View Single Post
  #8  
Old September 2nd 07, 06:36 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
Bruce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default "enforcement" vs. "strict enforcement"

On Sep 1, 11:56 am, samsloan wrote:
From the BINFOS for August 28, 2007. Note that Randy Bauer and Jim


Berry seem to be the only two sensible people on the board:

I abstain.

RB

OK, the motion has passed 6-0 with one abstention.

Bill Goichberg

Chessoffice@xxxxxxx wrote:

In a message dated 8/28/2007 2:10:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight

Time, randybauer2300@xxxxxxxxx writes:

Well, if the ball starts rolling, I'll be the first to
applaud - unless it is a Sisyphus exercise, of course. For the time
being, I'll pass on strict construction.

RB

Is that a no vote or an abstention?

Bill Goichberg

JABerryCG@xxxxxxx wrote:

Actually RB according to Joel this motion is important
because it gives Bill and Susan something to agree upon and start the
ball rolling for a better USCF.
If it takes a mundane motion to jump-start this train,
then I vote yes to strict enforcement of the Issues Forum guidelines
by the FOC and ED.
Susan-congrats on progress with Eric Moskow!!!
We have 67 pre-entries for 10-SS Labor Day FIDE tnmt
in Stillwater (USCF chess city of 2007)
Got final financials yesterday-thx.
Jim Berry


Why not just shut the puppy down cancel the idiotic internet liability
insurance policy and use the $11,000/Year for worthwhile program?


Ads
 

Advertising - Just Holden Commodores - Loans - Mortgage Calculator - Free Ringtones