On Oct 20, 4:28 am, "Chess One" wrote:

whether this means that another outfit is necessary to cogently contain and
process another level of chess, enabling it to escape its annual rotations
of members, without significant increase in numbers, all seem to be the
point these chess entrepreneurs are addressing

and indeed, that is the chat on 'the other circuit' to which uscf-only folks
are deaf, blind and dumb. it is not a raid on uscf resources as much as a
resource of necessity

phil innes
vermont

Of course, Innes and his side-kick, Rob ("the Robber") Mitchell, are
just two examples of those "people and groups who have been circling
around overhead like vultures waiting to dive down and eat up the
pieces as soon as we die".

Innes and Mitchell are two examples of those who think that if the
USCF fails the former members will flock to join their organization.
They have as much said so in their postings to the New York Times
Gambit Chess Blog. However, I somehow do not see anybody flocking to
join them, no matter what happens.

Sam Sloan