The following appears on the Trolgar controlled forum chessdiscussion:
by Harry Payne on Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:25 pm

gregory wrote:It should be noted that Mr. Sloan and Brian Lafferty
has had sanction after sanction overturned by Bill Goichberg and the FOC
over the course of a year now. When I was on the FOC and moderation
committees I personally witnessed similiar behavior to be tacitly
encouraged as long as it can lead to the embarrassment of Goichberg’s
political opponents.

Here is a post from Harry Payne who is an official member of the
USCF forum oversight committee: “you are correct, I believe Mr. Truong
needs to be gone at any and/or all cost.” Apr 21, 2008 4:54 pm #99253

This type of attitude to aggressively persue any methods possible
to investigate, smear, and harass someone’s family in order to try to
remove a candidate of the board is shameful at best. Unfortunately,
there is a very small group of dedicated people that will use any means
to meet these ends.

Paul and Susan, I am really sorry that you, or anyone for that
matter, has to go thru with this.

Gregory



Gregory,
I most certainly believe Paul needs to be removed from the Executive
Board, of the USCF. I do take personal offense at linking me to this
thread. I have never raised the issue of Susan's children. I have stated
(which you neglect to post here) If any member of the USCF or of the
USCF EB, has threaten Susan's Children they need to show the proof and
have them put in jail. There is not now, nor is there ever a need to
drag children into the mess going on. The "context" of the post, you
pulled my "text" from, was Paul's removal by recall petition, or A
Circuit Court Judge. Mr. Hillary stated he disagreed with a Judge, and
stated I wanted to see Paul removed at any cost. Which I agreed with.
But certainly not at the cost of harassment of Susan's Children. I do
not know if Susan's Children have been harassed or not. What Sam, posted
on the other site I have not read because I do not go there. And he has
not posted it on the USCF Forum because it would have been pulled.(
Which I think, if I remember correctly some time back he attempted to
do, and it was pulled. What you wish to say, or what you think of me,
matters little to me. But I would appreciate, you keep it in context,
and keep it honest. If this gets posted I will be pleasantly surprised,
but noting from the past, I doubt it. I know of no one on the EB, or in
the USCF, that condones Sam's post. Also, as a member of the MOC, I do
not have the power to overturn a sanction, that is by appeal to the FOC.
I have absolutely no knowledge what-so-ever of Mr. Goichberg even being
in touch with members of the FOC. Fact of business I do know for a fact
one member of the FOC, would make such an attempt public, as he is an
honest man of good character. (I believe any of the FOC members would
actually).

Also, I am not a member of the FOC, I am a member of the MOC (Moderation
oversight Committee).

Thank you
Harry Payne.
--------------------------------------------------------
by gregory on Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:58 pm
Harry,

You are extremely vociferous in your opposition to Paul, and you have
actively sought and support different routes to 'get rid of him', even
if it means finding an attorney to find any loop-hole, and if that does
not work; to eliminate existing USCF election bylaws.

My point was not to link you to Brian Lafferty's latest episodes, but
point out that there are quite a few people that will 'use any means' to
accomplish their goals. Many of you have gone too far and the extreme
tactics needs to stop.

Just my civil take,

G
Gregory

ChessDiscussion webmaster
----------------------------------------------------------

I would remind Gregory, the Trolgar Minion, that it was Trolgar who
injected her children into USCF affairs with the bald assertion that
they had been threatened. As I recall, Mr. Truong raised the issue by
asking me on the USCF Issues Forum if I was the one who anonymously
threatened Ms. Polgar's children. I of course did not and recommended
that he and Ms. Polgar report the matter to the FBI at Federal Plaza in
Manhattan and that they contact the Queens County District Attorney. I
even offered to put them in touch with an old law school classmate who
works in that office. There was no response from Trolgar to my offer
and Trolgar has NEVER confirmed publicly that they filed a complaint
anywhere. Mr. Truong then raised the issue of Ms. Polgar's children yet
again by writing a letter to the FOC strongly implying that I had
threatened Ms. Polgar's children and that I was "a dangerous person."

For Trolgar to complain that the issue of a court order controlling
their behavior regarding her children is not a valid issue is ludicrous.
She injected her children into USCF affairs with as yet
unsubstantiated claims of threats against them. Her conduct and that of
her now acknowledged husband toward children, especially her own, is
relevant, IMO, to her fitness to be involved in scholastic chess.

Gregory has, over the past several months, been clearly shown to be
nothing more than Trolgar's shill despite he attempts to appear otherwise.

