A POLITICAL CREATURE

I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry Evans
was a true man of chess. Now he is changing his tune and
talks about eliminating writers from Chess Life who are
eligible for Social Security.
..
The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.

They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
would win hands down. Therefore, there will be no further
surveys by these honchos.

Randy Bauer figures, yes, Evans is very well liked and
popular as a columnist, and there must be no polling.

Joel Channing will tell us how how "excellent" Evans On Chess
is and how wonderful it all happens to be, and that will be that.
Dissent in Chess Life must be crushed.

My sources say that FIDE has complained about the
criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans.

wrote:
A POLITICAL CREATURE

I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry Evans
was a true man of chess. Now he is changing his tune and
talks about eliminating writers from Chess Life who are
eligible for Social Security.
.
The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.

They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
would win hands down. Therefore, there will be no further
surveys by these honchos.

Randy Bauer figures, yes, Evans is very well liked and
popular as a columnist, and there must be no polling.

Joel Channing will tell us how how "excellent" Evans On Chess
is and how wonderful it all happens to be, and that will be that.
Dissent in Chess Life must be crushed.

My sources say that FIDE has complained about the
criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans.

Larry,

I think Randy Bauer and I may agree Chess Life needs to be refocused.
It's OK to have differing opinions on how that might be accomplished.
I would agree with you that we should ask the readers what they want to
see in Chess Life. I would, however, be surprised if Randy would not be
supportive of asking the readers what they prefer. In my view it is
unfortunate we must make unilateral decisions about our magazine before
polling the readership.

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

"WPraeder" writes:
supportive of asking the readers what they prefer. In my view it is
unfortunate we must make unilateral decisions about our magazine before
polling the readership.

Before polling the readership about fine details like which columns
should be included or not included, how about polling about whether
they want to receive the magazine at all. Until you're willing to
call for that kind of poll, requesting polls about columnists comes
across as hypocritical.

The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.

They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
would win hands down.

Not with this reader.

Paul Rubin wrote:
"WPraeder" writes:
supportive of asking the readers what they prefer. In my view it is
unfortunate we must make unilateral decisions about our magazine before
polling the readership.

Before polling the readership about fine details like which columns
should be included or not included, how about polling about whether
they want to receive the magazine at all. Until you're willing to
call for that kind of poll, requesting polls about columnists comes
across as hypocritical.

Paul,

I'm already on record being in favor of making Chess Life optional if
that is what the membership prefers. Polling the readers need not have
preconditions in order to provide useful feedback.

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

See reply in USCF Forum "ChessLife Nattering Nabobs."

GOICHBERG AT USCF FORUM

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:21 pm

The Executive Board is leaving it up to the Editor of Chess Life which
columns and features to use. Because college chess is so underdeveloped
I supported the exception of mandating a monthly college column, but
the Board reversed itself on this and after approving it 5-0, it was
defeated 3-2.

We understand that the Editor's strategy is more feature articles and
less columns, and we will give him a chance to show what he can do
before passing judgment. If it was up to me, though, I would have tried
hard to avoid eliminating the Evans and Rohde columns. My relations
with GM Evans through the years have not always been good, but he has
been an outspoken commentator on happenings in the chess world, often
providing a healthy dose of controversy to a magazine that would
otherwise have lacked it. I hope that he will continue to write for
USCF, either features in Chess Life or maybe by moving his column to
our website. I also respect the work of GM Rohde and have heard good
things about his column from members.

Bill Goichberg

wrote:
See reply in USCF Forum "ChessLife Nattering Nabobs."

Joel,

If you don't have a baseline of membership feedback on Chess Life how
do you plan to measure if your improvement investments/efforts are
successful in the eyes of the readers or not?

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

Everyone knows Wayne Praeder doesn't exist. No one should pay attention
to him until he can prove that he's real.

Sam Sloan

Mr. Channing, I have praised your willingness to appear
on this forum and answer questions as a breath of fresh air.
Lately, however, you seem to have vanished here -- and
you are sorely missed.

As you know, there has been a lot of controversy about
decisions made by the new editor who is still wet behind
the ears. I will not rejoin the USCF and I'm sure many others
will follow suit unless he reconsiders some rash decisions.
I would hate for this to happen to a game that I love.

While we have your ear, why can't we all see the Chess Life
redesign report prepared by Paul Hoffman for a reported fee
of $25,000? Apparently this report is the reason given by the
editor as the basis for his decisions.