LiamToo wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Yes, he should.

Why should I, the only idiotic and illiterate troll that we know is
you.

BTW, Nick, at one time or another, used the library computers in the
city of Sacramento in California to post here. He also used the UC
Davis library computer for the same reason, believe it or not.

Yes, I think I knew that. In fact, I know I did. In fact, it's 100%
that I knew it
*long* before you did, Ace.

Do you remember my posting this little missive in reply to you?

http://masl.to/?J4661246E

Moron that you are, you actually tracked Nick to Worcester, England...

ROFLMAO!!!

Here's a hint:

As soon as John Macnab wrote:

http://masl.to/?R2961246E

I knew exactly what Nick's real name is, and where he lives.

Clearly, it took you quite a lot longer.... D'Oh!

So much for my being illiterate, and your not being....

And so much for your being an ace reporter.

Face it, dude, you're just plain dumb.

Phil Innes wrote (Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:29:24 GMT):

7 ... And it was the Good Dr. Balir who cut my first reference
7 to the material. ...

_
Assertions are not true just because Phil Innes makes them.
In another thread:
_
"... criticised at Nolan-land ..." - Phil Innes
(Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:52:36 GMT)
_
Part of my response:
_
"Phil Innes wrote (Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:52:36 GMT):
_
7 ... criticised at Nolan-land ..."
- Louis Blair (13 Dec 2006 18:36:47 -0800)
_
In this thread:
_
"... I looked at the USCF site this morning and reported
on the $10,000 ..." - Phil Innes (Wed, 13 Dec 2006
16:25:41 GMT)
_
Part of my response:
_
"Phil Innes wrote (Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:25:41 GMT):
_
7 ... I looked at the USCF site this morning and
7 reported on the $10,000 ..."
- Louis Blair (13 Dec 2006 20:01:22 -0800)

Mark Houlsby wrote:
LiamToo wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Yes, he should.

Why should I, the only idiotic and illiterate troll that we know is
you.

BTW, Nick, at one time or another, used the library computers in the
city of Sacramento in California to post here. He also used the UC
Davis library computer for the same reason, believe it or not.

Yes, I think I knew that. In fact, I know I did. In fact, it's 100%
that I knew it *long* before you did, Ace.

Do you remember my posting this little missive in reply to you?

http://masl.to/?J4661246E

Moron that you are, you actually tracked Nick to Worcester, England...

ROFLMAO!!!

Here's a hint:

As soon as John Macnab wrote:

http://masl.to/?R2961246E

I knew exactly what Nick's real name is, and where he lives.

Clearly, it took you quite a lot longer.... D'Oh!

Sooooo, you came back to tell to the world that you knew exactly what
Bourbaki's real name is and it took me quite a lot longer?

Who cares?

