I was looking for Sam's candidate statement so that I could take a
closer look at what he exactly said about Eade, but came across this
ironic post, from just before the Delegates' meetings in LA.

Sam was brown nosing Frank Niro right up until the day the ceiling
collapsed. Now you'll notice he says nothing about Niro.

From: Sam Sloan )
Subject: Problems with Frank Niro
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics, rec.games.chess.misc
Date: 2003-07-21 08:28:34 PST


Problems with Frank Niro

I am a strong supporter of Frank Niro. I especially appreciate the way
he has straightened out the financial mess the USCF was in, even
though a financial statement for the year 2002 has still not come out
yet. I certainly hope that he continues in his job.

I really loved the "I especially appreciate the way he has straightened
out the financial mess the USCF was in,". Boy, Sam was right on target
with that comment.

Best Regards,

Bruce

"Bruce Draney" wrote in message
...
I was looking for Sam's candidate statement so that I could take a
closer look at what he exactly said about Eade, but came across this
ironic post, from just before the Delegates' meetings in LA.

Sam was brown nosing Frank Niro right up until the day the ceiling
collapsed. Now you'll notice he says nothing about Niro.

From: Sam Sloan )
Subject: Problems with Frank Niro
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics, rec.games.chess.misc
Date: 2003-07-21 08:28:34 PST


Problems with Frank Niro

I am a strong supporter of Frank Niro. I especially appreciate the way
he has straightened out the financial mess the USCF was in, even
though a financial statement for the year 2002 has still not come out
yet. I certainly hope that he continues in his job.

I really loved the "I especially appreciate the way he has straightened
out the financial mess the USCF was in,". Boy, Sam was right on target
with that comment.

Bruce,

I share your depreciation of certain elements of the chess political
community. However, please keep in mind that Sam was responding to the
information available at the time. There are lots of areas to effectively
question the judgement of some of our more forceful political voices; this
isn't one of them.

David

--
without the block

--
without the block

SLOAN WAS WRONG, 180 DEGREES

By Larry Parr

Bruce Draney quotes Sam Sloan in praise of Frank Niro. Wrote Mr.
Sloan, "I especially appreciate the way he has straightened out the financial
mess the USCF was in."

Mr. Draney also writes, "Sam was brown nosing Frank Niro right up until
the day the ceiling collapsed. Now you'll notice he says nothing about Niro."

Frank Niro did not turn around the Federation, which is one reason why
Mr. Sloan should have been less appreciative of the man's job. Still, a more
complete error by Mr. Sloan is to state appreciation only to the executive
director for what was perceived to be dramatic improvement in the finances.
Both John McCrary and Frank Camaratta, who would have gotten a fair amount of
credit, also deserved Mr. Sloan's praise at the time. After all, all three men
have since received the discredit. The Messrs. McCrary and Niro did the right
thing by resigning, and Mr. Camaratta should also resign, I begin to think.

Having said this, I don't think it fair to say that Mr. Sloan was
"brown nosing" Mr. Niro in his statement. He began that statement completely
up front, "I am a strong supporter of Frank Niro." When you let the reader
know where you stand right off and then say good things about a man, you are
praising him rather than brown nosing.

Bruce Draney promises to comb Mr. Sloan's candidate's statement,
paragraph by paragraph, isolating any possible instances of libel and
explaining why those instances are libelous.

I would suggest he reproduce what is probably a relatively brief
statement by Mr. Sloan and then append his comments in parentheses directly
following each instance, if any, of what he regards as a libelous remark
directed toward Jim Eade, who was not even mentioned by name in the Chess Life
statement.

It's not enough for Mr. Eade or anyone here to assert a libel by Mr.
Sloan. They must also demonstrate it.

"Parrthenon" wrote in message
...

Bruce Draney promises to comb Mr. Sloan's candidate's statement,
paragraph by paragraph, isolating any possible instances of libel and
explaining why those instances are libelous.

