Main
Date: 04 Dec 2007 16:37:35
From: samsloan
Subject: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??

Nobody can seem to get access to the USCF Issues Forum today.

Perhaps it is as computer problem. On the other hand, manipulation and
abuse of the USCF Issues Forum is a central issue to the Sloan vs.
Truong lawsuit now going on in federal court and perhaps the lawyers
told them to close it.

Even before this, three board members, Channing, Polgar and Truong,
were on record as wanting to close it.

Sam Sloan




 
Date: 06 Dec 2007 08:59:08
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 6, 4:21 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Dec 5, 5:16 pm, Louis Blair <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > By the way, being placed in the queue is not the same as being
> > "banned". It means that posts must be approved by a moderator
> > before they will appear in the forum.
>
> It might have been intended that way, but that is not the way it was.
>
> I was not put in the moderation queqe. I was banned as far as I could
> tell. The USCF Issues Forum was invisible to me. I could see the other
> five forums but there was a notice that I could not edit or post to
> those forums.
>
> I was told that this was a computer problem. Now this problem has been
> "corrected" just a few minutes ago. I can now see the USCF Issues
> Forum but I cannot post there.
>
> What I can see is that almost every posting since I was banned two
> days ago involved attacks on me and responses. It seems that they are
> discussing nothing else. Yet, I am not able to defend myself. I am
> attacks but I cannot respond.
>
> Also, I see that the two immediate reasons why I was banned concerned
> the thread "Silence of the Board". I have just read all the postings
> to that thread and I can find nothing remotely objectionable there.
> Can you tell me what is wrong with my postings to that thread?
>
> If a posting has been removed from that thread, I should have been
> notified and I have not been.
>
> Also, it says that I was sanctioned about postings concerning Meeting
> Link. The Meeting Link Scandal is a hot issue right now in the USCF.
> The issue is that it turns out that Meeting Link was getting rebates
> or commissions for booking USCF tournaments into hotels. For example,
> when we hold a national scholastic championship where 4,000 kids play,
> obviously there are a lot of hotel room nights involved. We now learn
> that for several years Meeting Link has received a commission from the
> hotels for booking these events. Yet, we never even heard of that
> organization. One and now possibly two USCF employees had undisclosed
> links to Meeting Link and received payments. One possibly even worked
> for Meeting Link while at the same time also worked for the USCF. Why
> is no discussion of this issue allowed on the USCF Forums?
>
> Regarding the posting by Louis Blair defending Gregory Alexander and
> attacking me, he is being disingenuous. The FOC was in fact debating
> what to do about Gregory Alexander. Since I am not a member of the FOC
> and their discussions are secret, I do not know what actions were
> proposed to be taken by the FOC but I know from comments by FOC
> members and by Gregory Alexander himself that he was being charged
> with misconduct for specifically disobeying directives of the FOC by
> pulling postings that the FOC had ordered reinstated. That was
> discussed at length on the Forum when these events occurred. Why are
> the current forum members not allowed to know about this? Why are they
> allowed to atttack me with every posting but I am not allowed to
> defend myself??
>
> Sam Sloan

I just saw a note from Mike Nolan that explained that there was some
sort
of mistake that caused Sam Sloan (and others) to be "blocked" instead
of being placed in the queue. The note indicated that there had been
an
attempt to correct this.

As for my supposedly being "disingenuous", Sam Sloan offers no
evidence because he has none. Again, no sanction against Gregory
was being discussed by the FOC at the time he resigned and Sam
Sloan should not indicate otherwise.


