| |
Main
Date: 08 Oct 2007 07:46:31
From: Rob
Subject: Why only the USCF
|
Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
other organizations different from the USCF?
Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
Rob
|
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 20:39:19
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 10:58 am, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> I have been reading these groups for nearly two years and it is ONLY
> complaints with the USCF.
Then you must have missed *many* of the rants posted here
by Larry Parr; he often attacks FIDE, even while in the middle
of attacking the USCF, or perhaps in the middle of brushing his
teeth.
> While English is the uniform language of the internet, that does not
> exclude the rest of the world from complaining about their home
> organizations problems, if they have any.
Right. But let's say Boris Slavishnekov wanted to complain
about the Russian chess federation -- would he not be more
likely to do that /in Russian/? So his complaints would
probably appear someplace else. Besides, Americans are
just born whiners.
> So. Rather than make the discussion one of personalities, why is it
> that only members of the USCF complain about the USCF?
Once again you have missed the k; look for example at
the countless complaints posted here by Larry Parr -- who is
not a USCF member at all! In fact, I would rank Mr. Parr as
the number one attacker of the USCF in rgcm, so not seeing
him was a titanic blunder. Maybe Sam Sloan has passed up
the Great Parrthenium recently on account of having been
first elected and then not re-elected to the board, but much
of the time he posts about other interests like sex, unsound
openings, sex, Thomas Jefferson's slave children, or sex. ( I
can't rank the USCF attackers in rgcp accurately because
I tend to read only those postings which are cross-posted to
both rgcp and rgcm, which might skew the results.)
Here is another item to consider: some posters have
complained that everything here relates to the United States,
to "our" narrow world of chess; so it is known that this is not
the place to discuss, say, problems with the Vietnamese
chess federation. Such posters might well expect to be
attacked or just ignored for a lack of interest. This goes
right back to the language and numbers again; Americans
dominate these chess newsgroups in terms of numbers,
and the language tends to exclude native speakers of
anything but English. You may have noticed the postings
by a fellow from St. Kitts -- in English; he attacks the USCF
all the time here, and I expect there is no reason for him to
be a USCF member, since "we" have *not yet* taken over
his country.
Diving a bit deeper, we can postulate that many Americans
are frustrated -- still -- after what happened with the Cold
War hype and the subsequent Fischer bust, where the mass
media told "us" that "we" had beaten the Russian Bear, only
to look on as the Bear got back up, dusted himself off, and
sat back down in his chess throne, making himself comfy
again (until just now, with GM Anand's win). This frustration
may well be one root cause behind the tendency of so many
Americans to complain about chess politics.
Another item to consider is how many of "us" here in
America have computers and internet access. Not everyone
is so "wealthy", and not all countries sport a large population
of idlers, who have so much free time on their hands.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 19:31:33
From: Rich Hutnik
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 12:00 pm, David Richerby <[email protected] >
wrote:
> Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
>
> Perhaps it's because membership of the USCF is relatively expensive
> and a de facto requirement for playing in tournaments in the US? I
> don't care much about the ECF because I'm not a member and all they do
> for me is rate my games.
>
> Dave.
If the USCF actually did more for the money, would it be worth being a
member? Is it the price of what they offer that is the problem?
- Rich
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 21:29:37
From:
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 4:12 pm, PB <[email protected] > wrote:
> And could one add that in the USCF you really do seem to have a range
> of outstanding narcissists? I mean, we do too, but some of the
> posters here really take the biscuit.
>
> Paul Buswell
I agree, but we're supposed to. "Individuality" is encouraged to the
extreme. Chessplayers over here are more on the fringe of society as
well, and that's reflected in the regulars on these newsgroups who
need to constantly draw attention to themselves. I've heard
chessplaying in Europe is more mainstream and almost considered a
respectable career!
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 14:12:45
From: PB
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
And could one add that in the USCF you really do seem to have a range
of outstanding narcissists? I mean, we do too, but some of the
posters here really take the biscuit.
Paul Buswell
On Oct 8, 10:05?pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Oct 8, 3:36 pm, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 8, 3:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > > > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > > > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
>
> > > What do these acronyms stand for? There could be dozens of reasons why
> > > no one complains about them on these newsgroups. Are you suggesting
> > > they don't have any problems? How many members do they have and how
> > > many are online? What is there to complain about? What is the penalty
> > > if someone is found to be complaining about them? What is to be gained
> > > by complaining about them online? Why bother? Who cares if there is
> > > something to complain about or not? What other grievance resolution
> > > options are there for members? And on and on and on.
>
> > ECF.. English Chess Federation
> > ICU.. Irish Chess Union
> > SCF.. Scottish Chess Federation
> > CCF.. Canadian Chess Federation
>
> > Answer to all of your other questions is I dont know and that why I
> > asked the question. :-)
> > Rob
>
> Cultural differences. Disputes handled internally out of the public
> eye. Speaking out is bad form and publicly discouraged. Isn't that how
> it works? UK/Irish care about nothing but drinking and gambling. What
> is it they care enough to complain about other than football (and
> America)? Canadians are well satisfied with curling and hockey so why
> not a lousy chess organization too.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 21:05:40
From:
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 3:36 pm, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Oct 8, 3:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
>
> > What do these acronyms stand for? There could be dozens of reasons why
> > no one complains about them on these newsgroups. Are you suggesting
> > they don't have any problems? How many members do they have and how
> > many are online? What is there to complain about? What is the penalty
> > if someone is found to be complaining about them? What is to be gained
> > by complaining about them online? Why bother? Who cares if there is
> > something to complain about or not? What other grievance resolution
> > options are there for members? And on and on and on.