_
"... Mikhail Koreman ... was paid $10,000 to do
fundraising over the summer and produced no
positive results.
_
Mr. Koreman was moving to Chicago and had
no job when the EB approved these funding for
him. A $2000 per month plus $500 per month in
expenses. A total of $10,000. ..." - Beatriz
Marinello (Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:49 am)
_
_
"I voted in favor of giving the money to Mikhail
because I was so impressed with what he had
achieved in Kansas. In retrospect I believe I
made a mistake, but that does not take away
from his proven brilliance as a chess promoter
and organizer." - Joel Channing (Sun
Dec 10, 2006 12:03 pm)
_
_
"As a delegate, I, too, would like more
information on why Mr. Korenman was selected
to do this fundraising. I recall reading about it at
the time and honestly, this is the type of
decision making that bothered me then and
bothers me now.
_
Why was he selected to do the fundraising? Did
the USCF put out an open bid to its membership
or publish in Chess Life that it was soliciting bids
for fundraising? Did USCF ask for and receive a
resume detailing his experience as a fundraiser?
Did the USCF establish a contract with
benchmarks for results and dates by which to
achieve them in order to determine whether the
fundraising contract was successful? If so, has
the fundraising met those objectives?
_
When the USCF begins to function more as an
independent business with open bidding,
contracts, and goals with measureable results,
then it will have a chance of becoming a
successful organization.
_
All of the questions above are no reflection on
Mr. Korenman. I know nothing about him and
have no political agenda in this regard. They
are simply questions that the general
membership has a right to know the answers
on especially in light of Beatriz's last post."
- Donna Alarie (Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:25 pm)
_
_
"Benchmarks for results and review dates? It's
not the USCF way. It's why USCF buys
snake-oil over and over and over again.
...
The $10K in moving expenses to somone's
buddy is your USCF dues hard at work." - Allan
Fifield (Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:43 pm)
_
_
"Korenman was selected because he made a
proposal to USCF regarding a four month
period when he would be available. Because
his fundraising results in the past have been
spectacular, I supported this proposal.
_
This arrangement involved work other than
fund raising, and it is possible that
sponsorship will still result from his efforts, but
I am disappointed that no definite sponsorship
has resulted so far." - Bill Goichberg (Sun
Dec 10, 2006 6:50 pm)
_
_
"[1]
... 'Fundraising' is obviously a gamble. One
cannot force a successful outcome. ...
_
[2]
A.Karpov was not mentioned in the earlier
posts. Yet it is natural to wonder how much
of Mr. Korenman's success in Lindsborg KA
was due in part to A.Karpov's fame and
involvement. Is it accurate to say Karpov
deserves some of the credit?
_
[3]
I wish the E.B. would modify its perspective
away from 'fundraising' and toward 'marketing'.
Fundraising has a place, but it sounds like
asking for charity. Fundraising is not a growth
channel, it is not even self-sustaining.
_
In contrast, 'marketing' searches for 'win-win'
situations for both the sponsor and chess or
the USCF. Marketing aims at increasing the
appeal of chess to the untapped public."
- Gene Milener (Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:36 pm)
_
_
"... You are quite correct here. I believe the
appropriate avenue for the USCF is to cease
the fundraising aspect and engage actively in
searching for marketing / advertising
sponsorships.
_
For the past 2 years I have been actively
working on securing marketing/advertising
sponsorships and I can say it is not an
simple job but significantly a larger pool than
the fundraising/charity angle.
_
Corporate foundations are very specific in
what they will provide donations to and while
chess has the educational aspect to it many
corporate foundations will not entertain chess
as a viable educational outlet. Additionally
these foundations are limited - remember
these foundations are tax shelters also for
the corporation but the tax shelter is limited
so the funds do run out (and relatively quickly).
_
Marketing / Advertising dollars are quite
different. First they are controlled in two steps
generally - national/international budgets and
local/regional budgets. While the national
budget may not have any opportunities,
local/regional may and generally its easier to
go that route. Secondly - the sponsorship is
no longer only about doing good to the
community - it's about how you can help
them reach new markets and generate sales.
It's not a charity pitch - it's a sales pitch.
Finally - marketing/advertising dollars can be
replenished at various times of the year, not
just at the beginning when budgets become
fresh - foundation dollars are stuck where
they are at year round.
_
So marketing/advertising sponsorship is the
way to go, not corporate foundations. Of
course that is my opinion." - Sevan Muradian
(Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:02 pm)
_
_
"Out of curiosity, what were [Mr. Korenman's]
spectacular fund raising results?" - Kevin
Bachler (Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:16 am)
_
_
"I'm sure there were others, but one area where
he was successful was getting grant funding
from the State of Kansas, I believe through
their department of economic development.
This was different than other chess grant
funding efforts through government, which
generally rely on chess' educational value. In
this instance, he went with the approach that
'chess tournaments appeal to people as being
intellectual and full of smart people, and with
strong national publicity, Kansas will benefit
from being associated with them.' I think he
also tied in the Karpov angle, again giving the
City and State a 'worldly' image.
_
He did get a lot of publicity for some high
impact events, including national coverage. I
had some professional curiosity about the
State actually providing this kind of funding
and spoke with some colleagues in Kansas
about it, and my general recollection is that
the State was satisfied with the outcomes."
- Randy Bauer (Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:10 pm)
_
_
"National evening/nightly news coverage as I
recall. My wife called me out of my office to
see it because one of the networks was
interviewing him." - David Hood (Tue
Dec 12, 2006 2:19 pm)
_
_
"I was curious in part, because, from some
of the press articles I read about when he left,
it sounded more like a failing business than
successful fundraising.
_
Someone made a comment about being on
national news. But really all that would take is
us spending time on PR. Heck, our our 5th
grade chess team was on CNN a few years
ago, and that was just a matter of performing
well.
_
I'm not trying to downplay what he might have
accomplished, but so far, I haven't seen $$
amounts, programs completed, etc. so that
right now I don't know that he accomplished
anything other than promoting himself. And
what he has done in Illinois certainly has been
controversial at best (apparently helping to
increase the expenses of this year's state
championship with no real benefit)...so that
right now my skepticism is up. My suggestion
would be that if he is a real candidate and a
good candidate is that he needs to get some
hard information out soon." - Kevin Bachler
(Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:35 pm)
_
_
"Here's an article that ran in National
Geographic on Korenman and chess in
Kansas.
_
http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0605/feature6/
_
Reading this, it would seem that Korenman
has gotten some good PR for chess in the
mainstream press and has been a successful
organizer. This explains why the USCF board
was willing to back him." - Maret Thorpe (Wed
Dec 13, 2006 1:28 pm)
_
_
"... Anyone that has tried fundraising can tell
you that it is a rare occurance when you can
walk into a meeting with a proposal, and walk
out with a large check. Quite often, a proposal
has to be put into the budget and will be given
out the following fiscal year. So it is premature
to call his efforts a failure.
_
Korenman has previously received a 250K grant.
He has generated quite a bit of publicity in both
print and television media. He has organized
master events and scholastics. He has served
on the scholastic council. I would rather see
someone get elected or not based on their
merits and actions. Based on Mr. Korenman's
actions, I think he makes a fine candidate."
- Glenn Panner (Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:31 pm)

