In one of her first acts after being elected to the USCF Executive
Board, Susan Polgar named Gregory Alexander as "Volunteer of the
Month".

However, Gregory Alexander does not even have a USCF rating nor has he
ever directed a USCF rated tournament. He only recently joined the
USCF.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

He is best known for ranting and raving on the USCF Issues Forum. He
has also been demanding that a hard link to his "College Chess League"
be placed prominently in the upper left-hand corner of the uschess.org
home page, even though his "league" has no teams and no players.

Because almost every one of his posts involves an attack on a USCF
member, he has been placed in the Moderated Q. As a result, he has
moved most of his attacks over to Susan's own chessdiscussion.com
where he is the webmaster.

His latest rant is about "Prior USCF political investigations against
a board member".

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1299

It is obvious that Gregory Alexander should never have been made
"Volunteer of the Month". He has done no volunteer work for the USCF.
His only volunteer work has been of a personal nature for Susan Polgar
herself.

My question is: Should there not be some minimum standards for
"Volunteer of the Month"? Can a chess politician just name anybody as
"Volunteer of the Month" as a matter of political patronage?

Sam Sloan

samsloan wrote:
Can a chess politician just name anybody as
"Volunteer of the Month" as a matter of political patronage?


Apparently, yes.

On Jul 8, 3:00*am, samsloan wrote:
In one of her first acts after being elected to the USCF Executive
Board, Susan Polgar named Gregory Alexander as "Volunteer of the
Month".

However, Gregory Alexander does not even have a USCF rating nor has he
ever directed a USCF rated tournament. He only recently joined the
USCF.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

He is best known for ranting and raving on the USCF Issues Forum. He
has also been demanding that a hard link to his "College Chess League"
be placed prominently in the upper left-hand corner of the uschess.org
home page, even though his "league" has no teams and no players.

Because almost every one of his posts involves an attack on a USCF
member, he has been placed in the Moderated Q. As a result, he has
moved most of his attacks over to Susan's own chessdiscussion.com
where he is the webmaster.

His latest rant is about "Prior USCF political investigations against
a board member".

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1299

It is obvious that Gregory Alexander should never have been made
"Volunteer of the Month". He has done no volunteer work for the USCF.
His only volunteer work has been of a personal nature for Susan Polgar
herself.

My question is: Should there not be some minimum standards for
"Volunteer of the Month"? Can a chess politician just name anybody as
"Volunteer of the Month" as a matter of political patronage?

Sam Sloan

I have a hard time believing that this post is from Mr. Sloan. Even
Sam Sloan can't be that stupid to write something this.

On Jul 9, 9:03 pm, Gregory wrote:
On Jul 8, 3:00 am, samsloan wrote:



In one of her first acts after being elected to the USCF Executive
Board, Susan Polgar named Gregory Alexander as "Volunteer of the
Month".

However, Gregory Alexander does not even have a USCF rating nor has he
ever directed a USCF rated tournament. He only recently joined the
USCF.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

He is best known for ranting and raving on the USCF Issues Forum. He
has also been demanding that a hard link to his "College Chess League"
be placed prominently in the upper left-hand corner of the uschess.org
home page, even though his "league" has no teams and no players.

Because almost every one of his posts involves an attack on a USCF
member, he has been placed in the Moderated Q. As a result, he has
moved most of his attacks over to Susan's own chessdiscussion.com
where he is the webmaster.

His latest rant is about "Prior USCF political investigations against
a board member".

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...php?f=4&t=1299

It is obvious that Gregory Alexander should never have been made
"Volunteer of the Month". He has done no volunteer work for the USCF.
His only volunteer work has been of a personal nature for Susan Polgar
herself.

My question is: Should there not be some minimum standards for
"Volunteer of the Month"? Can a chess politician just name anybody as
"Volunteer of the Month" as a matter of political patronage?

Sam Sloan

I have a hard time believing that this post is from Mr. Sloan. Even
Sam Sloan can't be that stupid to write something this.

I see that you are the one and only infamous Gregory Alexander.

I am the Real Sam Sloan.

Why do not you respond, if you can?

Sam Sloan

In what organization did you perform these great works?

