Stephen Jones for USCF Executive Board

Originally Posted by Stephen L. Jones

I agree that such a code of ethics is a good
idea.

I believe that the proposed code requires a little tinkering to fit the
circumstances, other than merely replacing "USGenNet" with
"USCF."

In particular, there are a number of persons both on the Board and
candidates for the Board who make money through chess in America. By
the way, I am not one of them. One way or another, their income might
be said to be directly or indirectly connected to the USCF. And these
people have valuable experience and should not be automatically
excluded from the Board.

I would suggest limiting the proposed code so that every Board member
would be required to disclose any and all such financial arrangements
and potential benefits (a "sunshine" provision) and that any member
would refrain from taking any action in any decision actually affecting
that member's interests. That would be consistent with the
"certification" proposed in the posting which states that there
have been no financial benefits accruing to the individual except those
which are identified. Thus, any financial benefits have to be
disclosed but are not fatal to that individual's participation in
other Board matters.

By the way, if you propose a code, you should also propose a means for
enforcing the code. What are the proposed consequences if there is a
violation by a Board member and how would they be implemented?

Stephen Jones

Please note that Stephen Jones is a surprise new candidate for election
to the USCF Executive Board.

I know very little about him and met him only once, which was at the
1963 US Intercollegiate Championship at Notre Dame University in
Indiana. There I remembering him drawing with our team member Donald
Dean when Dean was a piece down in a position that looked hopeless.

My team, which was the University of California at Berkeley, tied for
the Championship with his team, which was the University of Texas. My
team had Norris Weaver, Donald Dean, Tom Dorsch and Sam Sloan. His team
had Henry Davis, Steven Jones and three A-players. My team was all
experts except for Weaver who was then a master. I felt that we could
have beaten them in a match because of our greater depth. However, his
team won the championship by a half tie-breaking point.

Jones was famous for his performance the previous year in the 1962 US
Open Championship in San Antonio Texas. Entering the tournament as an
unknown expert, Jones ran off an incredible streak of wins to take an
early lead. By round nine he was in clear first place. However, he then
ran into a solid brick wall consisting of Byrne, Benko and Bisguier,
lost all the rest of his games and finished far down in the standings.

This is still one of the all time great performances by a previously
unknown player.

However, after that he stopped playing actively, although I understand
that he is a correspondence grandmaster. Still, he holds a solid master
rating.

Everybody is wondering what kind of board member he will be. We are all
surprised to see him running, since he is unknown except to a few
oldtimers like me.

Nevertheless, I feel that his chances for being elected are fairly
good. He certainly does not carry the negative baggage that most of the
other candidates have.

So, welcome to the race, Stephen Jones!

Sam Sloan

samsloan wrote:

Originally Posted by Stephen L. Jones

I agree that such a code of ethics is a good
idea.

I believe that the proposed code requires a little tinkering to fit the
circumstances, other than merely replacing "USGenNet" with
"USCF."

In particular, there are a number of persons both on the Board and
candidates for the Board who make money through chess in America. By
the way, I am not one of them. One way or another, their income might
be said to be directly or indirectly connected to the USCF. And these
people have valuable experience and should not be automatically
excluded from the Board.

I would suggest limiting the proposed code so that every Board member
would be required to disclose any and all such financial arrangements
and potential benefits (a "sunshine" provision) and that any member
would refrain from taking any action in any decision actually affecting
that member's interests. That would be consistent with the
"certification" proposed in the posting which states that there
have been no financial benefits accruing to the individual except those
which are identified. Thus, any financial benefits have to be
disclosed but are not fatal to that individual's participation in
other Board matters.

By the way, if you propose a code, you should also propose a means for
enforcing the code. What are the proposed consequences if there is a
violation by a Board member and how would they be implemented?

Stephen Jones

Please note that Stephen Jones is a surprise new candidate for election
to the USCF Executive Board.

I know very little about him and met him only once, which was at the
1963 US Intercollegiate Championship at Notre Dame University in
Indiana. There I remembering him drawing with our team member Donald
Dean when Dean was a piece down in a position that looked hopeless.

My team, which was the University of California at Berkeley, tied for
the Championship with his team, which was the University of Texas. My
team had Norris Weaver, Donald Dean, Tom Dorsch and Sam Sloan. His team
had Henry Davis, Steven Jones and three A-players. My team was all
experts except for Weaver who was then a master. I felt that we could
have beaten them in a match because of our greater depth. However, his
team won the championship by a half tie-breaking point.

Jones was famous for his performance the previous year in the 1962 US
Open Championship in San Antonio Texas. Entering the tournament as an
unknown expert, Jones ran off an incredible streak of wins to take an
early lead. By round nine he was in clear first place. However, he then
ran into a solid brick wall consisting of Byrne, Benko and Bisguier,
lost all the rest of his games and finished far down in the standings.

This is still one of the all time great performances by a previously
unknown player.

However, after that he stopped playing actively, although I understand
that he is a correspondence grandmaster. Still, he holds a solid master
rating.

Everybody is wondering what kind of board member he will be. We are all
surprised to see him running, since he is unknown except to a few
oldtimers like me.

Nevertheless, I feel that his chances for being elected are fairly
good. He certainly does not carry the negative baggage that most of the
other candidates have.

So, welcome to the race, Stephen Jones!

Sam Sloan

Everyone knows that a candidate will lose with my endorsement. Now that
I endorsed Stephen Jones, he's screwed. I need to endorse another 5
candidates.

Sam Sloan