If nothing Bruce will certainly expand his collection of lice, nits, and
ticks.

Bruce Draney wrote:

I was looking for Sam's candidate statement ...

_
From: Sam Sloan )
Subject: Sam Sloan's Candidate's Statement for the June Chess Life
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics, rec.games.chess.misc
Date: 2003-03-17 09:39:41 PST


If you saw the article in the December issue of Altantic Monthly, you
will have read that I am a chess writer and longtime friend of Bobby
Fischer. In a political manuver, Fischer was expelled from the United
States Chess Federation last year. I plan to have Fischer reinstated
and brought back into chess.

I want to build up, expand and improve the USCF. I do not want to
break up the USCF into pieces, as another candidate wants to do.

We need to drop Internet chess, where the field is crowded, and expand
scholastic chess. Every school in the country seems to want us now. We
need to develop teaching materials and course programs for the kids in
the schools. If we do not act now, we will be left in the dust, as we
were in Internet chess. I also want to bring back School Mates
magazine.

(149 words)

Sam Sloan

From: Sam Sloan )
Subject: Sam Sloan's 500 word statement for Chess Life (492 words long)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics, rec.games.chess.misc
Date: 2003-04-03 04:48:06 PST


I first joined the United States Chess Federation in 1956 when I was
11 years old. I have been a tournament chess player for 47 years. I am
best known as a journalist who writes articles about chess. Just about
every strong chess player in the world knows me or has at least heard
of me.

I have a legal and financial background. I have been the registered
principal of a Wall Street securities firm. I argued orally a case
before the United States Supreme Court, the last non-lawyer ever to do
so, and I won the case 9-0. SEC vs. Sloan, 436 US 103 (1978).

I favor re-organization and financial reform in the USCF. Fortunately,
we have the right man to do this in Frank Niro. For at least the last
seven years I have been nagging the USCF office about its persistent
failure to adopt Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Finally,
the USCF has agreed to do what I have been demanding ought to be done.
The new financial reports, when and if they ever come out (they are
now eight months late) will for the first time adhere to GAAP.

The USCF has lost money six years in a row. I believe that I can help
turn this around. The situation is getting better, much better than
before. Nevertheless, we must be vigilant. I have just received a
confidential report that $200,000 in USCF funds have gone missing. If
I am elected, I will not cover this up. I will be fully in favor of
criminal prosecutions, if this report proves to be true. I intend to
demand an investigation of what appears to be wrong-doing and
malfeasance by prior administrations.

On a more positive note, there has been a great expansion in the
popularity of scholastic chess. It seems like every school and every
library wants a chess teacher now. We are in demand and we must
exploit these opportunities. I want to bring back School Mates
magazine, which was abolished as a cost-saving measure.

I also want to abolish the no-magazine option of USCF membership.
Every member must receive a magazine. I favor a uniform scholastic
dues of $19 and a reduction of regular dues to $39.

We cannot continue to view scholastic chess as a loss leader. One of
the main reasons the USCF lost money six years in a row was that we
were servicing scholastic members at below cost.

We must end special deals for political insiders. For example, a
recent scandal has arisen because the FIDE Zone President for the USA
demanded and received a special deal under which his scholastic
players got to join the USCF for only one dollar. This was illegal and
wrong. If I am elected I am going to demand that he pay back the
money. You can be sure that such a thing will never happen again as
long as I am on the board.

Sam Sloan

From: Sam Sloan )
Subject: Sam Sloan's Candidate's Statement for the July Chess Life
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics, rec.games.chess.misc
Date: 2003-05-10 21:17:42 PST


Sam Sloan's Candidate's Statement for the July Chess Life

If you saw the article in the December issue of Atlantic Monthly, you
will have read that I am a chess writer and longtime friend of Bobby
Fischer. In a political maneuver, Fischer was expelled from the United
States Chess Federation last year. I plan to have Fischer reinstated
and brought back into chess.

