Today, Susan Polgar posted the following on her chessdiscussion.com

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1031

The Jerry Hanken issue

Post by Susan Polgar on Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:03 pm

In spite of my good will toward the regrettable recent conduct by Mr.
Hanken, here is what he publicly stated this morning about my husband
and me:

"I believe that If they (Susan and Paul) ever got control of USCF
with a board majority by getting a couple of bootlickers elected while
both held onto their seats, it would be all over for the Federation!
They would suck the USCF dry and leave its hulk in a dumpster while
founding the "Polger Chess Federation". This is NOT a joke and I am
not an alarmist."

It is even more unfortunate that some board members are continuing to
look the other way to protect an individual like this while continuing
to offer him paid USCF projects. This is one of the things I brought
up before and spoke out against. One of the reasons why the USCF is
often in financial difficulties is because we continue to award paid
projects to friends and insiders instead of getting the best people
for the job.

I hope that Mr. Goichberg and his board majority will speak out
against such regrettable statement and conduct by Mr. Hanken and
revoke all paid assignments from individuals like this. What does it
say when board members and the USCF see nothing wrong with this and
continue to support such individuals?

Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 14:52:25 -0700 (PDT), samsloan
wrote:

Today, Susan Polgar posted the following on her chessdiscussion.com

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1031

The Jerry Hanken issue

Post by Susan Polgar on Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:03 pm

In spite of my good will toward the regrettable recent conduct by Mr.
Hanken, here is what he publicly stated this morning about my husband
and me:

"I believe that If they (Susan and Paul) ever got control of USCF
with a board majority by getting a couple of bootlickers elected while
both held onto their seats, it would be all over for the Federation!
They would suck the USCF dry and leave its hulk in a dumpster while
founding the "Polger Chess Federation". This is NOT a joke and I am
not an alarmist."

It is even more unfortunate that some board members are continuing to
look the other way to protect an individual like this while continuing
to offer him paid USCF projects. This is one of the things I brought
up before and spoke out against. One of the reasons why the USCF is
often in financial difficulties is because we continue to award paid
projects to friends and insiders instead of getting the best people
for the job.

I hope that Mr. Goichberg and his board majority will speak out
against such regrettable statement and conduct by Mr. Hanken and
revoke all paid assignments from individuals like this. What does it
say when board members and the USCF see nothing wrong with this and
continue to support such individuals?

Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com


Would she be more forgiving if Hanken had said this stuff under
someone else's name? Just wondering...

Mike Murray wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 14:52:25 -0700 (PDT), samsloan
wrote:

Today, Susan Polgar posted the following on her chessdiscussion.com

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1031

The Jerry Hanken issue

Post by Susan Polgar on Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:03 pm

In spite of my good will toward the regrettable recent conduct by Mr.
Hanken, here is what he publicly stated this morning about my husband
and me:

"I believe that If they (Susan and Paul) ever got control of USCF
with a board majority by getting a couple of bootlickers elected while
both held onto their seats, it would be all over for the Federation!
They would suck the USCF dry and leave its hulk in a dumpster while
founding the "Polger Chess Federation". This is NOT a joke and I am
not an alarmist."

It is even more unfortunate that some board members are continuing to
look the other way to protect an individual like this while continuing
to offer him paid USCF projects. This is one of the things I brought
up before and spoke out against. One of the reasons why the USCF is
often in financial difficulties is because we continue to award paid
projects to friends and insiders instead of getting the best people
for the job.

I hope that Mr. Goichberg and his board majority will speak out
against such regrettable statement and conduct by Mr. Hanken and
revoke all paid assignments from individuals like this. What does it
say when board members and the USCF see nothing wrong with this and
continue to support such individuals?

Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com


Would she be more forgiving if Hanken had said this stuff under
someone else's name? Just wondering...

Poor Susie. I feel her pain. The truth hurts.

samsloan wrote:
Today, Susan Polgar posted the following on her chessdiscussion.com

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1031

The Jerry Hanken issue

Post by Susan Polgar on Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:03 pm

In spite of my good will toward the regrettable recent conduct by Mr.
Hanken, here is what he publicly stated this morning about my husband
and me:

"I believe that If they (Susan and Paul) ever got control of USCF
with a board majority by getting a couple of bootlickers elected while
both held onto their seats, it would be all over for the Federation!
They would suck the USCF dry and leave its hulk in a dumpster while
founding the "Polger Chess Federation". This is NOT a joke and I am
not an alarmist."

It is even more unfortunate that some board members are continuing to
look the other way to protect an individual like this while continuing
to offer him paid USCF projects. This is one of the things I brought
up before and spoke out against. One of the reasons why the USCF is
often in financial difficulties is because we continue to award paid
projects to friends and insiders instead of getting the best people
for the job.