>
> ECF.. English Chess Federation
> ICU.. Irish Chess Union
> SCF.. Scottish Chess Federation
> CCF.. Canadian Chess Federation
>
> Answer to all of your other questions is I dont know and that why I
> asked the question. :-)
> Rob
Cultural differences. Disputes handled internally out of the public
eye. Speaking out is bad form and publicly discouraged. Isn't that how
it works? UK/Irish care about nothing but drinking and gambling. What
is it they care enough to complain about other than football (and
America)? Canadians are well satisfied with curling and hockey so why
not a lousy chess organization too.
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 13:36:07
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 3:23 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
>
> What do these acronyms stand for? There could be dozens of reasons why
> no one complains about them on these newsgroups. Are you suggesting
> they don't have any problems? How many members do they have and how
> many are online? What is there to complain about? What is the penalty
> if someone is found to be complaining about them? What is to be gained
> by complaining about them online? Why bother? Who cares if there is
> something to complain about or not? What other grievance resolution
> options are there for members? And on and on and on.
ECF.. English Chess Federation
ICU.. Irish Chess Union
SCF.. Scottish Chess Federation
CCF.. Canadian Chess Federation
Answer to all of your other questions is I dont know and that why I
asked the question. :-)
Rob
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 20:23:40
From:
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
What do these acronyms stand for? There could be dozens of reasons why
no one complains about them on these newsgroups. Are you suggesting
they don't have any problems? How many members do they have and how
many are online? What is there to complain about? What is the penalty
if someone is found to be complaining about them? What is to be gained
by complaining about them online? Why bother? Who cares if there is
something to complain about or not? What other grievance resolution
options are there for members? And on and on and on.
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 16:54:39
From:
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
> What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
> other organizations different from the USCF?
>
> Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
> Rob
You don't want to know what is going on with St Kitts and Nevis to
FIDE. Only so much drama can happen at once.
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 17:00:11
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
Perhaps it's because membership of the USCF is relatively expensive
and a de facto requirement for playing in tournaments in the US? I
don't care much about the ECF because I'm not a member and all they do
for me is rate my games.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Confusing Windows (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ graphical user interface but you can't
understand it!
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 08:58:13
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 10:47 am, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> Rob wrote:
> > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
> > What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
> > other organizations different from the USCF?
>
> > Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
>
> (...thinking hard...) 1.g4!
>
> This forum is in English, and Americans dominate in terms
> of numbers -- that's why.
>
> Now here's another interesting question: why is it that only
> now do the ratpackers begin to complain about the complaints
> against the USCF? I say it is probably because just recently
> a favorite of IM Innes' -- namely Susan Polgar -- has come under
> attack in the "fake Sloan" case. I suggest that requests for IM
> Innes to request a statement from Paul Truong with regard to his
> guilt or innocent may have something to do with it. I say this
> because it seems that certain actions are "automatic", like say
> blinking, breathing, or Rob Mitchell rushing to the aid of IM
> Innes, who comes to the aid of Susan Polgar, for instance.
>
> So I interpret this sudden need to complain -- after months of
> political jabberings which engendered no similar response -- as
> an attempt to take some pressure off of IM Innes, who must feel
> under the gun about now. I see this as a feeble attempt to
> silence criticism which may well be fully justified; criticism of
> Paul Truong, and by close association (if nothing else) Susan
> Polgar, and going a step or two further in that vein, IM Innes.
>
> I see it as not reflecting legitimate concern, simply on account
> of the suspicious timing. But maybe that's just me.
>
> -- help bot
I have been reading these groups for nearly two years and it is ONLY
complaints with the USCF.
While English is the uniform language of the internet, that does not
exclude the rest of the world from complaining about their home
organizations problems, if they have any.
So. Rather than make the discussion one of personalities, why is it
that only members of the USCF complain about the USCF?
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 08:47:40
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
Rob wrote:
> Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
> What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
> other organizations different from the USCF?
>
> Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
(...thinking hard...) 1.g4!
This forum is in English, and Americans dominate in terms
of numbers -- that's why.
Now here's another interesting question: why is it that only
now do the ratpackers begin to complain about the complaints
against the USCF? I say it is probably because just recently
a favorite of IM Innes' -- namely Susan Polgar -- has come under
attack in the "fake Sloan" case. I suggest that requests for IM
Innes to request a statement from Paul Truong with regard to his
guilt or innocent may have something to do with it. I say this
because it seems that certain actions are "automatic", like say
blinking, breathing, or Rob Mitchell rushing to the aid of IM
Innes, who comes to the aid of Susan Polgar, for instance.
So I interpret this sudden need to complain -- after months of
political jabberings which engendered no similar response -- as
an attempt to take some pressure off of IM Innes, who must feel
under the gun about now. I see this as a feeble attempt to
silence criticism which may well be fully justified; criticism of
Paul Truong, and by close association (if nothing else) Susan
Polgar, and going a step or two further in that vein, IM Innes.
I see it as not reflecting legitimate concern, simply on account
of the suspicious timing. But maybe that's just me.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 08:00:22
From: Rob
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 9:50 am, The Historian <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> > with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> > have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
> > What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
> > other organizations different from the USCF?
>
> > Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
> > Rob
>
> There are more Americans online?
LOL!
Well, even if that is the case there should still be something from
the others, right?
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 07:50:56
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Why only the USCF
|
On Oct 8, 9:46 am, Rob <[email protected] > wrote:
> Why is it that in the ENTIRE WORLD of chess politics ONLY problems
> with the USCF are aired online here to any degree? We don't seen to
> have problems in the ECF, ICU, SCF CCF or ECU?
> What makes the USCF so special? There must be something? How are these
> other organizations different from the USCF?
>
> Think hard and honestly and come up with a thoughtful reply.
> Rob
There are more Americans online?
|
|