I have been a member of the USCF and an active tournament player since
1956. I first met Bobby Fischer the same year. I am one of the best
known chess personalities in the US. I have attended several World
Chess Olympiads and am well known internationally as well.

I have a legal and financial background. I have been the registered
principal of a Wall Street securities firm. I argued orally a case
before the United States Supreme Court, the last non-lawyer ever to do
so, and I won the case 9-0. SEC vs. Sloan, 436 US 103 (1978).

I want to build up, expand and improve the USCF, especially in the
area of Scholastic Chess. We need to provide a chess program and chess
curriculum for the schools, especially since many schools are
requesting this. There is suddenly a tremendous interest among
children in learning chess and in competing in chess tournaments. We
need to move aggressively to try to fill that demand. We need to
develop programs, courses and teacher certifications for the schools.
I want to bring back School Mates magazine, which was abolished as a
cost-saving measure.

At the same time, we need to drop Internet chess. There is too much
competition and we have missed the boat. Let them go to the many
available Internet chess servers.

I want to reduce adult membership dues back to $39 and to leave
scholastic dues at $19, while abolishing the no-magazine option. All
members must receive a magazine.

I favor re-organization and financial reform in the USCF. Fortunately,
we have the right man to do this in Frank Niro. For at least the last
seven years I have been nagging the USCF office about its persistent
failure to adopt Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Finally,
the USCF has agreed to do what I have been demanding ought to be done.
The new financial reports will for the first time adhere to GAAP. The
USCF has lost money six years in a row. I believe that I can help turn
this around.

We cannot continue to view scholastic chess as a loss leader. One of
the main reasons the USCF lost money six years in a row was that we
were servicing scholastic members at below cost. On a more positive
note, there has been a great expansion in the popularity of scholastic
chess. It seems like every school and every library wants a chess
teacher now. We are in demand and we must exploit these opportunities.


Sam Sloan

Thanks to Mr. Blair for digging this up. My view is that this a long
ways away from being libel. I know that's probably not what Jim Eade
wants to hear, but Sam never even mentions Eade's name, so I seriously
doubt anyone would consider it libel.

However, this still does not mean that USCF couldn't and shouldn't
establish standards of some kind for what is and is not allowed in a
candidate's statement in Chess Life.

There are several blatant misstatements in the statement. The major one
that I notice is Sam claiming that the California children are "his"
kids.

It has been well established that Eade had virtually nothing to do with
this tournament and the organizers were Koepcke and Peterson among
others.

Sam needs to either establish some basis for his claims being even
remotely credible. Other non-profits make such regulations regarding
candidate's statements. This is not really a free speech issue, this is
blatant lies being included in Chess Life. Although it's not libel in
my opinion, it still should make USCF see that candidates should not be
allowed to just print anything in their statements.

Best Regards,

Bruce

Bruce Draney wrote in message ...
Thanks to Mr. Blair for digging this up. My view is that this a long
ways away from being libel. I know that's probably not what Jim Eade
wants to hear, but Sam never even mentions Eade's name, so I seriously
doubt anyone would consider it libel.

However, this still does not mean that USCF couldn't and shouldn't
establish standards of some kind for what is and is not allowed in a
candidate's statement in Chess Life.

There are several blatant misstatements in the statement. The major one
that I notice is Sam claiming that the California children are "his"
kids.

It has been well established that Eade had virtually nothing to do with
this tournament and the organizers were Koepcke and Peterson among
others.

Sam needs to either establish some basis for his claims being even
remotely credible. Other non-profits make such regulations regarding
candidate's statements. This is not really a free speech issue, this is
blatant lies being included in Chess Life. Although it's not libel in
my opinion, it still should make USCF see that candidates should not be
allowed to just print anything in their statements.

So do you think the USCF should have refused to print Sloan's
statement?
I believe any power to censor candidate's statements is likely
to be a cure that is worse than the disease as it will be abused to
protect insiders and stifle dissent.
Sloan's statement included the following statements:

I favor re-organization and financial reform in the USCF.
Fortunately, we have the right man to do this in Frank Niro. ...