I hope that Mr. Goichberg and his board majority will speak out
against such regrettable statement and conduct by Mr. Hanken and
revoke all paid assignments from individuals like this. What does it
say when board members and the USCF see nothing wrong with this and
continue to support such individuals?

Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com

What is becoming increasingly clear over time is that Ms. Polgar
apparently has no idea of how the democratic political process works and
the fact that we have freedom of speech in the United States. The right
to speak truth to power is what men and women have given their lives for
in founding and defending this country.

To be charitable to Susie Chesspiece, her up bringing in a totalitarian
society with an authoritarian father is probably what has led to he
stunted political outlook. I'm surprised she didn't suggest dousing
Hanken's mouth with hot sauce.

On Apr 9, 7:26 pm, Brian Lafferty wrote:

Poor Susie. I feel her pain. The truth hurts.

I haven't been following the issue well enough to have any idea if the
danger is of Polgar and Truong doing that to the USCF, or of Hanken
doing that to the USCF.

I suppose if the Chinese had an up-and-coming chess Grandmaster that
we had to find some child prodigy to beat for World Champion, then the
USCF would have so many members it would feel confident this could not
happen to it.

Failing that, presumably if Chess were replaced with my pet project
modification of it:

http://www.quadibloc.com/chess/ch0202.htm

this would do away with opening theory, and (as advertised for
Seirawan Chess) "make chess fun again", and so the problem would be
solved.

Yeah, right.

It is _not_ going to be as simple as that. But that there is a
relation between shrinking pies and infighting is a reasonable enough
conclusion as well.

John Savard

To be charitable to Susie Chesspiece, her up bringing in a totalitarian
society with an authoritarian father is probably what has led to he
stunted political outlook. *I'm surprised she didn't suggest dousing
Hanken's mouth with hot sauce.


Whatever your opinion of Susan Polgar, that last remark was unworthy
of a gentleman. You should be ashamed for making it, sir.

zdrakec

zdrakec wrote:
To be charitable to Susie Chesspiece, her up bringing in a totalitarian
society with an authoritarian father is probably what has led to he
stunted political outlook. I'm surprised she didn't suggest dousing
Hanken's mouth with hot sauce.


Whatever your opinion of Susan Polgar, that last remark was unworthy
of a gentleman. You should be ashamed for making it, sir.

zdrakec

There's precedent for it in their household according to what her kids
told a guardian ad litem. They're quite the enlightened couple. Hot
sauce, blond jokes, slanderous attacks on people like Hanken and Lux,
not to mention being Fake Sam Sloanish, etc. Truth bites.

On Apr 10, 1:15 pm, wrote:

Kindly take a couple thousand words to justify your Schadenfreude as a
noble emotion, Mr. Parker.

:-|

On Apr 10, 9:21*am, Brian Lafferty wrote:
zdrakec wrote:
To be charitable to Susie Chesspiece, her up bringing in a totalitarian
society with an authoritarian father is probably what has led to he
stunted political outlook. *I'm surprised she didn't suggest dousing
Hanken's mouth with hot sauce.

Whatever your opinion of Susan Polgar, that last remark was unworthy
of a gentleman. You should be ashamed for making it, sir.

zdrakec

There's precedent for it in their household according to what her kids
told a guardian ad litem. *They're quite the enlightened couple. *Hot
sauce, blond jokes, slanderous attacks on people like Hanken and Lux,
not to mention being Fake Sam Sloanish, etc. Truth bites.

That does not give justification to make insulting innuendoes. I'm
sure that you yourself have never done anything that could be
considered wrong, but just in case you have, remember to keep that
first stone firmly in your fist.
Mind you, I also fail to restrain my pen and tongue from time to time,
but that remark was really uncalled-for - IMHO.

zdrakec

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:18:33 -0700 (PDT),
"
wrote:

I'll weigh in on the side of not bringing this up. Many parent's
decisions seem weird and creepy to other parents. I knew of parents
who washed their children's mouths out with soap, which seems creepy
to me, but it does no lasting harm and I am sure they were doing what
they thought was best; they also had probably had it done to them, and
felt it was normal. Hot saucing seems about the same. I wouldn't do
it, but it does not seem so out of the range of normal behavior as to
make an issue of it. The father has the right to bring it up, but I
don't think we do. In particular, it is the sort of thing parents do
which they think is best for their children. It is less likely to
cause serious damage than various other forms of discipline which are
still practiced in this country.

Normally, I'd agree with you, but given Truong and Polgar's
involvement with scholastic chess, it's probably something that
parents of prospective clients should evaluate.