 
Date: 06 Dec 2007 06:56:33
From: zdrakec
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 6, 6:21 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Dec 5, 5:16 pm, Louis Blair <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > By the way, being placed in the queue is not the same as being
> > "banned". It means that posts must be approved by a moderator
> > before they will appear in the forum.
>
> It might have been intended that way, but that is not the way it was.
>
> I was not put in the moderation queqe. I was banned as far as I could
> tell. The USCF Issues Forum was invisible to me. I could see the other
> five forums but there was a notice that I could not edit or post to
> those forums.
>
> I was told that this was a computer problem. Now this problem has been
> "corrected" just a few minutes ago. I can now see the USCF Issues
> Forum but I cannot post there.
>
> What I can see is that almost every posting since I was banned two
> days ago involved attacks on me and responses. It seems that they are
> discussing nothing else. Yet, I am not able to defend myself. I am
> attacks but I cannot respond.
>
> Also, I see that the two immediate reasons why I was banned concerned
> the thread "Silence of the Board". I have just read all the postings
> to that thread and I can find nothing remotely objectionable there.
> Can you tell me what is wrong with my postings to that thread?
>
> If a posting has been removed from that thread, I should have been
> notified and I have not been.
>
> Also, it says that I was sanctioned about postings concerning Meeting
> Link. The Meeting Link Scandal is a hot issue right now in the USCF.
> The issue is that it turns out that Meeting Link was getting rebates
> or commissions for booking USCF tournaments into hotels. For example,
> when we hold a national scholastic championship where 4,000 kids play,
> obviously there are a lot of hotel room nights involved. We now learn
> that for several years Meeting Link has received a commission from the
> hotels for booking these events. Yet, we never even heard of that
> organization. One and now possibly two USCF employees had undisclosed
> links to Meeting Link and received payments. One possibly even worked
> for Meeting Link while at the same time also worked for the USCF. Why
> is no discussion of this issue allowed on the USCF Forums?
>
> Regarding the posting by Louis Blair defending Gregory Alexander and
> attacking me, he is being disingenuous. The FOC was in fact debating
> what to do about Gregory Alexander. Since I am not a member of the FOC
> and their discussions are secret, I do not know what actions were
> proposed to be taken by the FOC but I know from comments by FOC
> members and by Gregory Alexander himself that he was being charged
> with misconduct for specifically disobeying directives of the FOC by
> pulling postings that the FOC had ordered reinstated. That was
> discussed at length on the Forum when these events occurred. Why are
> the current forum members not allowed to know about this? Why are they
> allowed to atttack me with every posting but I am not allowed to
> defend myself??
>
> Sam Sloan

So sue them.


 
Date: 06 Dec 2007 04:21:02
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 5, 5:16 pm, Louis Blair <[email protected] > wrote:

> By the way, being placed in the queue is not the same as being
> "banned". It means that posts must be approved by a moderator
> before they will appear in the forum.

It might have been intended that way, but that is not the way it was.

I was not put in the moderation queqe. I was banned as far as I could
tell. The USCF Issues Forum was invisible to me. I could see the other
five forums but there was a notice that I could not edit or post to
those forums.

I was told that this was a computer problem. Now this problem has been
"corrected" just a few minutes ago. I can now see the USCF Issues
Forum but I cannot post there.

What I can see is that almost every posting since I was banned two
days ago involved attacks on me and responses. It seems that they are
discussing nothing else. Yet, I am not able to defend myself. I am
attacks but I cannot respond.

Also, I see that the two immediate reasons why I was banned concerned
the thread "Silence of the Board". I have just read all the postings
to that thread and I can find nothing remotely objectionable there.
Can you tell me what is wrong with my postings to that thread?

If a posting has been removed from that thread, I should have been
notified and I have not been.

Also, it says that I was sanctioned about postings concerning Meeting
Link. The Meeting Link Scandal is a hot issue right now in the USCF.
The issue is that it turns out that Meeting Link was getting rebates
or commissions for booking USCF tournaments into hotels. For example,
when we hold a national scholastic championship where 4,000 kids play,
obviously there are a lot of hotel room nights involved. We now learn
that for several years Meeting Link has received a commission from the
hotels for booking these events. Yet, we never even heard of that
organization. One and now possibly two USCF employees had undisclosed
links to Meeting Link and received payments. One possibly even worked
for Meeting Link while at the same time also worked for the USCF. Why
is no discussion of this issue allowed on the USCF Forums?

Regarding the posting by Louis Blair defending Gregory Alexander and
attacking me, he is being disingenuous. The FOC was in fact debating
what to do about Gregory Alexander. Since I am not a member of the FOC
and their discussions are secret, I do not know what actions were
proposed to be taken by the FOC but I know from comments by FOC
members and by Gregory Alexander himself that he was being charged
with misconduct for specifically disobeying directives of the FOC by
pulling postings that the FOC had ordered reinstated. That was
discussed at length on the Forum when these events occurred. Why are
the current forum members not allowed to know about this? Why are they
allowed to atttack me with every posting but I am not allowed to
defend myself??

