Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11   Report Post  
Old May 3rd 04, 04:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2004
Posts: 209
Default Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)

(Sam Sloan) writes:

I feel that this is a bit like the case where Frank Niro agreed to
allow Northern California Scholastic players to join the USCF for only
one dollar. This was a clear violation of the USCF by-laws.


This was not a violation of USCF Bylaws. The non-member participants
in that event were never USCF members.

The Bylaws do not state that ONLY USCF members may participate in the
ratings system, though participation in rated play is recognized as
a privilege of membership.

Non-members participate in USCF rated play every month, such as primary
school players and foreign titled players, as well as participants in
events sanctioned by the National Congress of State Games. None of
these exceptions are codified in the USCF Bylaws.

Though the USCF has at times referred to some non-members participating
in rated play as 'length of tournament members' and even offered this
as a per-game fee until the early 1990's, these individuals were never
granted any of the other privileges of USCF membership nor were they
ever counted as current or past USCF members.

Should the USCF ever revive a per round or per event fee-based program
for non-member rated play, a more accurate name for it would be
'length of tournament particpant'.

However, given that Bill Goichberg was largely responsible for the demise
of the per-round 'length of tournament membership' program in the early
1990's, unless Bill has had a change of heart I consider it very unlikely
that it will be reinstituted any time soon.

A slightly stronger case could be made that Frank Niro exceeded his
authority with that Northern California tournament, but other ED's have
made similar arrangements in the past. Further, some of the members of the
Board were aware of it (specifically the USCF President).

Also, ED's before Frank all had the operational authority to exercise the
'promotional membership' privileges in the Bylaws, the same authority
Bill Goichberg is using today.
--
Mike Nolan, Member and past chair, USCF Bylaws Committee
  #12   Report Post  
Old May 3rd 04, 01:45 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,558
Default Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)

On 3 May 2004 03:56:22 GMT, (Mike Nolan) wrote:


A slightly stronger case could be made that Frank Niro exceeded his
authority with that Northern California tournament, but other ED's have
made similar arrangements in the past. Further, some of the members of the
Board were aware of it (specifically the USCF President).

Also, ED's before Frank all had the operational authority to exercise the
'promotional membership' privileges in the Bylaws, the same authority
Bill Goichberg is using today.
--
Mike Nolan, Member and past chair, USCF Bylaws Committee


I strongly disagree with everything Mike Nolan says in this posting.
This matter was argued at great length back in early 1993 when this
was taking place. I suggest that anybody interested look at the
postings by George John, Allan Fifield and myself on this issue. I do
not recall Mike Nolan as participating in this discussion.

Mike Nolan states above "other ED's have made similar arrangements in
the past." Can you cite even one instance in the 65 years of the
history of the United States Chess Federation where any ED has made a
deal like the deal that Frank Niro made here? I am sure that you
cannot. More that that, the bylaws to not permit the ED to make this
sort of deal. Only the Executive Board, not the ED, can offer a
promotional membership and the board did no such thing here.

Sam Sloan



  #13   Report Post  
Old May 3rd 04, 06:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,558
Default Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)

On Mon, 03 May 2004 12:45:06 GMT, (Sam Sloan)
wrote:


I strongly disagree with everything Mike Nolan says in this posting.
This matter was argued at great length back in early 1993 when this
was taking place.


Sorry for the typo. I meant to write in 2003, not in 1993.

Sam Sloan
  #15   Report Post  
Old May 6th 04, 05:19 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2003
Posts: 161
Default Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)


"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...

"I am not afraid of the challenges, since August our Board
has been demonstrating a hands-on approach, but we need help.
Therefore, we recognize the importance of engaging new leaders, doers
and ideas. But also we need to drive away the people who has been
milking the USCF for many years."

Since this posting referred almost entirely to Frank Niro plus
indirectly to Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, one would assume that
Beatriz is accusing them of "milking the USCF".


Hardly. They had not been on the receiving end of any USCF largess until
quite recently. Certainly not for many years.

StanB


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Five Candidates Run for USCF Executive Board Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 39 April 22nd 06 01:51 AM
Five Candidates Run for USCF Executive Board Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 25 April 22nd 06 01:51 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017