is this what Tim Just calls "the old shell game"?
I am truly surprised at you trying to hide, by saying that Donna's
posting of questions violates the AUG.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 05:35:49
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
On Jul 13, 7:08 am, "Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote:
> "Javert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:14f5a279-fa9d-48f8-bd60-7c185e340c40@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 12, 3:11 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
> english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
> of us.
>
> --
>
> Yes that's right. The most used 100 words in modern English are all 'old
> English', or more properly, varieties of Anglo Saxon.
Then how come when I go to places in England which are far from London
such as Leeds for example, I cannot understand a word the people are
saying, yet they claim to be speaking "English"?
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 11:45:59
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
"samsloan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Jul 13, 7:08 am, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Javert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:14f5a279-fa9d-48f8-bd60-7c185e340c40@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jul 12, 3:11 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
>> english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
>> of us.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Yes that's right. The most used 100 words in modern English are all 'old
>> English', or more properly, varieties of Anglo Saxon.
>
> Then how come when I go to places in England which are far from London
> such as Leeds for example, I cannot understand a word the people are
> saying, yet they claim to be speaking "English"?
Your ears are foreign to their speech. They themselves wonder why Americans
chose to speak through their noses, as if emulating ducks, honky.
Phil Innes
> Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 16:58:14
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_R.?=
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
"samsloan" <[email protected] > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:[email protected]...
> On Jul 13, 7:08 am, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Javert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:14f5a279-fa9d-48f8-bd60-7c185e340c40@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jul 12, 3:11 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
>> english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
>> of us.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Yes that's right. The most used 100 words in modern English are all 'old
>> English', or more properly, varieties of Anglo Saxon.
>
> Then how come when I go to places in England which are far from London
> such as Leeds for example, I cannot understand a word the people are
> saying, yet they claim to be speaking "English"?
Don't worry about it - they understand you even though you
cannot speak 'English'.
>
> Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 18:35:42
From: Javert
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
On Jul 12, 3:11=A0pm, "Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote:
> "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >> On Jul 12, 12:57 am, samsloan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
>
> >>> "Hoist by His Own Petard" is a term perhaps derived from Shakespeare
>
> >> =A0 Sam, at least get the quote right:
>
> >> =A0For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
> >> =A0Hoist with his own petar; and it shall go hard
> >> =A0But I will delve one yard below their mines,
> >> =A0And blow them at the moon.
>
> >> =A0 Hamlet (act 3, scene 3, if I understand the ODQ's notation)
>
> > Permit me to augment a bit...
>
> > Word History: The French used p=E9tard, "a loud discharge of intestinal
> > gas," for a kind of infernal engine for blasting through the gates of a
> > city. "To be hoist by one's own petard," a now proverbial phrase
> > apparently originating with Shakespeare's Hamlet (around 1604) not long
> > after the word entered English (around 1598), means "to blow oneself up
> > with one's own bomb, be undone by one's own devices." The French noun p=
et,
> > "fart," developed regularly from the Latin noun peditum, from the
> > Indo-European root *pezd-, "fart."
>
> Most likely so, and less likely [since it is hjarder to substantiate] is =
an
> earlier word from the same root~ that had been adopted into English [late
> medieval Anglo Norman]
>
> PETRONEL : a kind of blunderbuss, or horse-pistol. Sir Petronel Flash, a
> boasting fellow, a braggadocio, Florio p. 585
>
> The word is mentionined in the Brit. Bibl. ii. 167
>
> The older word [and phonetically truer in sound to the French] is PATERER=
OS:
> chambered pieces of ordnance, Archaeolica, xxviii, 376.
>
> One regional English word, much older is PAYL; to beat or thrash [Salop]
> which is an adaptation of the Anglo Saxon [still in use] PAY; (1) to beat
> which is later use, and (2) to make amends, which is referenced in MS Can=
tab
> Ff ii 38 f 148.
>
> There is also the Northern world PETHUR; with a sense of acting rashly to
> one's own regret or harm.
>
> Phil Innes
>
> > [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petard]
>
> > In the 1880s a stage performer named himself "Le P=E9tomane" and elevat=
ed
> > the p=E9tard to an artistic/entertainment level. =A0His act was a hit i=
n its
> > day.
>
> > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A9tomane]
>
> >>> which means to be caught in one's own trap.