Sam Sloan


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 14:16:47
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 5, 6:29 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
7 Turns out that myself, Bernen and George have all been
7 banned without warning from the USCF Issues Forum by
7 the newly installed "Moderation Committee".
7
7 The announcement just became visible this morning.
7
7 The announcement contains the following curious statement:
7
7 (Please note that this list does not include any posts that
7 violated Mr. Hall's directive.)
7
7 In other words, we have been banned for writing things that
7 were not against the rules.
7
7 Sam Sloan

That is not what the announcement was trying to indicate.
"Mr. Hall's directive" refers to a special rule that was announced
in post #72920.

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72920#72920

The announcement is simply pointing out that the moderation
committee is not making a decision on the basis of violation of
that particular rule. There are plenty of other rules described in
post #72051 (and in post #79396.)

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72051#72051

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=79396#79396

As I understand it, it is those other rules that the committee had
in mind when it decided that the queue was appropriate.

By the way, being placed in the queue is not the same as being
"banned". It means that posts must be approved by a moderator
before they will appear in the forum.


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 14:11:20
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 5, 6:29 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
7 Turns out that myself, Bernen and George have all been banned
without
7 warning from the USCF Issues Forum by the newly installed
"Moderation
7 Committee".
7
7 The announcement just became visible this morning.
7
7 The announcement contains the following curious statement:
7
7 (Please note that this list does not include any posts that violated
7 Mr. Hall's directive.)
7
7 In other words, we have been banned for writing things that were not
7 against the rules.
7
7 Sam Sloan

That is not what the announcement was trying to indicate.
"Mr. Hall's directive" refers to a special rule that was announced
in post #72920.

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72920#72920

The announcement is simply pointing out that the moderation
committee is not making a decision on the basis of violation of
that particular rule. There are plenty of other rules described in
post #72051 (and in post #79396.)

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72051#72051

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=79396#79396

As I understand it, it is those other rules that the committee had
in mind when it decided that the queue was appropriate.


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 14:09:04
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 5, 6:29 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> Turns out that myself, Bernen and George have all been banned without
> warning from the USCF Issues Forum by the newly installed "Moderation
> Committee".
>
> The announcement just became visible this morning.
>
> The announcement contains the following curious statement:
>
> (Please note that this list does not include any posts that violated
> Mr. Hall's directive.)
>
> In other words, we have been banned for writing things that were not
> against the rules.
>
> Sam Sloan

That is not what the announcement was trying to indicate.
"Mr. Hall's directive" refers to a special rule that was announced
in post #72920.

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72920#72920

The announcement is simply pointing out that the moderation
committee is not making a decision on the basis of violation of
that particular rule. There are plenty of other rules described in
post #72051 (and in post #79396.)

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=72051#72051

http://main.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=79396#79396

As I understand it, it is those other rules that the committee had
in mind when it decided that the queue was appropriate.


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 19:27:50
From: Guy Macon
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??



samsloan wrote:

>In other words, we have been banned for writing things that
>were not against the rules.

Your assertion that you obeyed the rules would hold more weight
if you were to make a commitment starting now to never again
break the rules concerning posting material that has nothing
to do with computer chess in the computer chess newsgroup, and
to never again break the rules concerning posting material that
has nothing to do with chess analysis in the chess analysis
newsgroup.

I note that you have never been willing to discuss this
particular behavior, ignoring all comments and criticisms
about it. This, too, lends weight to the theory that
you have no good reason for breaking the rules other than
pure self-interest. I would very much like to see a reply
either agreeing to stop or giving a good reason why you
refuse to stop. I won't hold my breath...






 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 09:51:36
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 5, 8:29 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> Turns out that myself, Bernen and George have all been banned without
> warning from the USCF Issues Forum by the newly installed "Moderation
> Committee".
>
> The announcement just became visible this morning.
>
> The announcement contains the following curious statement:
>
> (Please note that this list does not include any posts that violated
> Mr. Hall's directive.)
>
> In other words, we have been banned for writing things that were not
> against the rules.
>
> Sam Sloan

No. FOr things which lacked any inkling of intelligence.


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 06:29:21
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
Turns out that myself, Bernen and George have all been banned without
warning from the USCF Issues Forum by the newly installed "Moderation
Committee".

