Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 19th 06, 08:50 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 There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

On Sunday, June 18, 2006, Sunday, June 18, 2006 Mike Goodall wrote:

I assume that the person responsible for this screwup has been relieved
of his/her responsibilities??


To this, Mike Nolan replied:

However, if every time someone makes a mistake the response is to fire
him or her, the USCF office is going to be empty quickly.

Not all of us are perfect, perhaps you are the exception?
--
Mike Nolan


Of course, I agreed with Mike Nolan. How could Mike Goodall be so
harsh as to want to fire somebody just for a simple mistake?

I thought that, until I saw the mistake.

I will not tell you what the mistake is. I want you to see it
yourself. Just open the ballot and see if you do not spot a serious
error within one second.

In sum, the mistake on the ballot is so big that either the USCF will
have to forget about holding a delegate election this year, or it will
have to mail the ballot again, at an estimated cost of $25,000.

Any person of average or below average intelligence or even a child
would have spotted this mistake instantly. If such a simple and
obvious mistake has been made in a matter for public view, how many
other mistakes have been made that we do not know about?

On Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:12 pm Post subject: USCF Executive Board
Election Ballots, Sam Sloan wrote:

..... Anybody stupid enough to make these sort of mistakes the first
time will surely do it again.

Turns out I was right.

Sam Sloan
  #2   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 02:03 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 252
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups


I've made a lot of mistakes. One of the biggest was swabbing Heet onto
my case of jock itch. As a result I actually beat Yuri Gagarin into
space but I didn't take a radio with me so no one ever knew about it.

Old Haasie

  #3   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 03:21 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 781
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

With no election of Delegates, Mike Nolan gets to continue his
abssolute rule without any checks or balances

In sum, the mistake on the ballot is so big that either the USCF will
have to forget about holding a delegate election this year, or it will
have to mail the ballot again, at an estimated cost of $25,000.


The ballot mistake was ON PURPOSE. The USCF figured I was going to buy
out all of the Delegates in Florida, so they sabotaged the ballot. The
idea is to try to show me how expensive it is to buy up memberships to
try to become a USCF Delegate. Nobody worth any money would want the
liability of being a director for an organization of corrupt child
molesters. However, this is all some people live for, so any act is ok
to protect the current group of people from trying to force their views
on 90,000 people. The USCF has just cancelled the election on purpose.

Marcus Roberts is such a threat to Chess, the USCF decided to quit
holding elections. After all, articles about me have been deleted from
the USCF web site authored by executive committee candidate Mr. Sam
Sloan. Susan Polgar has stated that "Marcus Roberts" is bad for chess.
At least I don't strip naked like Susan for FIDE Drug tests. I never
imagined I am such a threat that the USCF Delegate Mike Nolan (the
Chess Nazi) deletes anything posted about me on the USCF web site, and
the election of Delegates is cancelled.

When will anyone in the USCF consider changing the board of delegates
to have more of an open model of governance? These ballot elections are
going to bankrupt the corporation. Beyond the expense of the ballot and
the litigation Sam is about to possibly file it appears to me that this
election for Delegates has no purpose. Why do we need to spend all of
this money on a body which most people consider irrevalant? The social
need to identiy those in the clique and out of the clique appears more
important to some MENSA types that they prefer to abolish elections
themselves. After all, this is not the first ballot error. These ballot
problems are INTENTIONAL, LAZY, SLOPPY, work of CROOKS.

Nobody ever objected to the voting power of the Delegates be divided
into States. My ideas in the early 1990's were to open up the
Delegates to interested chess players to allow non voting rights as
they have in the FIDE General Assembly. Membership and voting are two
entirely different concepts, yet these American chessplayers lack the
intellect to solve their own problems.

This social clique will not yield power, at all costs. Dumb broke
failures are stealing from the corporation at every opportunity. 3,000
dollar cash checks are just handed out when anyone in the clique needs
money to go on a European vacation. Come on, a mail ballot election in
a 90,000 member organization with a 1 to 2 percent turnout is not an
election. If you can't get a 10% turnout, then the election needs to
be VOIDED and a new system of government created. If you can't get 10%,
the United States needs a new system. This will never work.

Let's just forget about who is a USCF Delegate and who is not a USCF
Delegate, open up the membership on the Board of Delegates to all Life
members who meet certain criteria, and set up a rules committee to
handle the Advance Delegate Motions, and run the Delegates more like
the US House of Representatives. In my model, being a Delegate would be
less powerful than a delegate today. Not all delegates would
necessarily have time to speak, the meetings would be longer and more
bureaucratic, but at least the USCF would have a partial democratic
government, as opposed to the corrupt, dishonest rule of the current
..JUNTA in power.

Without a fair election for USCF Delegates, Mike Nolan is free to
CENSOR SPEECH, BULLY PEOPLE, and become an ABSUIVE DICTATOR.

The idea of Mike Nolan being a volunteer for Chess is a joke.

The USCF is a disgraceful organization, all for personal benefit of the
rather broke snob clique in power.

I support a lawsuit against the USCF to force a new election of
Delegates.

Marcus Roberts

  #4   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 01:22 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 There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrantPerks

I suggest we wait and let the delegates decide. A possible solution is
to offer a revote on a state by state basis. While there might be a
few candidates who lose that would demand such a resolution, it is
highly unlikely that there will be all that many states involved. I
seriously doubt anyone in my home state of Ohio would contest the
election, and I assume most candidates in other states whould feel the
same way. This would keep the additional cost to a minimum.
This is a silly, stupid remark. Here in New York, the ballot says:
"Vote for up to 14 candidates. Minnesota, Oregon, and Rhode Island did
not provide candidates."

It then lists 13 candidates.

So we are told to vote for 14 candidates in a field of 13.