It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228

samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228

It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?

Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228

It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?


He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.

wrote:

Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228
It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?


He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.

So, like Las Vegas, the house always wins. And if you were at a
tournament, John, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place? I'll
have to look for tournaments where I can take 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of
the rounds.

From chessdiscussion:
by Engelbert on Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:26 am
Don't know Mr. Payne from Jack but I find his posts quite arrogant,
offensive and less than truthful. Sounds like a racist or at least he
comes across as such. Mr. Payne is a master of insulting and attacking
others but he's upset when others think negatively of him. I wish to see
less talk and more actions. Horton hears a who Mr. Payne. Horton hears a
who. Just my 2 cents... :roll:


Brian Lafferty wrote:
The following appears on the Trolgar controlled forum chessdiscussion:
by Harry Payne on Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:25 pm

gregory wrote:It should be noted that Mr. Sloan and Brian Lafferty
has had sanction after sanction overturned by Bill Goichberg and the FOC
over the course of a year now. When I was on the FOC and moderation
committees I personally witnessed similiar behavior to be tacitly
encouraged as long as it can lead to the embarrassment of Goichberg’s
political opponents.

Here is a post from Harry Payne who is an official member of the
USCF forum oversight committee: “you are correct, I believe Mr. Truong
needs to be gone at any and/or all cost.” Apr 21, 2008 4:54 pm #99253

This type of attitude to aggressively persue any methods possible to
investigate, smear, and harass someone’s family in order to try to
remove a candidate of the board is shameful at best. Unfortunately,
there is a very small group of dedicated people that will use any means
to meet these ends.

Paul and Susan, I am really sorry that you, or anyone for that
matter, has to go thru with this.

Gregory



Gregory,
I most certainly believe Paul needs to be removed from the Executive
Board, of the USCF. I do take personal offense at linking me to this
thread. I have never raised the issue of Susan's children. I have stated
(which you neglect to post here) If any member of the USCF or of the
USCF EB, has threaten Susan's Children they need to show the proof and
have them put in jail. There is not now, nor is there ever a need to
drag children into the mess going on. The "context" of the post, you
pulled my "text" from, was Paul's removal by recall petition, or A
Circuit Court Judge. Mr. Hillary stated he disagreed with a Judge, and
stated I wanted to see Paul removed at any cost. Which I agreed with.
But certainly not at the cost of harassment of Susan's Children. I do
not know if Susan's Children have been harassed or not. What Sam, posted
on the other site I have not read because I do not go there. And he has
not posted it on the USCF Forum because it would have been pulled.(
Which I think, if I remember correctly some time back he attempted to
do, and it was pulled. What you wish to say, or what you think of me,
matters little to me. But I would appreciate, you keep it in context,
and keep it honest. If this gets posted I will be pleasantly surprised,
but noting from the past, I doubt it. I know of no one on the EB, or in
the USCF, that condones Sam's post. Also, as a member of the MOC, I do
not have the power to overturn a sanction, that is by appeal to the FOC.
I have absolutely no knowledge what-so-ever of Mr. Goichberg even being
in touch with members of the FOC. Fact of business I do know for a fact
one member of the FOC, would make such an attempt public, as he is an
honest man of good character. (I believe any of the FOC members would
actually).

Also, I am not a member of the FOC, I am a member of the MOC (Moderation
oversight Committee).

Thank you
Harry Payne.
--------------------------------------------------------
by gregory on Tue Apr 29, 2008 8:58 pm
Harry,

You are extremely vociferous in your opposition to Paul, and you have
actively sought and support different routes to 'get rid of him', even
if it means finding an attorney to find any loop-hole, and if that does
not work; to eliminate existing USCF election bylaws.

My point was not to link you to Brian Lafferty's latest episodes, but
point out that there are quite a few people that will 'use any means' to
accomplish their goals. Many of you have gone too far and the extreme
tactics needs to stop.

Just my civil take,

G
Gregory

ChessDiscussion webmaster
----------------------------------------------------------

I would remind Gregory, the Trolgar Minion, that it was Trolgar who
injected her children into USCF affairs with the bald assertion that
they had been threatened. As I recall, Mr. Truong raised the issue by
asking me on the USCF Issues Forum if I was the one who anonymously
threatened Ms. Polgar's children. I of course did not and recommended
that he and Ms. Polgar report the matter to the FBI at Federal Plaza in
Manhattan and that they contact the Queens County District Attorney. I
even offered to put them in touch with an old law school classmate who
works in that office. There was no response from Trolgar to my offer
and Trolgar has NEVER confirmed publicly that they filed a complaint
anywhere. Mr. Truong then raised the issue of Ms. Polgar's children yet
again by writing a letter to the FOC strongly implying that I had
threatened Ms. Polgar's children and that I was "a dangerous person."

