USCF Issues Forum: "Sloan haters - Polgar worshippers"

Sloan haters - Polgar worshippers
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Post new topic Reply to topic USChess.org Forum Index - USCF
Issues
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message (Note: Except where statements are specifically
indicated as USCF policy
by someone authorized to make policy statements on behalf of the USCF,
all messages in these Forums are the opinion of the author and the
USCF is
not responsible for the accuracy of those opinions.)
Smith 12816225



Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 72


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:19 am Post subject: Sloan haters -
Polgar worshippers Reply with quote
ppwchess wrote:

...
Right now I'm equally fed up with the people who demonize candidates,
and those that see that they can do no wrong. Enough of "He said, she
said." I'm not sure I can take 5 more months of this crap.


AMEN!

Does every post have to be Polgar-worship or Sloan-bashing? While Sam
certainly has his flaws (major ones), he's not some demon who's going
to eat your children. And regardless of what some would have you
believe, Susan's not the saviour who will single-handedly solve all of
the USCF's problems.

The ceaseless drivel on this forum from anti-Sloan/pro-Polgar
supporters really doesn't help your cause. If anything it's Sloanesque
and may drive moderates away.

And dont' bother to call me a Sloan supporter, I'm not.

Last edited by Smith 12816225 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:44 pm; edited 3
times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonnybear 10098068



Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 218
Location: Brooklyn, N.Y.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:33 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
Exactly right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ron Suarez 12483626



Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 441
Location: Peoria, Illinois ... the Middle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:01 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
I agree wholeheartedly.

The problem we seem to have here is one where people are concerned
mainly with arguing the "rightness" and the "wrongness" of individuals
and their beingness.

We need to get back to discussing the merits and rightness and
wrongness of actions and positions.

Good people can certainly do bad things along with the good they do.

Bad people conversely can do good things.

I personally know that is more complicated than having good and bad
people in this world. I wish it were that easy to tell as in the old
TV westerns where the good guys wore white hats and the bad ones wore
black hats.

Reputation in an elected official is important, I agree. The
discussions of reputation should be kept in their respective places
and not brought in at every discussion on every other issue or area of
concern.

For instance, the financial reporting and handling of our group really
is not affected by Sam Sloan and his reputation of his personal life.
Sam is not in a position of financial trust where he is the sole
decider of what happens to monies of our group. The discussion of
finances should be just that and no more.

Susan Polgar may very well be a successful business person, or she may
not be. I do not know either way. Even if she is successful in her
private business dealings this may or may not prove her to be a good
candidate to handle our national group's finances. Do you see my
point?
_________________
....from the Middle,

Ron Suarez
ID# 12483626
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fpawn 12595730



Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:11 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
The problem is that the 2006 election was marred by apathy, which
allowed a fringe candidate to get elected. Certain people in this
forum are determined to prevent such apathy from occurring again. I
agree that their repeated rhetoric is becoming annoying, but annoyance
is important to prevent apathy.

I think the real question is this: Is the US Chess Federation better
off today than it was last August in Chicago? Why or why not? What
role did the two new Board members, Randy Hough and Sam Sloan, have in
this change?

Michael Aigner
_________________
USCF life master aspiring to the FM title. I am an active tournament
player, scholastic coach, and TD in California and Nevada.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
tanstaafl 11246770



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 1648


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:46 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Is the title of this thread really helpful? I've been a vocal critic
of Sam Sloan for some time now, but I certainly don't HATE him. I
honestly try to limit my remarks and stay on topic. I feel that most
others do the same. While I support Susan Polgar's candidacy, I
certainly don't "worship" her. Even her most vocal supporter (Jack)
seems to honestly consider her faults (and, yes, she has some).

What's changed lately is that there seem to be a lot more people that
are vocal critics of Mr. Sloan and vocal supporters of Ms. Polgar than
there were a few months ago. But, IMHO, this is simply an obvious
result of Mr. Sloan's own campaign strategy. The "big lie" technique
won't fool all the people all the time. Eventually people start
noticing the truth and talking about it.

There's no need to describe people with these extreme labels. It's the
same kind of thing the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" camps do to each
other (after all, who's against life OR choice?). MOST of us that
oppose Mr. Sloan, do so because of the issues, not because we have
anything against him personally (much less hate him). I assume that
the people that support Ms. Polgar do so because they simply feel that
she would help the USCF, not out of some kind of "hero-worship" (or
any other kind of worship). I also don't think it's appropriate to
call these comments "drivel". When Mr. Sloan makes a false, attacking
statement and people correct it, that's reasonable.

