On Jan 21, 2:46*pm, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
"Chess One" wrote in message

. ..







"Mike Murray" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:08:03 -0500, "Chess One"
wrote:

Monday January 21st, 2008
-----------------------------

Chessville received a letter from Susan Polgar on Sunday morning, Jan 20,
2008, stating the USCF's process of inquiry, of herself, and Paul
Truong's
complicity with the terms of the inquiry, and to correct a "blatant
misrepresentation" by Bill Goichberg. She ended by restating the offer:-

* *"We give consent to the board and their attorneys to publish all
information they have about us relating to this case.

This might be interesting, but the USCF's attorneys requested
information they DON'T have, i.e., information from PT's ISP. *They
also requested a formal denial, one which has more legal weight than
one reported via a third party, an interview or e-mail.

Who is Mike Murray quoting? He seems to know what USCF's attorneys have
asked, but cut the response which already states 2 things in response to
his question; that the questions were answered, and that all information
about the issue can be opened up, according to Polgar and Truong.

For the record, I have offered USCF the opportunity to respond equally to
Susan Polgar. In addition, I have provided a generous deadline to make any
simple and official comment themselves, as well as inquiring if they will
accord with Susan Polgar's offer to take the lid off all matters
heretofore held secret.

I obviously cannot take issue with Mike Murray if he states that questions
actually put to Polgar and Truong were not answered - since I do not know
if that is true. That, indeed, was my reason to ask USCF if Susan Polgar's
first statement was true.

Now... from the second statement, there seems to be a contest to what is
true or not, and the gauntlet still lies on USCF's mat to pick up or not -
which is in effect to make statements about what has happened, or to open
up so that members themselves can make their own assessment.

Phil Innes

ROTFLMAO!! *Your friend Susan is beyond help as are you. *It has been
clearly stated by Randy Bauer and Bill G that the attorneys for the USCF
asked Truong for a statement by HIM, directly to the attorneys, denying or
admitting the Sloan allegations. *Simple request. *Normal request by ones
counsel in litigation. But, a request Truong can't bring HIMSELF to comply
with. *Guilty people do have problems with such requests.

Truong was asked by counsel to facilitate the gathering of evidence from his
IPs for use in defending against the Sloan litigation. *So Susan responds by
saying sure, but not until the Sloan litigation is over.

Bull**** will only carry a person so far once the legal action commences.
Truong has reached the end of the line.

ChaChing........GUILTY



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am much distrubed by the USCF's inclination to "eat it's young".
There has been a tolerance of miscreants in this organization for
decades. Susan Polgar and Paul Truong are ,IMO, being attacked simply
because they are thoughtful agents of change. There is no personal
information that is safe once in the hands of the USCF.

Confidential information of members is shared or left open to
exploitation. Employment applications and resume's of applicants are
faxed and distributed "willy-nilly" with no fore-thought to
confidentiality.

Currently, it appears to me the quickest way to destroy the future of
the game of chess in America is to associate it with the USCF.