>
> >>>http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/hoistbyoneso.html
>
> >>>http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.ht=
ml
Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
of us.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 08:08:40
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
"Javert" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:14f5a279-fa9d-48f8-bd60-7c185e340c40@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 3:11 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected] > wrote:
> "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
of us.
--
Yes that's right. The most used 100 words in modern English are all 'old
English', or more properly, varieties of Anglo Saxon. The spelling of these
words has varied, and we do not know anything whatever about the sound of
the original words except as they are maintained in dialectal speech, and as
we continue to use them?
It is interesting that given early Anglo Norman and early Anglo Saxon to
read, modern readers find the Saxon more comprehensible and likeable than
the language which arrived 600 years later. In the 1300s there was even a
sort of revolt where ordinary people reverted to early Saxon words and
discarded Norman ones.
Studies of these things are difficult, since even a perfunctory record of
the /speech/ of the people, and their very varied dialects in England, were
not compiled in a dictionary until 1650. Though the great majority of the
population was 'illiterate', that merely means they couldn't read - and at
least in the countryside this preserved English since it is hard to corrupt
people's language when they can't read any 'foreign' dialects.
Interestingly Dampier notes that the highest literary rate in England in the
late 1600s was among sailors and lawyers. Sailors he said attained about 80%
literate rate, whereas in the country no more than 30% of others could
read - and these mostly Londoners, a city of 500,000 at the time. After that
the next 2 largest population areas were not significant, being of 30,000
and in the West, Bristol with 20,000.
This dictionary record situation was not remedied for 200 years until
publication of Halliwell in 1850, with 51,000 //common// words being set
down, usually with quotations, which though spoken all around England were
nevertheless not recorded.
Therefore the very high interest in Elizabethan or Shakespeare's speech is
often confounded by those who only quoted written materials to cite the
text - whereas the words of the people were principally as speech. Perhaps
the most voluble recorded of Sussex speech during this era [1575] was
Tusser, who composed agricultural ditties for country folk [who had
remarkable memories for them] but this speech often did not overlap much
with the clever wits from Oxford university, who wrote from what was
written.
The 'Shakespearean' issue is that somehow the Author of the Work seemed to
have compiled a personal vocabulary of some 24,000 words [low estimate, some
say 30,000], which drew on both writing and knowledge of English speech
[Current undergrads manage about 9,000 words of English]. So... where did he
get them?
Certainly Shakespeare was an atavist, like Gower and Chaucer 200 years
previously, he coined [mostly, not exclusively] on Anglo Saxon words. Quite
apart from his knowledge of archaic words contained in the speech of the
people, it is not even well understood how he could attain knowledge of what
was written. Certainly Stratford contained no great library.
The greatest [known] library in England belonged to John Dee - and was much
consulted by Elizabeth herself who prided herself on her scholarly
knowledge, as well as being attended by many of her ministers. The Mortlake
library burned and its contents now not known to us.
Could the Bard have studied there? These is sometimes the subject of
speculation for the '4 missing years' of his life, apr�s-Stratford where
there are no extant remarks to assure us that he was other than an ordinary
student, and before the schoolboy showed up in London and began to sonneteer
with the best literary minds in the country - and then to overtake them in
his writing [not necessarily in the popularity of his plays - but the
longevity of his Work which still entertains us by its wealth of evocation.]
Alternate candidates for 'Great Library' are more secret ones. The south
West of England remained resistantly Catholic and recusant, especially
Dorset and Devon. Further West, some Cornish Islands were also thought to
support illicit literature.
Phil Innes
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 13:46:46
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 08:08:40 -0400, "Chess One" <[email protected] >
wrote:
> Perhaps
>the most voluble recorded of Sussex speech during this era [1575] was
>Tusser, who composed agricultural ditties for country folk [who had
>remarkable memories for them] but this speech often did not overlap much
>with the clever wits from Oxford university,
Like, maybe the Oxford wits were a bit too garrulous and glib? Oh,
wait... Heh, heh, heh.
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 16:54:36
From: =?Windows-1252?Q?J=FCrgen_R.?=
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
"Chess One" <[email protected] > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Javert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:14f5a279-fa9d-48f8-bd60-7c185e340c40@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 12, 3:11 pm, "Chess One" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "J.D. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>
> Of course since we all can speak and read old english, this middle
> english nonsense is moot. Old English is the everyday language of all
> of us.
