Jim Eade comes out in favor of Sam Sloan

Jim Eade, who retired years ago from organized chess to enjoy a life
of leisure as outlined in a previous thread, has returned the
compliment Sloan paid him recently by expressing concern and dismay at
the current development, which is that 3 out 5 of the current
candidates for the USCF Executive Board are present or former USCF
staffers.

On Sat Apr 29, 2006 6:57 pm James Eade writes:

I agree with your first sentence, although I would choose a different
word than "nitpicking." In fact, I agree with everything you say
except the following: "He's exactly the kind of person the EB needs."
It is this kind of thinking that drives me crazy! In all likelihood
I'll vote for Ernie, but I'm #### him with faint praise.

The USCF needs board members who have established a successful track
record outside of chess, and who love chess. People like Joel Channing
and Eric Anderson should be who we're voting for or against, not TD's
or ex-USCF staffers.

Just for background, Ernie and I have bumped heads once or twice, but
we've maintained a mutually respectful relationship over the years. I
even tried to set him up in a business venture, which fell through,
through no fault of his or my own. I think Ernie is an ideal committee
member or chair, and he's someone whose counsel I value. I like him
personally.

However, he doesn't have the experience a board member requires. In
this field he stands out, but we have to do better, IMHO. Ernie's
proper role is to give advice and counsel to someone who has a
successful business background, but who might not know all of the
twists and turns of the USCF. That's when he shines.

The USCF has two enormous problems to overcome: 1: Thinking OTB
players are the core members. 2: Thinking TD's should be board
members. It drives me CRAZY!

I mean no disrespect to Ernie, and I will in all likelihood vote for
him. I don't know Grant Perks, so I reserve judgment with regards to
him, but as to the rest, I can only say that we've got to do better.

If the USCF is an organization of TDs voting for other TDs, there is
no future. We need board members who have no idea what continuing
actions of delegate's motions are, and people like Ernie, who do.

Personal note to Ernie: If elected, and I think you will be, serve out
your term. I considered resignation in the wake of the infamous
12/23/96 motion, but I think you must honor the voters. If they put
you in office, stay in office, even if things go against you. Just
keep advocating for what you believe in.

Jim Eade

(Sam Sloan) writes (quoting Jim Eade):
The USCF has two enormous problems to overcome: 1: Thinking OTB
players are the core members. 2: Thinking TD's should be board
members. It drives me CRAZY!

Who does Jim think the core members are, if they're not the OTB players?

"Who does Jim think the core members are, if they're not the OTB
players?" (Paul Rubin)
======
I was wondering that myself. Evidently Jim wants a Bill Gates type to
lead a bunch of chess problem solvers, habitual magazine readers, and
never rated chess club duffers.

Old Haasie

"Who does Jim think the core members are, if they're not the OTB
players?" (Paul Rubin)
======
I was wondering that myself. Evidently Jim wants a Bill Gates type to
lead a bunch of chess problem solvers, habitual magazine readers, and
never rated chess club duffers.

Old Haasie