Liam Too wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:
LiamToo wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Yes, he should.

Why should I, the only idiotic and illiterate troll that we know is
you.

BTW, Nick, at one time or another, used the library computers in the
city of Sacramento in California to post here. He also used the UC
Davis library computer for the same reason, believe it or not.

Yes, I think I knew that. In fact, I know I did. In fact, it's 100%
that I knew it *long* before you did, Ace.

Do you remember my posting this little missive in reply to you?

http://masl.to/?J4661246E

Moron that you are, you actually tracked Nick to Worcester, England...

ROFLMAO!!!

Here's a hint:

As soon as John Macnab wrote:

http://masl.to/?R2961246E

I knew exactly what Nick's real name is, and where he lives.

Clearly, it took you quite a lot longer.... D'Oh!

Sooooo, you came back to tell to the world that you knew exactly what
Bourbaki's real name is and it took me quite a lot longer?

Who cares?

Er no... I came back to learn what people's reactions to Kramnik-DF
were.

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Er no... I came back to learn what people's reactions to Kramnik-DF
were.

Good, so do I.

_
"... Certainly spending $10.000 of limited USCF
funds for a fundraiser who generated no funds
shows some disappointing results on some
decisions: attempts at a band-aid approach to
generate funds. ..." - Joe Lux (Sat Dec 09, 2006
7:27 pm)
_
_
"... Without naming names, Joe raises above an
issue about one declared candidate who recently
received an estimated $10,000 from the USCF
and has produced little or nothing to show for it.
This raises important issues which the members
need to learn more about before voting." - Sam
Sloan (Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:29 am)
_
_
"Who did we give this money to, what were we
expecting to receive, and who decided to spend
the money? ..." - Herbert Vaughn (Sun
Dec 10, 2006 8:26 am)
_
_
"The exact details about this transaction need
to come from Mr. Goichberg or Mr. Hall (the two
Bills). Let us hope that they clarify this matter
soon.
_
Will they tell us, or will this be just another
cover-up of a wasteful expenditure by the USCF?
..." - Sam Sloan (Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:47 am)
_
_
"... Mikhail Koreman ... was paid $10,000 to do
fundraising over the summer and produced no
positive results.
_
Mr. Koreman was moving to Chicago and had
no job when the EB approved these funding for
him. A $2000 per month plus $500 per month in
expenses. A total of $10,000. ..." - Beatriz
Marinello (Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:49 am)
_
_
"I voted in favor of giving the money to Mikhail
because I was so impressed with what he had
achieved in Kansas. In retrospect I believe I
made a mistake, but that does not take away
from his proven brilliance as a chess promoter
and organizer." - Joel Channing (Sun
Dec 10, 2006 12:03 pm)
_
_
"As a delegate, I, too, would like more
information on why Mr. Korenman was selected
to do this fundraising. I recall reading about it at
the time and honestly, this is the type of
decision making that bothered me then and
bothers me now.
_
Why was he selected to do the fundraising? Did
the USCF put out an open bid to its membership
or publish in Chess Life that it was soliciting bids
for fundraising? Did USCF ask for and receive a
resume detailing his experience as a fundraiser?
Did the USCF establish a contract with
benchmarks for results and dates by which to
achieve them in order to determine whether the
fundraising contract was successful? If so, has
the fundraising met those objectives?
_
When the USCF begins to function more as an
independent business with open bidding,
contracts, and goals with measureable results,
then it will have a chance of becoming a
successful organization.
_
All of the questions above are no reflection on
Mr. Korenman. I know nothing about him and
have no political agenda in this regard. They
are simply questions that the general
membership has a right to know the answers
on especially in light of Beatriz's last post."
- Donna Alarie (Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:25 pm)
_
_
"Benchmarks for results and review dates? It's
not the USCF way. It's why USCF buys
snake-oil over and over and over again.
...
The $10K in moving expenses to somone's
buddy is your USCF dues hard at work." - Allan
Fifield (Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:43 pm)
_
_
"Korenman was selected because he made a
proposal to USCF regarding a four month
period when he would be available. Because
his fundraising results in the past have been
spectacular, I supported this proposal.
_
This arrangement involved work other than
fund raising, and it is possible that
sponsorship will still result from his efforts, but
I am disappointed that no definite sponsorship
has resulted so far." - Bill Goichberg (Sun
Dec 10, 2006 6:50 pm)
_
_
"[1]
... 'Fundraising' is obviously a gamble. One
cannot force a successful outcome. ...
_
[2]
A.Karpov was not mentioned in the earlier
posts. Yet it is natural to wonder how much
of Mr. Korenman's success in Lindsborg KA
was due in part to A.Karpov's fame and
involvement. Is it accurate to say Karpov
deserves some of the credit?
_
[3]
I wish the E.B. would modify its perspective
away from 'fundraising' and toward 'marketing'.
Fundraising has a place, but it sounds like
asking for charity. Fundraising is not a growth