>
> --
>
> Yes that's right. The most used 100 words in modern English are all 'old
> English', or more properly, varieties of Anglo Saxon. The spelling of
> these words has varied, and we do not know anything whatever about the
> sound of the original words except as they are maintained in dialectal
> speech, and as we continue to use them?
>
> It is interesting that given early Anglo Norman and early Anglo Saxon to
> read, modern readers find the Saxon more comprehensible and likeable than
> the language which arrived 600 years later. In the 1300s there was even a
> sort of revolt where ordinary people reverted to early Saxon words and
> discarded Norman ones.
>
> Studies of these things are difficult, since even a perfunctory record of
> the /speech/ of the people, and their very varied dialects in England,
> were not compiled in a dictionary until 1650. Though the great majority of
> the population was 'illiterate', that merely means they couldn't read -
> and at least in the countryside this preserved English since it is hard to
> corrupt people's language when they can't read any 'foreign' dialects.
>
> Interestingly Dampier notes that the highest literary rate in England in
> the late 1600s was among sailors and lawyers. Sailors he said attained
> about 80% literate rate, whereas in the country no more than 30% of others
> could read - and these mostly Londoners, a city of 500,000 at the time.
> After that the next 2 largest population areas were not significant, being
> of 30,000 and in the West, Bristol with 20,000.
>
> This dictionary record situation was not remedied for 200 years until
> publication of Halliwell in 1850, with 51,000 //common// words being set
> down, usually with quotations, which though spoken all around England were
> nevertheless not recorded.
>
> Therefore the very high interest in Elizabethan or Shakespeare's speech is
> often confounded by those who only quoted written materials to cite the
> text - whereas the words of the people were principally as speech. Perhaps
> the most voluble
'voluble'?
You have Parr disease: Try looking up the meaning of unfamiliar
words before you use them. Otherwise your pretense to scholarship
becomes ludicrously reminiscent of your idol Parr.
[..snipping gibberish]
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 11:07:56
From:
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
Note that "hoist" is the past tense of the verb, "to hoise," thus
"hoist by his own petard" rather than "hoisted by his own
petard" (which would be the modern version.)
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 08:49:40
From:
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
On Jul 12, 12:57=A0am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
>
> "Hoist by His Own Petard" is a term perhaps derived from Shakespeare
Sam, at least get the quote right:
For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
Hoist with his own petar; and it shall go hard
But I will delve one yard below their mines,
And blow them at the moon.
Hamlet (act 3, scene 3, if I understand the ODQ's notation)
> which means to be caught in one's own trap.
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/hoistbyoneso.html
>
> http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.html
>
> What is happening to Bill Goichberg, current USCF President, is a
> perfect example of this.
>
> When I won election to the USCF Executive board in July 2006, even
> before I had taken office, Bill Goichberg went into a wild frenzy of
> trying to ensure that either I would not be able to take office, or I
> would not be able to be effective in office and/or would be defeated
> when I tried to be re-elected to the same office.
>
> Goichberg did all this, even though I was no threat whatever to his
> hegemony and indeed I had been his long-term supporter.
>
> Here are a few examples:
>
> 1. Sam Sloan was due to take office on August 13, 2006, so, starting
> on July 31, 2006 Bill Goichberg wrote a series of five letters to the
> USCF litigation attorney Michael Matsler asking Matsler how to stop
> Sam Sloan from taking office or how to remove him from office
> immediately after he had taken office. Matsler replied to each of
> these five letters and his legal bill was a bit less than $1000 for
> each letter, so the total bill paid by the USCF was a bit less than
> five thousand dollars.
>
> 2. At the beginning of the 2006 delegates meeting but just prior to
> the start of the regular meeting, a change in the by-laws was made and
> passed to effectively give the delegates the power to remove Sam Sloan
> from the board during the meeting. This was done just a moment before
> Sam Sloan was due to take office. However, the plan did not work
> because few delegates were willing to sign the petition to recall a
> person who had just been elected. Ironically, it is this provision
> originally passed to try to remove Sam Sloan from office which is
> planned to be used to try to remove Paul Truong, Susan Polgar and Bill
> Goichberg from office during the forthcoming meeting in Dallas. This
> is an example of Bill Goichberg being hoist by his own petard.
>
> 3. Bill Goichberg refused to appoint Sam Sloan as liaison to any
> committee. Usually the liaison appointments are divided up equally
> among the board members.
