Perhaps someone could post this note at USCF forums, too...?

wrote in message
ps.com...
ANOTHER TABOO TOPIC

"Someone once quipped that if Russian and American chess officials
changed places, nobody would notice the difference." -- GM Larry Evans
in THIS CRAZY WORLD OF CHESS

The mention of censorship is now to be censored
by the Federation censors at the USCF forum!

It is amusing, ain't it! Grimly amusing. So far as I can tell by reading
there, the maximum attendance has been 41 at the height of the voting
season, but usually there are just 4 or 5 people, being watched by 2 or 3
people, in case they mention chess management, the taboo subject - and yet
the reason USCF exists!

There are so many moderated forums these days, I wonder who USCF think they
are catering to? The only reason I can think for USCF to have a genuine
forum /is/ to discuss chess politics / chess management.

Even the new board who ran more on principle than on personality, must take
into account that previously all chess management was personality driven,
and supported by various clacques of followers and advocates. Even genius
level new board members can't shift the entrenched corporate culture, and
people are naturally anxious to clarify issues previously bent out of shape
by the Old Guard - to such a degree that they want 'show me' not 'tell me'
from the New Board.

Rob Mitchell's remark follows:

perhaps if someone not a USCF member moderated the forums, there would
be no politics as that person would have nothing to gain.

Quite! In fact two calls emerged last year for an omgoodsman - one NM said
it was necessary to expedite the 9 month lapsus in correspondance ratings,
for which the cc players had paid good money to USCF but received only
promises... and the second was for an independent forum moderator. Even a
past president [Redman] said the USCF forum was entirely political.

It really depends what the current board intend to forum to be - many posts
there are repetitive and can be answered by a FAQ. But if chess
management/politics is taboo, what is there left to discuss? Chessville's
forum seems to cover more ground on both the theory and practice of play,
and good folks like Dan Heisman often hold fort, and field all sorts of
inquiries. We also talk a lot about graves [lol] and some kind soul recently
compiled an interesting chess tour of NY City.

Currently several journalists are compiling questions for the new board, and
I suppose this will be one of them - though not even very high up the list,
since actually, as Mr. Parr says above - [to liberally extend that
sentiment] if you can discuss chess politics here in rgcp, then what is the
fuss about a very few people plus rather more overseers discussing what is
better attended to elsewhere? That is in fact what killed chesscafe's forum.
USCF could save themselves $11,000 in insurance and a lot of board
distraction.

I mean, you don't read Pravda for the news, but for the official spin and
party line.

Phil Innes