Beatriz
It would seem to me that saying nothing for weeks about this issue which
has
upset many people besides Goichberg/Schultz and only now apologizing
would
be for political purposes. Did Shaughnessy object to a motion for the
truth
about the Natrol deal to come out? Did she defend the Natrol deal at the
National Open as has been reported? (Yes, she did)

Beatriz has spoken with the Parrot, and her letter or responsibility as
well as the Natrol deal, replete with financials, will appear later this
Sunday July 3rd at www.chessville.com and also in The Chessville Weekly
e-newsletter.

Phil Innes


I have no idea who Goichberg or Schultz are. I have never met them nor
talked
to them. I also don't think any other actions you have taken while in
your
office, which are commendable, give you a 'get out of jail free' card
when
you make a colossal mistake such as the Natrol deal. You can make all the
excuses you want, but it just makes it sound even more like you are unfit
for the
post. Either you don't have the time to commit to the job, or you are
unable
to degelate anything.
Did Natrol lie in their advertisement or were those your words that were
quoted? It is a mountain that you made, not anyone else no matter how you
wish
to see it. It was YOU who decided that the USCF would endorse people
taking a
performance enhancing supplement when the only thing an organization like
the
USCF should promote is achieving the best that you can through your own
abilities and hard work. If you have any honour you would resign your
position on
the EB. If Shaughnessy has been supporting the Natrol deal she should as
well.
Let me make this perfectly clear. I have no political agenda. If this had
taken place in the middle of December I would still be upset and calling
for
you to resign as well as anyone who supported the idea.
Nixon did good things as President as well, so under your logic I guess
we
should forget the Watergate thing, yes? (This is the best point of all)
Just to drive home the point, it shouldn't have required searching for
information about Natrol to make the decision. Any idiot could have seen
it was
bad right off.
--------------------------------
Someone made the points above.
The question is why no apology 3 = 4 weeks ago when Susan Polgar (who was
the
first person who) spoke out against this Natrol thing before most people
even knew what took place. Did this apology appear on the USChess.org
website or
Chess Life or is it only for a small group of vile politicians on
rec.games?
Again, another political move.
In addition, that was not an apology letter. In the same letter, she can't
help herself but pulled the same trick which is trying to blame someone
else
using the P word again. For Beatriz, everything is politics. It should not
be.
There should be no politics in chess. So all the members who are disgusted
and appalled by BM's decision are all politically motivated like Don and
Bill?
Please. If you are going to apologize, do it sincerely.
It is quite obvious that she should have done what I suggested from day
one
which is to sincerely apologize. She did not. She had her Chihuahuas
attacking everyone who questioned it. She waited until the matter blew
totally out of
proportion before she acted. Why now? Because she and her teammate took a
nasty political hit and she is in danger of losing all credibility in the
scholastic community. That could mean the end of her career in scholastic
chess
and she makes a living in this field.
The same with the US Women's Olympiad issue. The same people who endorsed
Natrol voted not to honor legal contracts. This matter will be ten times
worst
than the Natrol deal. Why? Very few people if any were affected by Natrol.
The
future of women's chess in America and the USCF are severely affected by
BM's decision and tens of thousands of people knew about BM's decision.
She
handled it badly and unprofessionally. To make matters worst, not only
Beatriz
personally insulted all five members of the 2004 US Women's Olympiad team
multiple times, she allowed her attack Chihuahuas to carry out her
messages.
When will the members of the US Women's Olympiad team receives an apology
from Beatriz? My advice to Beatriz and any future president / board
members is
SHUT UP. If you have a disagreement, do it behind the doors. Don't air out
your dirty laundry in public. This is appalling and bad for chess. The
other
advice is drop your Chihuahuas immediately before this federation will
collapse.

I just sent a e-mail to David from Chessville to clarified the
following:

"Did she defend the Natrol deal at the
National Open as has been reported? (Yes, she did)"

I never said that Elizabeth defended the Natrol deal.

David is a very fair person, I truly appreciate the fact that he is
willing to report both sides of the story.

Beatriz Marinello

I don't think it was you that said it Beatriz. It was reported by
people present at the National Open

Beatriz,

All of this is just a distraction being fomented by people who are up to
their eyebrows in theft, filth and druggery.