>
> 4. Bill Goichberg did not allow any of the first board meetings when
> Sam Sloan was on the board to be transcribed and broadcast, thereby
> violating the by-laws, so that the general membership could not find
> out what was really going on at those meetings.
>
> 5. Bill Goichberg refused to hold any of the board meetings in the
> Crossville office while Sam Sloan was on the board, since Sloan was
> constantly complaining about the waste and mismanagement of the
> Crossville office.
>
> 6. Bill Goichberg directed the Chess Life Editor not to publish the
> name of Sam Sloan in Chess Life magazine except as a routine listing
> of all board members, so that when Chess Life columnists submitted
> articles for publication with Sloan's name in them, that name was
> deleted by the editor.
>
> 7. In order to bring about Sloan's defeat for re-election, Goichberg
> groomed Polgar for a position on the board even though Goichberg knew
> that since 2002 Polgar and Truong had been scamming the federation out
> of large sums of money. In November 2003, while Goichberg had been
> Acting Executive Director, he had paid Polgar $13, 358.56 without
> telling the board about it, in defiance of a directive from Tim Hanke,
> who was then VP of Finance, who said =93do not pay them a penny=94. Also,
> Goichberg knew of a variety of other scams pulled by Polgar and
> Truong, including their demand that they be paid $50,000 for training
> the Womans Chess Olympiad Team, when that training was of no value and
> consisted of Paul Truong telling the woman chess grandmaster what to
> do during their menstrual periods.
>
> 8. Even though Goichberg knew that Polgar and Truong have a long
> history of scamming the federation, he allowed a picture of Polgar to
> appear in every issue of Chess Life magazine for a year and free ads
> for the Susan Polgar Foundation to appear in every issue of Chess Life
> magazine for a year. Also, Susan Polgar was given a cover story on
> Chess Life magazine of her kicking a football after she had won a
> patzer unrated exhibition tournament held in connection with the World
> Cup of Football.
>
> 9. All of the above was designed to create in the minds of the chess-
> playing public the impression that Susan Polgar was achieving great
> things in chess, whereas in reality Polgar was retired as a chess
> player and had not played an internationally rated game of chess since
> 2004 and had only played in two rated chess events since 1996.
>
> 10. In order to bring about the defeat of Sloan and the election of
> Polgar, Goichberg caused to be appointed the most rabidly anti-Sam
> Sloan and pro-Polgar moderators to the USCF Issues Forum. For example,
> Herbert Rodney Vaughn was appointed as moderator. This same person,
> Herbert Rodney Vaughn, had been allowed to sit in the 2006 delegates
> meeting as a delegate from Ohio without being properly appointed, then
> had tied up the delegates meeting with a slew of anti-Sam Sloan
> motions including the aforementioned changes in the by-laws to make it
> easier to recall a board member. Then this same Herbert Rodney Vaughn
> had been allowed to camp out for a week in the USCFs office in
> Crossville preparing a 400-page ethics complaint in color against Sam
> Sloan using the USCFs office facilities and tying up office staff.
> Then this same person was then made moderator of the USCF Issues Forum
> just so that he could delete or remove any posting by a USCF member
> favorable to Sloan or any posting embarrassing to Polgar and Truong
> such as postings asking them whether they were married to each other
> or not or what they did for a living of the names of the billion
> dollar corporations that Truong claimed he had rescued and saved.
>
> 11. Goichberg did of all these things even though he knew from vast
> experience that Polgar and Truong were scammers and that Truong was
> the Fake Sam Sloan, because they were useful to his purposes at that
> time. Goichberg believed that through this, Polgar would be elected
> and Sloan would be defeated. Goichberg also believed that Truong would
> be defeated. He felt that Polgar would be no danger to him as long as
> she was alone on the board.
>
> 12. Late in the campaign, Polgar and Truong suddenly started attacking
> Goichberg, even though Goichberg had been supporting Polgar up until
> that point. This caused Goichberg to withdraw his support from Polgar.
> Goichberg mailed 17,000 postcards to USCF members primarily attacking
> Sloan but also making critical remarks about Polgar and Truong.
> However, by then it was too late as Polgar and Truong were already so
> far ahead that even after Goichberg had turned against them they were
> elected anyway.
>
> It has been written that a chess master must have a heightened sense
> of danger. (I wish I could remember who first wrote that.) Goichberg
> is a chess master, or at least he was when he was an active player, so
> he should have realized that Sloan posed no danger to him but there
> was considerable danger from Polgar and Truong. He should have
> remembered that the Hungarian Chess Federation was convulsed by the
> antics of Miss Polgar before she moved to America.
