On susanpolgar.blogspot.com Paul Truong wrote at:
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007...ul-truong.html

"Q: Someone said that you and Susan spent less than $50 for this
election. Is this true?

"A: Yes, it is true. Once again, this is what I have been saying all
along. It is the same thing as chess marketing, PR and promotion. We
do not have to spend tons of money to get good results. I learned
throughout my life experience to make things work with what I have."

However, the required filing fee is $250. Also, Polgar and Truong have
a long history of demanding things for free that others have had to
pay for, such as the numerous free ads that have been published in
Chess Life.

Also, Bill Hall has a history of giving free things to Polgar and
Truong. For example, in Februrary 2006, Bill Hall made a secret deal
to give Polgar and Truong one year of free ads in Chess Life and then
hid that deal from the board and lied to the board about it for one
year until Donna Alarie forced him to confess in March, 2007, by which
time the one year was complete.

So, it would fit the pattern that has gone back to 2003 where Polgar
and Truong would say that in return for a celebrity or publicity
appearance where Susan Polgar promotes herself and her own books, she
should not have to pay the $250 filing fee.

When will Bill Hall respond to the question: Did Polgar and Truong Pay
the Required $250 filing fees?? When will he produce the canceled
checks proving that they paid?

If they did not pay, were they validly elected to the board? Can they
be ruled off the board?

A significant quote from Susan Polgar's recent blog posting at
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007...pen-forum.html is:

"I am prepared to produce solid evidence going back to my announcement
to run for the board and perhaps even further back."

What does this mean? Does it mean that the board too is starting to
question the circumstances under which she ran for election and got
elected?

Sam Sloan

Randy Bauer, you are on the board. Why cannot you just ask Bill Hall
or ask Paul Truong himself whether they paid or not? Why do you feed
us hypotheticals?

Regarding the previous years election, Bill Hall never gave a credible
answer. One time he said they paid by check, another time he said they
paid by credit card, yet another time he said that a bunch of payments
were batched together later in the month.

When I pointed out this discrepancy and asked which one was true and
show us the proof, Bill Hall never answered.

Last year it was not such a big deal because the three candidates in
question all lost the election. However, this year it is a big deal
because they were elected.

Sam Sloan

On Dec 3, 9:21 am, samsloan wrote:

On susanpolgar.blogspot.com Paul Truong wrote at:http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007...ul-truong.html

"Q: Someone said that you and Susan spent less than $50 for this
election. Is this true?

"A: Yes, it is true. Once again, this is what I have been saying all
along. It is the same thing as chess marketing, PR and promotion. We
do not have to spend tons of money to get good results. I learned
throughout my life experience to make things work with what I have."


Mr. Sloan is going to have to come up with something
better than this if he wishes to prove his case.

Look at the SP Web site and you will find that it is
filled to overflowing with lies, distortions and fabrications,
so snipping the above text to use as "evidence" is absurd.
Might as well flip a coin rather than rely upon anything
taken from that Web site, for at least then one knows
where one stands (at a 50/50 chance).


-- help bot

But there is evidence. One is the statement they made after being
elected that they only spent $50 on their election campaign.

Another is that while on the board Beatriz Marinello asked Bill Hall
for a copy of the USCF's bank statements. The statements Bill Hall
mailed us failed to show checks received from Polgar and Truong but it
did show checks received from the other candidates.

Also, while I was on the board, we received CDs showing all checks
received and paid by the USCF since 2002. I went all through those CDs
and I never saw even one single check paid by Polgar or Truong or any
Polgar entity like Polgar Chess Inc. to the USCF but I saw many, many
checks paid by the USCF to Polgar, adding up to about $50,000.

There is a clear pattern of constant demands by them for money and
threats of lawsuits.

Thus, it would fit the pattern and would not be surprising at all if
Polgar and Truong did not pay their candidate's filing fees.

Regarding the "hundreds (if not thousands) of hours in preparing
content on Susan's blog" it has become clear that Susan does not
really do that blog, although she provides input. There have been days
when Susan was attending USCF meetings or traveling and we knew where
she was and could not possibly have access to a computer and still the
daily content of ten postings have appeared on her blog. For example,
right now she is in India. Is she spending her days over there now
posting to her blog, or is she touring the Taj Mahal?

Susan several times has thanked the person who is actually doing her
blog. As I recall, his name in Jenkins and he lives in Philadelphia.

The real question is: Since it is a simple question requiring a yes or
no answer, why do not you answer it?

Sam Sloan