I, speaking for myself, support you. If I may say it here and now. Good job
and keep up the good fight. Personally, I think you just made a mistake, and
perhaps even, you were set up. I don't know all the facts.

Tom Klem

"Jerry" wrote in message
oups.com...
I don't think it was you that said it Beatriz. It was reported by
people present at the National Open

Fascinating. Considering this is the dirtiest campaign
in USCF history I would not be surprised.

Duncan

"Tom Klem" wrote

Beatriz,

All of this is just a distraction being fomented by people who are up to
their eyebrows in theft, filth and druggery.

I, speaking for myself, support you. If I may say it here and now. Good
job and keep up the good fight. Personally, I think you just made a
mistake, and perhaps even, you were set up. I don't know all the facts.

Tom Klem

THE CULTURE OF SECRECY

My take on the Natrol incident is a bit different than that of
others. I know nothing about this substance; it could be the best thing
since a good Indian butter chicken masala. The issue here is not the
substance per se but the big clam up by Beatriz Marinello, Randy Bauer
and their cohorts.

This incident shows why we need one Sam Sloan on the Board: to tell
us what is happening.

Beatriz Marinello's brief account of the Natrol deal in which she
took personal responsibility was, of course, late in coming and
incomplete. You could smell it. Too, the silence about the Executive
Director and Natrol after I first asked questions about a month back
was deafening. Still, one wasn't sure that more needed to be said
until Mrs. Marinello's vague explanation was published.

Did the new executive director Bill Hall work or have dealings
with Nikken? Did Mr. Hall at one time market products involving
advanced nutritive detoxification and improved brain circulation? Did
he work with Natrol while with Nikken?

The culture of secrecy and lying will, if Mrs. Marinello and Mr.
Bauer do not come clean, drag down the new executive director. They are
doing him no favors at all by their silence.

To my mind, if the new ED is behind the Natrol deal, that does
not constitute a reason for his dismissal. It merely means that the
membership needs to know the facts.

One problem may be that Mrs. Marinello had prior contacts that
have been undisclosed with the new ED in the food nutritional field.

WHAT WAS THE PRECISE ROLE OF THE NEW ED IN THE NATROL
DECISION? DID MRS. MARINELLO KNOW THE NEW ED EARLIER AND HAVE ANY
BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH HIM?

These questions will not go away. It is time for full
disclosure or the recently hired ED will soon hit the deck hard.

Secrecy and clamming up just won't cut it.

" WHAT WAS THE PRECISE ROLE OF THE NEW ED IN THE NATROL
DECISION? DID MRS. MARINELLO KNOW THE NEW ED EARLIER AND HAVE ANY
BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH HIM?"

The letter of intent was from May 25, 2005. The new ED does not have
anything to do with this.
Furthermore, I meet Bill Hall in Berkley at the Executive Board's
meeting. I never had any business dealings with him.

I hope this clarifies the questions.

Beatriz Marinello

wrote in message
oups.com...
THE CULTURE OF SECRECY

My take on the Natrol incident is a bit different than that of
others. I know nothing about this substance; it could be the best thing
since a good Indian butter chicken masala. The issue here is not the
substance per se but the big clam up by Beatriz Marinello, Randy Bauer
and their cohorts.

I have stated over and over, and from the very beginning, that the Natrol
partnership was a mistake, and I favor a Board policy that limits our
involvement to organizations or groups who wish to market chess as a social,
recreational, or educational activity. I had absolutely no prior knowledge
of the partnership -- the first I knew of it was when the press release was
quoted on the newsgroups, and I originally thought it was a hoax. I have
two school age chess-playing daughters, and I would never support a
partnership that suggests that the way to improve your chess is through
taking drugs.

Period. End of story.

Randy Bauer

Larry,

Being told anything through Sam 'Dah Mout'piece' Sloan, is akin to looking
at the stars through a dirty Coke bottle.

Very frustrating, and not very illuminating.