For Trolgar to complain that the issue of a court order controlling
their behavior regarding her children is not a valid issue is ludicrous.
She injected her children into USCF affairs with as yet unsubstantiated
claims of threats against them. Her conduct and that of her now
acknowledged husband toward children, especially her own, is relevant,
IMO, to her fitness to be involved in scholastic chess.

Gregory has, over the past several months, been clearly shown to be
nothing more than Trolgar's shill despite he attempts to appear otherwise.

On Apr 30, 5:50 am, Brian Lafferty wrote:
wrote:

Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228
It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?

He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.

So, like Las Vegas, the house always wins. And if you were at a
tournament, John, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place? I'll
have to look for tournaments where I can take 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of
the rounds.

It would have been proper for Mr. Truong to refuse a prize for playing
as a filler. In a situation like that, the prize list might have been
extended to compensate for his 11th place finish. Do you have any
evidence that Truong accepted prize money for playing as a house man,
or is this charge merely another example of your usual Sam-ish
"kitchen sink" attacks on the Trolgars?

The Historian wrote:
On Apr 30, 5:50 am, Brian Lafferty wrote:
wrote:

Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.
Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416
Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228
It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?
He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.
So, like Las Vegas, the house always wins. And if you were at a
tournament, John, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place? I'll
have to look for tournaments where I can take 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of
the rounds.

It would have been proper for Mr. Truong to refuse a prize for playing
as a filler. In a situation like that, the prize list might have been
extended to compensate for his 11th place finish.

That is to say, his placing is bogus unless every other player was
afforded the opportunity to get 1/2 point byes for 3/4 of their rounds.

Do you have any
evidence that Truong accepted prize money for playing as a house man,
or is this charge merely another example of your usual Sam-ish
"kitchen sink" attacks on the Trolgars?

I never said there was prize money of any kind in this case. I asked
John a purely hypothetical question. I wrote, "And IF YOU were at A
tournament, JOHN, with a prize list that went down to 20th place, would
you feel good about the organizer pocketing extra cash because of 1/2
point byes not afforded to others when you finished in 11th place?"
[emphasis added]

Interestingly, if you look at his tournament record over the past few
years, he appears to play to keep his rating up by playing in
tournaments where he faces opponents who are usually rated 500 points
(often 1000 or unrated) below him. He then takes byes in the later
rounds if there is significant opposition in the tournament. It's a
good way to inch your rating up. Of course, he isn't the first or only
player to do that. Too bad the USCF records only go back to 1990 or so.

On Apr 29, 9:26*pm, wrote:
Brian Lafferty wrote:
samsloan wrote:
It is to be recalled that it is actually Susan who brought her
children into this debate by repeatedly claiming that her children
were being threatened. She stated making this claim back around
November 2006.

Meanwhile, her eldest son, Tom, reached his peak rating at about that
time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?13060416

Her younger son has actually been dropping in rating. Apparently he is
the one who complained that he is being forced to play chess.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13546228

It also appears that Truong finished 10th in the open adult four round
event with one win and three half point byes. *How does one get all
those 1/2 byes?

He obviously played one game as a house man. If you had any experience
directing or playing in chess tournaments ... well, you wouldn't be
such an easy target.- Hide quoted text -

Although I think Brian is barking up the wrong tree here, I have never
heard of a house player rated 2300 in a small tournament, being paired
against someone who was either unrated or had a provisional rating
10XX. If Paul wanted money, he obviously could have finished at worst
2d by just playing the games. It wasn't quite a standard house player
arrangement, however, though he did function as one. It looks more
like a withdrawal and the TD just filling in half point byes instead
of full point byes in the reporting list, perhaps in a decision that
this would be fairer for the tiebreak points of the person he played.
I think it is important to focus on the real issue, an actual case of
abusive impersonation; this tournament is not at all relevant.

Jerry Spinrad

- Show quoted text -

My real concern here is that Truong has played in three tournaments in
a row in which he has played much lower rated opponents, inching up
one point each time.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?12123950

There is nothing wrong with this, except he might be trying to confirm
his rating or make it appear that he is more active than he really is.
These were the same tactics used by Robert Tanner.

Sam Sloan