The announcement just became visible this morning.

The announcement contains the following curious statement:

(Please note that this list does not include any posts that violated
Mr. Hall's directive.)

In other words, we have been banned for writing things that were not
against the rules.

Sam Sloan


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 02:10:53
From:
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??


samsloan wrote:
> On Dec 4, 10:14 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> > samsloan wrote:
> > > Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
> >
> > > Nobody can seem to get access to the USCF Issues Forum today.
> >
> > > Perhaps it is as computer problem. On the other hand, manipulation and
> > > abuse of the USCF Issues Forum is a central issue to the Sloan vs.
> > > Truong lawsuit now going on in federal court and perhaps the lawyers
> > > told them to close it.
> >
> > > Even before this, three board members, Channing, Polgar and Truong,
> > > were on record as wanting to close it.
> >
> > > Sam Sloan
> >
> > Let's take up a collection to buy Sam a tinfoil hat. (Perhaps Sam
> > didn't notice that he had been placed in the :"moderation queue" and
> > can no longer post without permission from an adult?)
>
> If such a thing has happened it should be in the Announcements section
> and I should have received a PM. Neither has happened.
>
> Sam Sloan


It is. Apparently you didn't read it. See below..


by Terry_Vibbert on Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:58 pm #81812
LEVEL THREE SANCTION

By a vote of 3 in favor and none opposed, the Moderation Committee is
imposing a level 3 sanction on Sam Sloan 11115292 as a result of his
posts:

Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:25 pm #80629, Silence of the Board
....Statement without evidence

Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:31 pm #80632, Silence of the Board
....Speculating about motives.

Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:25 am #79969, Letter to the Court in Sloan vs.
Truong
....This post contains a quote of an obscene usenet post.

Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:03 am #79373, Recall Petition - Paul Truong
....Pulled because of inappropriate link.

Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:03 pm #78796, Comparing Hillary Clinton, Susan
Polgar lec
....This post contains unsupported charges

Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:24 am #76991, Questions about Meeting Link, Inc
....Suggestions, without substantial proof...

Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:02 am #76494, Susan Polgar complains of a "securit
....Name calling

Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:02 pm #76398, Rule 4(d) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Pro
....Post is disrespectful, bullying, threatening, and intimidating.

(Please note that this list does not include any posts that violated
Mr. Hall's directive.)

Accordingly, Sam Sloan 11115292 is to be placed into the Moderation
Queue as outlined in the AUG:

Third offense: Poster is placed in a moderation queue, requiring prior
approval of posts. This status may be rescinded at the discretion of
the Moderation Committee. If queue status is rescinded, the poster
reverts to having two offenses.
Last edited by Terry_Vibbert on Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:15 pm, edited 1
time in total.


 
Date: 05 Dec 2007 00:42:12
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
On Dec 4, 10:14 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
>
> > Nobody can seem to get access to the USCF Issues Forum today.
>
> > Perhaps it is as computer problem. On the other hand, manipulation and
> > abuse of the USCF Issues Forum is a central issue to the Sloan vs.
> > Truong lawsuit now going on in federal court and perhaps the lawyers
> > told them to close it.
>
> > Even before this, three board members, Channing, Polgar and Truong,
> > were on record as wanting to close it.
>
> > Sam Sloan
>
> Let's take up a collection to buy Sam a tinfoil hat. (Perhaps Sam
> didn't notice that he had been placed in the :"moderation queue" and
> can no longer post without permission from an adult?)

If such a thing has happened it should be in the Announcements section
and I should have received a PM. Neither has happened.

Sam Sloan


 
Date: 04 Dec 2007 19:14:16
From:
Subject: Re: Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??


samsloan wrote:
> Has the USCF Issues Forum Closed Down??
>
> Nobody can seem to get access to the USCF Issues Forum today.
>
> Perhaps it is as computer problem. On the other hand, manipulation and
> abuse of the USCF Issues Forum is a central issue to the Sloan vs.
> Truong lawsuit now going on in federal court and perhaps the lawyers
> told them to close it.
>
> Even before this, three board members, Channing, Polgar and Truong,
> were on record as wanting to close it.
>
> Sam Sloan


Let's take up a collection to buy Sam a tinfoil hat. (Perhaps Sam
didn't notice that he had been placed in the :"moderation queue" and
can no longer post without permission from an adult?)