Tom Klem

wrote in message
oups.com...
THE CULTURE OF SECRECY

My take on the Natrol incident is a bit different than that of
others. I know nothing about this substance; it could be the best thing
since a good Indian butter chicken masala. The issue here is not the
substance per se but the big clam up by Beatriz Marinello, Randy Bauer
and their cohorts.

This incident shows why we need one Sam Sloan on the Board: to tell
us what is happening.

Beatriz Marinello's brief account of the Natrol deal in which she
took personal responsibility was, of course, late in coming and
incomplete. You could smell it. Too, the silence about the Executive
Director and Natrol after I first asked questions about a month back
was deafening. Still, one wasn't sure that more needed to be said
until Mrs. Marinello's vague explanation was published.

Did the new executive director Bill Hall work or have dealings
with Nikken? Did Mr. Hall at one time market products involving
advanced nutritive detoxification and improved brain circulation? Did
he work with Natrol while with Nikken?

The culture of secrecy and lying will, if Mrs. Marinello and Mr.
Bauer do not come clean, drag down the new executive director. They are
doing him no favors at all by their silence.

To my mind, if the new ED is behind the Natrol deal, that does
not constitute a reason for his dismissal. It merely means that the
membership needs to know the facts.

One problem may be that Mrs. Marinello had prior contacts that
have been undisclosed with the new ED in the food nutritional field.

WHAT WAS THE PRECISE ROLE OF THE NEW ED IN THE NATROL
DECISION? DID MRS. MARINELLO KNOW THE NEW ED EARLIER AND HAVE ANY
BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH HIM?

These questions will not go away. It is time for full
disclosure or the recently hired ED will soon hit the deck hard.

Secrecy and clamming up just won't cut it.

"Randy Bauer" wrote in message
news:AU2ye.130228$nG6.75699@attbi_s22...

wrote in message
oups.com...
THE CULTURE OF SECRECY

My take on the Natrol incident is a bit different than that of
others. I know nothing about this substance; it could be the best thing
since a good Indian butter chicken masala. The issue here is not the
substance per se but the big clam up by Beatriz Marinello, Randy Bauer
and their cohorts.

I have stated over and over, and from the very beginning, that the Natrol
partnership was a mistake, and I favor a Board policy that limits our
involvement to organizations or groups who wish to market chess as a
social, recreational, or educational activity. I had absolutely no prior
knowledge of the partnership -- the first I knew of it was when the press
release was quoted on the newsgroups, and I originally thought it was a
hoax. I have two school age chess-playing daughters, and I would never
support a partnership that suggests that the way to improve your chess is
through taking drugs.

Period. End of story.

Well Randy, I think it can't be the end of story!

We have seen previous villifications of the Ed here for acting outside the
board's understanding of that role in representing USCF, but now is it
really Forgive and Forget based simply on who took the action?

I know its political season, but this affair spread far beyond politicians
and chess managers to the greater public, and like you, very many parents
seem entirely put out by it. Just 500 of them pulling their junior's
memberships and choosing another rating service will directly cost USCF
something like 4x times the amount of the sponsorship, right?

I agree with Larry Parr that no resignations are necessary, but
accountability to any exterior group is in question. USCF enjoys the status
of a public non-profit and was established for the public benefit, and is
not a private corporation. Credability of its unresponsive 'representatives'
continues to be at stake, and is entirely heightened rather than lessened by
this reluctant admission after 3 weeks of silence.

Got any other plans cooking? What about the challenge that Don Shultz issued
about this affair - What about his subsequent punishment? What about a
remedy?

Yesterday I wrote in another group, also in agreement with Larry Parr that
the issue is not best hushed up, but that "Only a terse but honest dialog
can raise these issues and engage the real intentions of parties. This has
been a signal failure of the current administration."

After so many issues of this kind, do you yourself feel there is a better
remedy than light and fresh-air, rather than guilty recriminations or more
deadly silent treatment?

We should all be prepared to admit that this was a mistake, without needing
to blame the agents who engineered it. This way the corporate structure of
USCF can evolve for everybody, and move beyond any pro-con cupidity at the
personality level.

Come come! If Larry Parr and I can recommend this, both of us being notably
terse critics of the organisation's current behavior, what is there to fear?

Cordially, Phil Innes

Randy Bauer