>
> Goichberg thought that the result of the election would be that Sloan
> would be replaced by Polgar, which would be a good exchange from the
> point of view of Goichberg. What happened instead was that his friend
> Schultz and Sloan were replaced by Polgar and Truong.
>
> This should make Goichberg afraid that not only might the USCF
> collapse but his own CCA might collapse as well. Goichberg should be
> trying to rally the troops and solidify the opposition to Polgar and
> Truong.
>
> Instead, Goichberg, oblivious to the danger to himself, is now trying
> to push through a crazy scheme to make Chess Life magazine not a part
> of the regular USCF membership. Even though the Goichberg plan has
> almost no support, he is pushing ahead with it relentlessly. Hanon
> Russell has already put him on notice that he may be suing the USCF
> over this and will likely stop paying the $150,000 per year he agreed
> to pay under the contract.
>
> Everybody has been telling him but Goichberg refuses to believe that
> making the magazine optional will ultimately result in a complete stop
> in the publication of the magazine and the collapse of the USCF, as
> tens of thousands of members will decline to renew their memberships.
>
> The likely outcome of this is that Goichberg will be thrown out and
> Polgar and Truong will take control of the federation.
>
> In other words, Bill Goichberg will be hoist by his own petard.
>
> Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 09:33:51
From: J.D. Walker
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
[email protected] wrote:
> On Jul 12, 12:57 am, samsloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
>>
>> "Hoist by His Own Petard" is a term perhaps derived from Shakespeare
>
> Sam, at least get the quote right:
>
> For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
> Hoist with his own petar; and it shall go hard
> But I will delve one yard below their mines,
> And blow them at the moon.
>
> Hamlet (act 3, scene 3, if I understand the ODQ's notation)
>
Permit me to augment a bit...
Word History: The French used pétard, "a loud discharge of intestinal
gas," for a kind of infernal engine for blasting through the gates of a
city. "To be hoist by one's own petard," a now proverbial phrase
apparently originating with Shakespeare's Hamlet (around 1604) not long
after the word entered English (around 1598), means "to blow oneself up
with one's own bomb, be undone by one's own devices." The French noun
pet, "fart," developed regularly from the Latin noun pēditum, from the
Indo-European root *pezd-, "fart."
[ http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petard ]
In the 1880s a stage performer named himself "Le Pétomane" and elevated
the pétard to an artistic/entertainment level. His act was a hit in its
day.
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A9tomane ]
>
>> which means to be caught in one's own trap.
>>
>> http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/hoistbyoneso.html
>>
>> http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.html
>>
>> What is happening to Bill Goichberg, current USCF President, is a
>> perfect example of this.
>>
>> When I won election to the USCF Executive board in July 2006, even
>> before I had taken office, Bill Goichberg went into a wild frenzy of
>> trying to ensure that either I would not be able to take office, or I
>> would not be able to be effective in office and/or would be defeated
>> when I tried to be re-elected to the same office.
>>
>> Goichberg did all this, even though I was no threat whatever to his
>> hegemony and indeed I had been his long-term supporter.
>>
>> Here are a few examples:
>>
>> 1. Sam Sloan was due to take office on August 13, 2006, so, starting
>> on July 31, 2006 Bill Goichberg wrote a series of five letters to the
>> USCF litigation attorney Michael Matsler asking Matsler how to stop
>> Sam Sloan from taking office or how to remove him from office
>> immediately after he had taken office. Matsler replied to each of
>> these five letters and his legal bill was a bit less than $1000 for
>> each letter, so the total bill paid by the USCF was a bit less than
>> five thousand dollars.
>>
>> 2. At the beginning of the 2006 delegates meeting but just prior to
>> the start of the regular meeting, a change in the by-laws was made and
>> passed to effectively give the delegates the power to remove Sam Sloan
>> from the board during the meeting. This was done just a moment before
>> Sam Sloan was due to take office. However, the plan did not work
>> because few delegates were willing to sign the petition to recall a
>> person who had just been elected. Ironically, it is this provision
>> originally passed to try to remove Sam Sloan from office which is
>> planned to be used to try to remove Paul Truong, Susan Polgar and Bill
>> Goichberg from office during the forthcoming meeting in Dallas. This
>> is an example of Bill Goichberg being hoist by his own petard.
