No need for "provisionally", Murray - I'll dismiss all your uninformed
speculations, your libels, your smears, your one-sided bull****, your
obsession with real chessplayers, your backing of the amazing Sloan,
etc. without any caveat whatsoever. Get lost. That the only persons who
swallow your line are a kiddy-lover, a lying nutter who claims to be
a Caribbean diplomat, a thoroughly discredited Parking Tickets Judge
who has been proven to be a cretin by the kiddy-lover, and a couple of
anonymous trolls who may be alters of the PTJ, should tell you a lot.
But you're far too vain to see that. Those opposed to your viewpoint
include many of the strongest chessplayers alive, who view the cruel
vilification and persecuation of SP as beneath contempt, and the use
of the law to bludgeon her for any mild retaliation by her loved ones.

While I think that the above anonymously written material is indeed
cowardly, that is, the person does not wish to become engaged in a law
suit to state his or her opinion, this anonymous coward gets very much
right.

In fact, what does he get wrong in the above?

Evidently Murray is intent on repressing every other point of view
than his own, and Murray is the intellectual star of those mentioned
here ;((

Which is to say, you know, don't you comrade: When it is all soldiers,
soldiers! there is no poetry from Zhivago - and in chess terms, when
there is only politicians there is no art nor joy evident from them
for the game, and those do who have that do not publish it here,
before swine, as it were.

That is much the sense of it, as I read things, and since i was a mega
journalist compared to anyone here, even the dread Spinrad of dubious
orientation, me with 60,000 readers a week, that is also my sense of
the chess public's overwhelming sense of things.

[It is only in this, or these newsgroups, where a few people conduct
an agitprop campaign to indicate otherwise]

To be honest, there is also strong public opinion that Polgar and
Truong should get the hell away from USCF, since nothing has been
clear about that organization for the past 20 years - not even why
they exist.

To join with USCF is to muddy one's self, and I suggest to them
directly that this is the case, and since IMO the rot is deep, their
case is suspect thereby.

The barky is untenable. A new one may be indicated, but not on the
basis of maintenance alone - chess is taking off in the USA, and needs
mentors, encouragement, events and spectacles, not just rating
services, and un-financed titles.

It needs links to mainstream media and mainstream education. Any thing
else is hardly worth the argument.

This is my criticism of USCF, and of Susan Polgar and Paul Truong.

Cute is not compelling.

Phil Innes
Vermont