wrote in message
ups.com...
CASE NOT PROVEN

Sam has made a circumstantial case against Paul
Truong as the Fake Sam Sloan. He argues that the case
is true because he has managed to eliminate possible
alternatives such as a Neil Brennan or a Stan Booz.

But what is Proven, Mr. Parr, is that Sam Sloan is not showing any
indications of being a useful member of the board, since what we wanted was
to end the news-blackout. If his choice to continue making rather
speculatory charges, then what is not speculated upon will become diluted to
such a degree that it will be greatly reduced in value.

Mr. Sloan needs to get it into his head that people wanted more straight
talk about on-going USCF issues than they were accustomed to hearing from
the Board or Jerry Hanken - who is not exactly a replacement 'critic' for
Larry Evans.

I don't assess any other reason that he became elected.

In this current 'practice' period of managing chess we have seen a variety
of distortions based on exaggeration of his own role in the affairs of the
Polgars - combined with this rather simple animus disliking of their current
manager.

Sloan needs to focus on just a few tasksw he can accomplish in the next 12
months, and he he will achieve them. If they have no beneficial effect on
the future [as this melee with Polgars has not] he will distract himself
silly, and in a couple of months prove himself useless as a chess manager.

He has some other potential, not as a rather outre personality type, but in
playing the /role/ of inside reporter and in addressing /vital/ business -
which I would say is identified by whatever should form a foundation and
superstructure in support of chess USA in the future.

I think he has not understood this as the reason he was elected, nor as the
only basis, as I see it, for continued interest in himself.

Phil Innes
..

I see no proof that Mr. Truong is the Fake Sam
Sloan; I see speculation. So, too, I still see no
proof that Sam Sloan has ever molested an unwilling
female -- underage or overage. I see speculation. I
see people drawing conclusions from inadequate
evidence.

Frankly, I found Sam's attempts to dismiss Stan
Booz as a possible miscreant to be weak. Like any
good rgcpist, Neil Brennan is filled with hatred and
bile, and he could sustain such a campaign
emotionally, though the capability to hate over a span
of months means little in terms of making a case.

There is a sickness in the Fake Sam Sloan, and I
don't find that sickness in Mr. Truong. Bill Brock or
Vinnie Hart may have the required emotional makeup
that somehow seems absent in Mr. Truong.

Still, my impressions of people unprove nothing,
just as Sam's long analyses prove nothing.

The truth is we still do not know the identity of
the Fake Sam Sloan(s).