Smith seems to be making the same sort of mistake he's being critical
of in others by using labels/insults like "Sloan hater", "Polgar
worshiper", and "drivel".

Some of you may notice that I'm a lot less vocal in my critcism of Mr.
Sloan lately. This isn't because I've started thinking that he's doing
a decent job for the USCF. Rolling Eyes No, it's because the original
post in this thread was right on target in one very limited sense --
there's no need for multiple people to jump on Mr. Sloan on every
single thread. It's overkill. And it will just lead to people being
(incorrectly, IMHO) lumped in with Mr. Sloan. Some readers just aren't
going to bother to check the facts and they'll assume that people like
me, chrisfalter, jacklemoine, and SteveTN are just using the same
technique as samsloan. I happen to feel that there's a big difference
(truthfullness) but to a casual observer, it all starts to look the
same if we get too carried away and too strident in our remarks.

So, while I don't think it's "drivel", I do agree that the rhetoric
should be toned down a little bit.
_________________
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
---
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can
spread. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteveTN 12467003



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 338
Location: Nashville, TN

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Ron Suarez wrote:

The problem we seem to have here is one where people are concerned
mainly with arguing the "rightness" and the "wrongness" of individuals
and their beingness.


How about stating this in positive terms?

Here's what I look for in a "leader":

Someone of quality character that has not only the courage of their
convictions, but also the courage to admit when they are wrong and the
will to change accordingly.

-Quality Character: Is the person a "straight shooter?" Do they have a
track record of making choices for the right reasons? Do they make
choices with regard to all involved or only their own interests?

-Courage of Convictions: Does this person make decisions on what is
morally and ethically the right thing? Will they do the right thing
even when it is unpopular and will cost them politically or otherwise?
Specifically, will the person do right thing for the USCF even if it
is not good for them?

-The Will to Change One's Mind and Course When Wrong: Is this person
able to consider other opinions or does this person continue to fight
for his own beyond reason?

Just as it is our responsibility to seek these qualities in a leader,
it behooves the constituency to recognize when a leader lacking these
qualities has been chosen and to do everything possible to remove them
from leadership.
_________________
Steve in Tennessee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
gregory 13474581



Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:04 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Smith,

Your language is pretty harsh. I don't think that members 'hate' or
'worship' anyone here. If Mr. Sloan and I met up somewhere, I would
stop and have a conversation with him; and I bet that he would be an
entertaining person to talk to. Same with Susan. That said; I
definitely have a preference between the two. Please give me that
right as it is given to you.

Regards,

Gregory

PS Well said Tan.
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007...gue.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
fpawn 12595730



Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Sacramento, CA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
gregory wrote:
If Mr. Sloan and I met up somewhere, I would stop and have a
conversation with him; and I bet that he would be an entertaining
person to talk to. Same with Susan.


I spent 10 days at last year's US Open in Chicago and never once spoke
with either Sam Sloan nor Susan Polgar. In hindsight, that is my
biggest regret. I saw Sloan only once, from the back of a big room
when I sat in on the delegates meeting for 1/2 an hour. I saw Polgar a
few times, but usually she was busy speaking with other people (she's
incredibly popular). Probably Polgar knows who I am since I spoke
several times with her manager Paul Truong.

Michael Aigner
_________________
USCF life master aspiring to the FM title. I am an active tournament
player, scholastic coach, and TD in California and Nevada.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
Ron Suarez 12483626



Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 441
Location: Peoria, Illinois ... the Middle

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:26 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
SteveTN wrote:

How about stating this in positive terms?

Here's what I look for in a "leader":

Someone of quality character that has not only the courage of their
convictions, but also the courage to admit when they are wrong and the
will to change accordingly.

-Quality Character: Is the person a "straight shooter?" Do they have a
track record of making choices for the right reasons? Do they make
choices with regard to all involved or only their own interests?

-Courage of Convictions: Does this person make decisions on what is
morally and ethically the right thing? Will they do the right thing
even when it is unpopular and will cost them politically or otherwise?
Specifically, will the person do right thing for the USCF even if it
is not good for them?

-The Will to Change One's Mind and Course When Wrong: Is this person
able to consider other opinions or does this person continue to fight
for his own beyond reason?

Just as it is our responsibility to seek these qualities in a leader,
it behooves the constituency to recognize when a leader lacking these
qualities has been chosen and to do everything possible to remove them
from leadership.