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament. Gregory Alexander only
joined the USCF last year.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

If you did all these great deeds it must have been in connection with
some other organization because it certainly was not in connection
with the USCF.

For a person to be named "USCF Volunteer of the Month" he should have
done some volunteer work in connection with the USCF. Naming a person
who has done no significant volunteer work for the USCF is an insult
to the hundreds of volunteers who have done volunteer work for the
USCF and for chess for 20, 30 or 40 years and have received no
recognition for their efforts.

Sam Sloan

Yes, I do, and it certainly bothers me that Gregory Alexander had
access to others private conversations.

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament. Gregory Alexander only
joined the USCF last year.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

He should not have been named a moderator or an FOC member and he
should not have been named by Susan as "Volunteer of the Month".

Sam Sloan

"samsloan" wrote in message
...

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregory For over 5 years, I have been actively organizing online chess events for the college community. You can label me as being partisan all that you want-- but trying to infer that I only received this award without merit as a hand me down from Susan is offensive. I have worked very hard and have been very dedicated to promote the game that we all share. Regards, Gregory Alexander

In what organization did you perform these great works?

What does it matter what organization. It was pro-bono chess, and I even
asked in 'your' newsgroup if USCF wanted to support it - they didn't.

When it becomes a matter of organizational lethargy and active agents in
promoting the game, we see which way Sam Sloan swings!

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament. Gregory Alexander only
joined the USCF last year.

Fischer wasn't a member either.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

If you did all these great deeds it must have been in connection with
some other organization because it certainly was not in connection
with the USCF.

Of course it was with another 'organization' the one he created to promote
collegiate chess - I wrote a bunch of people in it, gave them some
publicity - it included Westpoint eg - a quite enthusiastic group.

For a person to be named "USCF Volunteer of the Month" he should have
done some volunteer work in connection with the USCF.

So Sam Sloan argues that USCF awards are for those who promote the
organisation and not promote chess - he is indifferent to that, as indeed is
USCF. What's new?

Naming a person
who has done no significant volunteer work for the USCF is an insult
to the hundreds of volunteers who have done volunteer work for the
USCF and for chess for 20, 30 or 40 years and have received no
recognition for their efforts.

An insult to them, how so? Gregory Alexander raised an entire network of
players and did more for a stated USCF goal [see my interview with Beatriz
Marinello in keeping players in the game] than did USCF itself?

Surely Sam Sloan is not arguing that people who have greater organizational
experience in promoting the game in some sphere than USCF has, and who joins
USCF, should /not/ be applauded?

But who knows what Sam Sloan thinks should receive an award, 20, 30, 40
years of association but achieved what exactly?

Is it actually better to take 30 years to do something than 5 years to do
something? That seems the only criterion presented here.

Phil Innes

Sam Sloan

"samsloan" wrote in message
...

Quote:

Originally Posted by marknibb Could we focus on the truth or untruth of Gregory's posting. I've yet to see anyone deny that what Gregory posted is true. Is there anything in Gregory's post that anyone takes issue with. http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB...4&t=1299#p7642 Back to this being troubling - does it bother folks that some seem to have access to others private communications. Mark Nibbelin

Yes, I do, and it certainly bothers me that Gregory Alexander had
access to others private conversations.

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament.

Don't records show that the top TD in the USA doesn't have a USCF rating?
[ROFL]

Of course, she has connections, instead.

Phil Innes

Gregory Alexander only
joined the USCF last year.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?13474581

He should not have been named a moderator or an FOC member and he
should not have been named by Susan as "Volunteer of the Month".

Sam Sloan

On Jul 10, 12:52 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament.

Don't records show that the top TD in the USA doesn't have a USCF rating?
[ROFL]

Of course, she has connections, instead.

She's a damn good, proven TD as well.

"SBD" wrote in message
...
On Jul 10, 12:52 pm, "Chess One" wrote:

USCF records show that Gregory Alexander does not have a USCF rating
and has never directed a USCF tournament.

Don't records show that the top TD in the USA doesn't have a USCF rating?
[ROFL]

Of course, she has connections, instead.

She's a damn good, proven TD as well.

But unrated? That is the point. Unrated for how many years?

Phil Innes