>>
>> 3. Bill Goichberg refused to appoint Sam Sloan as liaison to any
>> committee. Usually the liaison appointments are divided up equally
>> among the board members.
>>
>> 4. Bill Goichberg did not allow any of the first board meetings when
>> Sam Sloan was on the board to be transcribed and broadcast, thereby
>> violating the by-laws, so that the general membership could not find
>> out what was really going on at those meetings.
>>
>> 5. Bill Goichberg refused to hold any of the board meetings in the
>> Crossville office while Sam Sloan was on the board, since Sloan was
>> constantly complaining about the waste and mismanagement of the
>> Crossville office.
>>
>> 6. Bill Goichberg directed the Chess Life Editor not to publish the
>> name of Sam Sloan in Chess Life magazine except as a routine listing
>> of all board members, so that when Chess Life columnists submitted
>> articles for publication with Sloan's name in them, that name was
>> deleted by the editor.
>>
>> 7. In order to bring about Sloan's defeat for re-election, Goichberg
>> groomed Polgar for a position on the board even though Goichberg knew
>> that since 2002 Polgar and Truong had been scamming the federation out
>> of large sums of money. In November 2003, while Goichberg had been
>> Acting Executive Director, he had paid Polgar $13, 358.56 without
>> telling the board about it, in defiance of a directive from Tim Hanke,
>> who was then VP of Finance, who said “do not pay them a penny”. Also,
>> Goichberg knew of a variety of other scams pulled by Polgar and
>> Truong, including their demand that they be paid $50,000 for training
>> the Womans Chess Olympiad Team, when that training was of no value and
>> consisted of Paul Truong telling the woman chess grandmaster what to
>> do during their menstrual periods.
>>
>> 8. Even though Goichberg knew that Polgar and Truong have a long
>> history of scamming the federation, he allowed a picture of Polgar to
>> appear in every issue of Chess Life magazine for a year and free ads
>> for the Susan Polgar Foundation to appear in every issue of Chess Life
>> magazine for a year. Also, Susan Polgar was given a cover story on
>> Chess Life magazine of her kicking a football after she had won a
>> patzer unrated exhibition tournament held in connection with the World
>> Cup of Football.
>>
>> 9. All of the above was designed to create in the minds of the chess-
>> playing public the impression that Susan Polgar was achieving great
>> things in chess, whereas in reality Polgar was retired as a chess
>> player and had not played an internationally rated game of chess since
>> 2004 and had only played in two rated chess events since 1996.
>>
>> 10. In order to bring about the defeat of Sloan and the election of
>> Polgar, Goichberg caused to be appointed the most rabidly anti-Sam
>> Sloan and pro-Polgar moderators to the USCF Issues Forum. For example,
>> Herbert Rodney Vaughn was appointed as moderator. This same person,
>> Herbert Rodney Vaughn, had been allowed to sit in the 2006 delegates
>> meeting as a delegate from Ohio without being properly appointed, then
>> had tied up the delegates meeting with a slew of anti-Sam Sloan
>> motions including the aforementioned changes in the by-laws to make it
>> easier to recall a board member. Then this same Herbert Rodney Vaughn
>> had been allowed to camp out for a week in the USCFs office in
>> Crossville preparing a 400-page ethics complaint in color against Sam
>> Sloan using the USCFs office facilities and tying up office staff.
>> Then this same person was then made moderator of the USCF Issues Forum
>> just so that he could delete or remove any posting by a USCF member
>> favorable to Sloan or any posting embarrassing to Polgar and Truong
>> such as postings asking them whether they were married to each other
>> or not or what they did for a living of the names of the billion
>> dollar corporations that Truong claimed he had rescued and saved.
>>
>> 11. Goichberg did of all these things even though he knew from vast
>> experience that Polgar and Truong were scammers and that Truong was
>> the Fake Sam Sloan, because they were useful to his purposes at that
>> time. Goichberg believed that through this, Polgar would be elected
>> and Sloan would be defeated. Goichberg also believed that Truong would
>> be defeated. He felt that Polgar would be no danger to him as long as
>> she was alone on the board.
>>
>> 12. Late in the campaign, Polgar and Truong suddenly started attacking
>> Goichberg, even though Goichberg had been supporting Polgar up until
>> that point. This caused Goichberg to withdraw his support from Polgar.
>> Goichberg mailed 17,000 postcards to USCF members primarily attacking
>> Sloan but also making critical remarks about Polgar and Truong.