channel, it is not even self-sustaining.
_
In contrast, 'marketing' searches for 'win-win'
situations for both the sponsor and chess or
the USCF. Marketing aims at increasing the
appeal of chess to the untapped public."
- Gene Milener (Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:36 pm)
_
_
"... You are quite correct here. I believe the
appropriate avenue for the USCF is to cease
the fundraising aspect and engage actively in
searching for marketing / advertising
sponsorships.
_
For the past 2 years I have been actively
working on securing marketing/advertising
sponsorships and I can say it is not an
simple job but significantly a larger pool than
the fundraising/charity angle.
_
Corporate foundations are very specific in
what they will provide donations to and while
chess has the educational aspect to it many
corporate foundations will not entertain chess
as a viable educational outlet. Additionally
these foundations are limited - remember
these foundations are tax shelters also for
the corporation but the tax shelter is limited
so the funds do run out (and relatively quickly).
_
Marketing / Advertising dollars are quite
different. First they are controlled in two steps
generally - national/international budgets and
local/regional budgets. While the national
budget may not have any opportunities,
local/regional may and generally its easier to
go that route. Secondly - the sponsorship is
no longer only about doing good to the
community - it's about how you can help
them reach new markets and generate sales.
It's not a charity pitch - it's a sales pitch.
Finally - marketing/advertising dollars can be
replenished at various times of the year, not
just at the beginning when budgets become
fresh - foundation dollars are stuck where
they are at year round.
_
So marketing/advertising sponsorship is the
way to go, not corporate foundations. Of
course that is my opinion." - Sevan Muradian
(Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:02 pm)
_
_
"Out of curiosity, what were [Mr. Korenman's]
spectacular fund raising results?" - Kevin
Bachler (Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:16 am)
_
_
"I'm sure there were others, but one area where
he was successful was getting grant funding
from the State of Kansas, I believe through
their department of economic development.
This was different than other chess grant
funding efforts through government, which
generally rely on chess' educational value. In
this instance, he went with the approach that
'chess tournaments appeal to people as being
intellectual and full of smart people, and with
strong national publicity, Kansas will benefit
from being associated with them.' I think he
also tied in the Karpov angle, again giving the
City and State a 'worldly' image.
_
He did get a lot of publicity for some high
impact events, including national coverage. I
had some professional curiosity about the
State actually providing this kind of funding
and spoke with some colleagues in Kansas
about it, and my general recollection is that
the State was satisfied with the outcomes."
- Randy Bauer (Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:10 pm)
_
_
"National evening/nightly news coverage as I
recall. My wife called me out of my office to
see it because one of the networks was
interviewing him." - David Hood (Tue
Dec 12, 2006 2:19 pm)
_
_
"I was curious in part, because, from some
of the press articles I read about when he left,
it sounded more like a failing business than
successful fundraising.
_
Someone made a comment about being on
national news. But really all that would take is
us spending time on PR. Heck, our our 5th
grade chess team was on CNN a few years
ago, and that was just a matter of performing
well.
_
I'm not trying to downplay what he might have
accomplished, but so far, I haven't seen $$
amounts, programs completed, etc. so that
right now I don't know that he accomplished
anything other than promoting himself. And
what he has done in Illinois certainly has been
controversial at best (apparently helping to
increase the expenses of this year's state
championship with no real benefit)...so that
right now my skepticism is up. My suggestion
would be that if he is a real candidate and a
good candidate is that he needs to get some
hard information out soon." - Kevin Bachler
(Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:35 pm)
_
_
"Here's an article that ran in National
Geographic on Korenman and chess in
Kansas.
_
http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0605/feature6/
_
Reading this, it would seem that Korenman
has gotten some good PR for chess in the
mainstream press and has been a successful
organizer. This explains why the USCF board
was willing to back him." - Maret Thorpe (Wed
Dec 13, 2006 1:28 pm)
_
_
"... Anyone that has tried fundraising can tell
you that it is a rare occurance when you can
walk into a meeting with a proposal, and walk
out with a large check. Quite often, a proposal
has to be put into the budget and will be given
out the following fiscal year. So it is premature
to call his efforts a failure.
_
Korenman has previously received a 250K grant.
He has generated quite a bit of publicity in both
print and television media. He has organized
master events and scholastics. He has served
on the scholastic council. I would rather see
someone get elected or not based on their
merits and actions. Based on Mr. Korenman's
actions, I think he makes a fine candidate."
- Glenn Panner (Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:31 pm)