The above is extremely well put. I think this deserves a thread of its
own. We need a thread that teaches people how to choose a candidate to
vote for. The point is, we need to identify what qualities and what
types of experiences make a better board member. After all we should
be more worried about voting in good Executive Board members not just
simply good candidates.
_________________
....from the Middle,

Ron Suarez
ID# 12483626
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smith 12816225



Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 72


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:02 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
duplicate post removed

Last edited by Smith 12816225 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:07 pm; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smith 12816225



Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 72


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:05 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
tanstaafl wrote:
Is the title of this thread really helpful?


The title of this thread is every bit as helpful as "Victim Claims Sam
Sloan Website Aided Rapist."

Quote:

Smith seems to be making the same sort of mistake he's being critical
of in others by using labels/insults like "Sloan hater", "Polgar
worshiper", and "drivel".


The difference is I don't do it 15 times a day. Besides, from where
I'm sitting, I believe the words I used are accurate.

hate - to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for
or extreme hostility toward; detest

worship - to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or
thing).

Quote:


So, while I don't think it's "drivel", I do agree that the rhetoric
should be toned down a little bit.


I only used the word drivel because if I say the same thing over and
over again at some point it becomes just a bunch of silly talk...even
if it is true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rfeditor 10010250



Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 1414


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:10 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Smith wrote:


hate - to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for
or extreme hostility toward; detest


Inaccurate, as it implies some degree of respect for a worthy
opponent. Better would be "despise," or "have contempt for."
_________________
John Hillery

Last edited by rfeditor 10010250 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:19 pm; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
chrisfalter 12754009



Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 108


PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:45 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Does anyone reading this thread ever watch "Mythbusters"? I suspect
that many do, and enjoy it. Is it drivel because they're always
exploding myths? I think not.

Think of my posts as "Mythbusters" installments. I'd gladly take up
issues from any of the candidates, but Sloan's the only one who's been
supplying any material the past few weeks.

As for the hating and worshipping, may I suggest that you are quite
mistaken, Smith? I do not recall ever singing any paeans to Polgar,
although I am willing to be corrected. And as for Sloan, I reserve no
animosity toward him. Toward his fabrications and libels, yes; toward
the man, no. I have striven to make a strong case for the truth, but I
have always tried to avoid ad hominem attacks and sneers. If you can
locate any failures on my part, though, please do not hesitate to PM
me. I will gladly edit any offending material by 1pm EST of the next
business day.

Personally, I think Sloan loves his kids. He's proud of his daughter,
a US Marine. In last year's campaign statement, he professed pride in
his chess-playing son; if I recall correctly, his name is Mark and
he's a USCF master. And he clearly has affection for the little child
who was photographed in his arms.

I also think that Sloan is allowing some of his less admirable
qualities to interfere with his potential. There are times when he's
cogent, such as when he speaks of the advisability of entering an
exclusive deal with ICC:

samsloan wrote:
there is a lot of new competition with ICC, including WCN and
playchess.com . As a national organization, we should try to give the
competitors a level playing field.

Sam Sloan


But then he'll proceed, almost in the next breath, to say something
reprehensible and spiteful:

samsloan wrote:
lblair wrote:
(I think I wanted to post all this stuff before, but something or
other caused me to lose my train of thought.)

Your particular form of insanity has been noted by others. You have an
obsessive-compulsive need to post long compilations of posts by
others. Now, for the first time, you have actually written something
yourself. You should seek help.


Because Sam so frequently posts nauseating and vicious stuff like that
last quote, he ruins his ability to contribute according to his
capabilities.

It seems to me that Polgar has, in this forum anyway, recently made
her rhetoric more diplomatic. She has listened to her critics and
realized that she has come across as shrill from time to time. I don't
agree with everything she says, but she seems to be demonstrating an
ability to learn from her critics and become more effective.

I wish--I truly wish--I could say the same thing about Sloan.
_________________
Chris Falter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ICC-TD Duncan 12614202



Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Marina, California USA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:10 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
chrisfalter wrote:
Personally, I think Sloan loves his kids. He's proud of his daughter,
a US Marine. In last year's campaign statement, he professed pride in
his chess-playing son; if I recall correctly, his name is Mark and
he's a USCF master.


It's Peter I believe.
_________________
--Duncan R Oxley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 971
Location: Connecticut

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:40 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Chris Falter, come on. Your main activity here has been to go after
Sam Sloan. You have every right to do that, just as I have every right
to skip over your haranguing.

It's not enough to edit ad-hominem posts pointed out to you by PM, by
1pm the next business day. You are responsible not to use that garbage
technique in the first place.

Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 374
Location: Atlanta GA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:11 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
I've noticed several people who frequently express their disapproval
of Mr. Sloan insist that it's nothing personal. Maybe. I've also
noticed that usually if a Sloan detractor finds reason to commend him
on anything, they usually add a backhanded slap along the lines of "I
hate to agree with SS" or "It doesn't happen often, but he got
something right". Those type of cracks certainly suggest it's
personal. It weakens the effect of their message.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mnibb 12818435



Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 595
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 11:50 am Post subject: Reply with
quote Edit/Delete this post
I would guess that I am a recognized "critic" of Mr. Sloan.

I really struggle at this point. I try to make it a point of not
associating generally with folks who don't have some basic standards
of Ethics and Decency. I am trying hard not to make this post a
personal attack, but I hold personal moral standards that I am pretty
sure are far different than Mr. Sloan. It does bother me to attempt to
be a promoter of an organization being led by people of Mr. Sloans
character.

I respect his right to believe and participate in legal activities. I
just have trouble with his being in a position of leadership and the
"potential" for kids interested in chess coming across Mr. Sloan web
sites. Now that might happen, but I would prefer it not happen with
Mr. Sloan as a leader of the USCF.

So, when he was elected, I was told it was the memberships fault that
he was elected. If I wanted to change that, the best thing to do would
be to work to have him not be elected in the coming election. How do
we do this?

I am told that election advertisement in Chess Life is not allowed. It
does not seem right that a person can create a "statement" and no real
rebuttal is allowed. This seems to be the only "forum" for rebuttal of
his false statements. It just doesn't seem right that he says anything
he wants to and no one should challenge it.

On the other hand, I do support Susan's election. In general I do not
see what she does as damaging to the USCF. She promotes the game well,
which is what I see as the prime function of the USCF. To me, it seems
that she has the best interest of chess in mind. I do not understand
the reasoning for all the attacks. I really have not heard anything
that has been brought up as a negative that I care so much about. In
my view, I think she is good for the USCF. If you want to call that
"drivel", I guess that is what it is.

None of this is to say that I think the USCF does not have any
problems. I do. I think Susan might have the most ability to begin to
correct them. Her Polgar Foundation seems to be doing pretty well, and
in my view it seems to be doing the kind of things that the USCF does
and could do better. Enough for now -
_________________
12818435
Mark Nibbelin
Fellow Life Management Institute
Chartered Life Underwriter
Scholastic Chess Organizer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ueschessmom 13470792



Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 11


PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:46 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Well said, Mark. I consider myself a supporter of Susan Polgar's
candidacy. I am not a "Susan worshipper" and I resent being stuck with
a label that I don't think is warranted. I don't consider myself a
"Sloan hater" either. I just started posting two days ago because I
was astonished by some of the misstatements of fact in his posts.

I have seen Susan in action at local and national tournaments and I
follow her blog daily and I think she is one of the best promoters of
chess we have. Do I agree 100% with everything she says and does? No.
Do I think that she will bring her talent, energy, ideas and
connections to help the USCF if elected? Absolutely yes.

I've been following the thread on the $18,000 loss with respect to the
Pan Am games and I sense that at least some of the hostility to
scholastic chess from the "adult chess" community comes from the
support that the USCF gives to the "travel teams," such as the players
who represent the U.S. at World Youth and Pan American tournaments. My
daughter is not playing at that level so we are not a direct recipient
of any funding but I think it's important to continue to support those
kinds of activities. However, if the money is not in the budget,
that's where fundraising comes in. (Just like travel soccer teams or
my daughter's school's tennis team. Hunter Elementary School, which
has one of the best chess programs in the country, has bake sales and
raffles to support their travel to the Nationals, etc.) I link this
back to Susan because I think that this is one area where she will
bring a lot to the table. She has been a successful fundraiser for her
Foundation and she is a very presentable and articulate spokesperson
for chess.

chrisfalter 12754009



Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 109


New postPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:43 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
artichoke wrote:
Chris Falter, come on. Your main activity here has been to go after
Sam Sloan. You have every right to do that, just as I have every right
to skip over your haranguing.

It's not enough to edit ad-hominem posts pointed out to you by PM, by
1pm the next business day. You are responsible not to use that garbage
technique in the first place.


I've been trying hard to avoid ad hominem attacks, and I'm claiming
success. I really think I haven't used the garbage technique. I've
certainly read many other commentators say stuff like "C'mon Sam, why
should we ever believe you?" or "Sam, you are such a _______." I've
done my best to stick scrupulously to the issues and the facts.

I also recognize that I'm a fallible human being, and I may have
failed in reaching the goal. That's why I invite fellow USCF members
to help me if I've failed.

And if someone wants to call me on something publicly, I think I'll be
able to handle that, too. I've already edited a couple of posts in
response to legitimate criticism.
_________________
Chris Falter