The USCF has lost money six years in a row. I believe that I can help
turn this around. The situation is getting better, much better than
before. ...

Why is no one complaining about these far more significant
errors?
James B. Shearer

James B. Shearer wrote:

So do you think the USCF should have refused to print Sloan's
statement?

My view is they could have made sure he either backed up his
accusations with facts, or that he word things in such a way that his
point was still made but someone's reputation was not damaged in the
pages of Chess Life.

I believe any power to censor candidate's statements is likely
to be a cure that is worse than the disease as it will be abused to
protect insiders and stifle dissent.

I don't believe that printing lies or false statements is a matter of
"censorship". Censorship to me is refusing to air someone's opinions or
ideas. No one is saying Sam couldn't criticize the Calchess deal in his
campaign statement. What I am criticizing is his inability to:

a) Get his facts about what happened correct.
b) Cast the blame on any of the three people besides Eade who was
most responsible for organizing and running the event.

This is a house organ that goes to all of our members. This is not
RGCP, where Sam can say pretty much anything he wants. Suppose he had
said, "James B. Shearer has stolen a considerable sum of money according
to my sources, and he should be forced to pay it back."? Would this
have been a-okay with you?



Sloan's statement included the following statements:

I favor re-organization and financial reform in the USCF.
Fortunately, we have the right man to do this in Frank Niro. ...

The USCF has lost money six years in a row. I believe that I can help
turn this around. The situation is getting better, much better than
before. ...

Why is no one complaining about these far more significant
errors?

Ahem!!!!! Niro suckered punched nearly everyone except for me and a
few other people. Check out the other numerous higher ups that were
caught looking idiotic because of Niro's job.

I was warning people about Niro and the USCF's mishandling of numerous
issues for the past year. Everyone just called me a Chicken Little
whiner.

James B. Shearer

Best Regards,

Bruce

On 9 Oct 2003 21:57:20 -0500, Bruce Draney wrote:


It has been well established that Eade had virtually nothing to do with
this tournament and the organizers were Koepcke and Peterson among
others.

I have been away in South Carolina for a week because of court
hearings about my brother's court cases against my mother, so I have
missed the latest slanders by Bruce, but I just came across this one.

At the time that the CalChess deal was made between Mr. Eade and Mr.
Niro, which was August 2002 immediately after the conclusion of the
USCF Delegate's meetings in Cherry Hill, Frank Niro had no idea and no
way of knowing that Richard Peterson was involved. Richard "Take the
Money and Run" Peterson is a notorious character in the USCF. I
discussed this issue with Frank Niro during the Kasparov vs. Computer
Chess Match and Niro told me that he would never have agreed to it had
he known that Richard Peterson was involved.

It is true that Richard Koepcke was present at the meeting between
Eade and Niro. However, Koepcke had no official position other than
being a delegate. By contrast, Jim Eade was the USA Zone President.
Niro was the Acting Executive Director, serving without pay, and was
applying to be made permanent executive director with pay. Niro knew
that Eade had the clout to block Niro from being made Executive
Director. Therefore, Niro had no choice but to agree to Eade's demand.

Significantly, two of America's biggest scholastic organizers, Richard
Crespo and Richard Jackson, were in the room and overheard this
conversation and they immediately asked for the same deal. Niro told
them that they could not get this deal. Only Eade and Koepcke could
get this deal.

Since only Eade, who was the Zone President, had any official position
and only Eade was in a position to stop Niro from getting the job of
Executive Director, it was entirely proper for me to emphasize Eade's
role in this affair and to demand that Eade repay the money that the
USCF lost on this deal.

Sam Sloan

"Bruce Draney" wrote in message
...

I was warning people about Niro and the USCF's mishandling of numerous
issues for the past year. Everyone just called me a Chicken Little
whiner.

Right Sam. Cluck, cluck, cluck.

StanB