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Matt Nemmers wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:

Strange that Neil and I are sitting with Bruceskis... and you have...
er... what do you have, Rob?

Rob has the prestigious and much-coveted "Piqued Parrot Plaque," Mark.
Awarded on 17 October 2006 in the thread "A first in RGCP history." As
Casey Stengel might say, "You could look it up."

Bruceskis are more common on RGCP -- I have one or two to my credit
somewhere along the line, if I'm not mistaken -- but that lessens their
value. You see, Bruceskis can be awarded to anyone by anyone for a
witty retort, snappy comeback, or thoughtful, intelligent post. The
Triple-P has only been awarded once and *can* only be awarded for one
act, and one act alone. And that act has been attempted by numerous
individuals over the years, all of whom have failed miserably (myself
included) because it's extremely hard to do. So, you might say that
while a Bruceski is equivalent to a Good Conduct Medal, the Triple-P is
equivalent to a Purple Heart.

Thus, it seems (to me) that Rob's award trumps yours and Neil's.

Why are you still here?

Mark

Very existential. Why *are* we still here?

LOL!

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the heads up! How the heck are you doing? How's life in Iowa?

No problem. Doing well. Wouldn't know.

Take care.

Chess One wrote:

"Mark Houlsby" wrote in message
ups.com...

Rob wrote:

Mark Houlsby wrote:
The Historian wrote:snipped... yawn.

Bruceski!

Correct spelling is "brewski". Unless you were imparting a
Polish surname to NB.

You see, Rob, as the impeccable Dr. Blair just pointed out to you, *in
these groups* THE CORRECT SPELLING IS "Bruceski".

You don't know ****.

Shut the **** up and go away.

Is this a person who complains about abuse?


Certainly, I'm a person who complains about a specific kind of abuse.
It's known as: trolling.

A Brewski is what ordinary people call a beer in the USA. In these threads
we named a joke after a character called Bruce, so respelled it. Unlike Rob
Mitchell, Houslby here, does know ****.

Right, and I can tell it from shinola. Also, I can spell my own name.

And that, so it seems, is all.

Phil Innes

No, Phil, it's not all.

For example, you *still* haven't told me, in plain English, what the
"Houslby (sic) Challenge" is...

Any chance you might do that? In the appropriate thread, or here...

Mark Houlsby

The HOUSLBY CHALLENGE: Specifically let me turn this on you - and if you
wish to state that the material exists, then presumably you will retract
your [abstract] ****-talk and calm down, otherwise the term net-nazi suits
you well.

I wait your response.

Would Mr. or Ms. Holsby, whoever you are, please translate this? It's a
complete nonsense.