>> However, by then it was too late as Polgar and Truong were already so
>> far ahead that even after Goichberg had turned against them they were
>> elected anyway.
>>
>> It has been written that a chess master must have a heightened sense
>> of danger. (I wish I could remember who first wrote that.) Goichberg
>> is a chess master, or at least he was when he was an active player, so
>> he should have realized that Sloan posed no danger to him but there
>> was considerable danger from Polgar and Truong. He should have
>> remembered that the Hungarian Chess Federation was convulsed by the
>> antics of Miss Polgar before she moved to America.
>>
>> Goichberg thought that the result of the election would be that Sloan
>> would be replaced by Polgar, which would be a good exchange from the
>> point of view of Goichberg. What happened instead was that his friend
>> Schultz and Sloan were replaced by Polgar and Truong.
>>
>> This should make Goichberg afraid that not only might the USCF
>> collapse but his own CCA might collapse as well. Goichberg should be
>> trying to rally the troops and solidify the opposition to Polgar and
>> Truong.
>>
>> Instead, Goichberg, oblivious to the danger to himself, is now trying
>> to push through a crazy scheme to make Chess Life magazine not a part
>> of the regular USCF membership. Even though the Goichberg plan has
>> almost no support, he is pushing ahead with it relentlessly. Hanon
>> Russell has already put him on notice that he may be suing the USCF
>> over this and will likely stop paying the $150,000 per year he agreed
>> to pay under the contract.
>>
>> Everybody has been telling him but Goichberg refuses to believe that
>> making the magazine optional will ultimately result in a complete stop
>> in the publication of the magazine and the collapse of the USCF, as
>> tens of thousands of members will decline to renew their memberships.
>>
>> The likely outcome of this is that Goichberg will be thrown out and
>> Polgar and Truong will take control of the federation.
>>
>> In other words, Bill Goichberg will be hoist by his own petard.
>>
>> Sam Sloan
>
--
"Do that which is right..."
Rev. J.D. Walker
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 15:11:32
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
|
"J.D. Walker" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>> On Jul 12, 12:57 am, samsloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Goichberg is being hoist by his own petard
>>>
>>> "Hoist by His Own Petard" is a term perhaps derived from Shakespeare
>>
>> Sam, at least get the quote right:
>>
>> For 'tis the sport to have the engineer
>> Hoist with his own petar; and it shall go hard
>> But I will delve one yard below their mines,
>> And blow them at the moon.
>>
>> Hamlet (act 3, scene 3, if I understand the ODQ's notation)
>>
>
> Permit me to augment a bit...
>
> Word History: The French used p�tard, "a loud discharge of intestinal
> gas," for a kind of infernal engine for blasting through the gates of a
> city. "To be hoist by one's own petard," a now proverbial phrase
> apparently originating with Shakespeare's Hamlet (around 1604) not long
> after the word entered English (around 1598), means "to blow oneself up
> with one's own bomb, be undone by one's own devices." The French noun pet,
> "fart," developed regularly from the Latin noun peditum, from the
> Indo-European root *pezd-, "fart."
Most likely so, and less likely [since it is hjarder to substantiate] is an
earlier word from the same root~ that had been adopted into English [late
medieval Anglo Norman]
PETRONEL : a kind of blunderbuss, or horse-pistol. Sir Petronel Flash, a
boasting fellow, a braggadocio, Florio p. 585
The word is mentionined in the Brit. Bibl. ii. 167
The older word [and phonetically truer in sound to the French] is PATEREROS:
chambered pieces of ordnance, Archaeolica, xxviii, 376.
One regional English word, much older is PAYL; to beat or thrash [Salop]
which is an adaptation of the Anglo Saxon [still in use] PAY; (1) to beat
which is later use, and (2) to make amends, which is referenced in MS Cantab
Ff ii 38 f 148.
There is also the Northern world PETHUR; with a sense of acting rashly to
one's own regret or harm.
Phil Innes
> [ http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petard ]
>
> In the 1880s a stage performer named himself "Le P�tomane" and elevated
> the p�tard to an artistic/entertainment level. His act was a hit in its
> day.
>
> [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A9tomane ]
>
>>
>>> which means to be caught in one's own trap.
>>>
>>> http://www.bartleby.com/59/4/hoistbyoneso.html
>>>
>>> http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hoist%20by%20your%20own%20petard.html
|
|