You do not have to pass an IQ test to realize that there is something
wrong with this.

In reality, there are only 7 delegate slots available, not 14.
Therefore, a new ballot will have to be sent out. Otherwise, we are
simply not having an election.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that?

Sam Sloan
  #5   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 05:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2004
Posts: 267
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

postscript: I also think that having the voter supply postage keeps the
voters away.

We get, what, something like 400-1,000 each election who bother to
participate?
If therewas prepaid postage this number would triple at a minimum.

Here is another idea. We have a chance for the first time to get the member
to answer
a few questions because the new website will need you to supply some
information the
first time you log on. This is a PERFECT time to ask them if they will do a
short survey.

One of the questions could be to see if they want Evans to continue and
another could
be to ask if they want ballots. The money saved from not having to mail
ballots to people
who clearly don't care and won't vote could be used to supply postage to the
people getting ballots.

--Duncan


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ] On
Behalf Of Duncan Oxley
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 6:18 AM
To:
; ;
;
Subject: [fide-chess] There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really
big Screw-Ups

My ballot arrived. It was held together by two small pieces of tape that
disintegrated.

It was also mangled by the USPS machinery because it was so thin. It looks
like it was printed on anyone's home PC printer.

In the Delegates section mine also says: "Vote for up to 14 candidates.
Minnesota,
Oregon, and Rhode Island did not provide candidates."

There are 15 choices including Jim Eade. The last candidate has an * but we
are not told what this signifies.

I don't see much wrong with the main voting section. Well, except that
there are
spaces for write-ins yet these are not marked.

--Duncan


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
] On
Behalf Of

Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 5:23 AM
To:
; ;
; ;
; ;
; ; ;
;
Subject: [fide-chess] There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big
Screw-Ups



Quote:
Originally Posted by GrantPerks

I suggest we wait and let the delegates decide. A possible solution is
to offer a revote on a state by state basis. While there might be a
few candidates who lose that would demand such a resolution, it is
highly unlikely that there will be all that many states involved. I
seriously doubt anyone in my home state of Ohio would contest the
election, and I assume most candidates in other states whould feel the
same way. This would keep the additional cost to a minimum.
This is a silly, stupid remark. Here in New York, the ballot says:
"Vote for up to 14 candidates. Minnesota, Oregon, and Rhode Island did
not provide candidates."

It then lists 13 candidates.

So we are told to vote for 14 candidates in a field of 13.

You do not have to pass an IQ test to realize that there is something
wrong with this.

In reality, there are only 7 delegate slots available, not 14.
Therefore, a new ballot will have to be sent out. Otherwise, we are
simply not having an election.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that?

Sam Sloan

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (4) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar


You are receiving Individual Emails Change Delivery Settings
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
We Made Changes

Your Yahoo! Groups email is all new.

Learn More

Share Feedback

Visit Your Group

SPONSORED LINKS

Board game store
Parker brother board game
Milton bradley board games
Collectible board game
Cranium board game
Chess board game
..


__,_._,___




  #6   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 05:29 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 There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

Quote:
Originally Posted by chessoffice
I agree with Grant. Also, it should be noted that in Delegate
elections, most states usually nominate a number of candidates equal
to the number of positions and these nominees are elected easily,
opposed by only a few scattered write-ins. With members being allowed
to vote for twice as many candidates as necessary, write-ins may
increase but the candidates listed on the ballot will probably still
win easily. It would be absurd to spend a lot of money to revote in
these states.

There are generally a few states that have serious contests and if the
losers in these states protest, the delegates may decide to redo the
elections in these states. The cost of this will be far less than
redoing the whole country.

Bill Goichberg
Both you and Grant Perks are either missing or deliberately avoiding
my point, which I think is incredibly obvious and easy to understand,
which is:

The ballot says to vote for any 14, but there are only 13 candidates
listed. This means that all of us are going to win. There might be a
few write-in votes to fill the 14th slot.

Therefore, all 13 of us will get the same or nearly the same number of
votes.

But, actually this election is not for 14 delegate positions. It is
only for 7 delegate positions. So, you are proposing that the votes be
counted and the top-7 vote getters will be elected, and the other six
will just be alternates.

Is this stupid or what? How did you ever get to be elected USCF
President with such a silly idea?

It just so happens that the ballot is rigged in my favor, because my
name is first on the list. There will always be a few voters who check
off the first few boxes and then get tired and do not bother to check
off the rest, so I will be one of the seven who is elected.

The reason that nobody will complain (except of course Paul Truong who
always complains no matter what the issue is) is that these delegate
positions are almost meaningless because most delegates do not attend
the meetings and anyway the board just about completely ignores what
the delegates decide. However, being a delegate does have a few perks,
I will grant you that, two being that you get the delegate's
newsletter (I have been an alternate for years and have never received
one) plus you get to place an item on the advance agenda plus you are
sure of being seated if you attend the meeting. You also get to vote
to kick out Sam Sloan, as Tim Redman tried to do at the last meeting
in Phoenix.

However, I do not see how a ballot which tells you to vote for 14 out
of 13 candidates whereas there are really only 7 positions available,
can be considered valid.

I believe that most other states will be the same. However, a voter in
Northern California informs me that there in that state there are 15
candidates for 14 slots. So, you have a choice. You can vote off one
guy, kind of like the reality shows that are popular on TV right now.
Not much, but better than nothing.

Sam Sloan
  #7   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 06:08 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2004
Posts: 267
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

Thank you Tom. I missed that on the other side of the ballot.

Mea Culpa,
Duncan
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the Delegates section mine also says: "Vote for up to 14 candidates.
Minnesota, Oregon, and Rhode Island did
not provide candidates."


The mistake made was that this year you can only vote for the number
of delegates that your state has - in this case 7. In previous years
you could vote for 14 - the number of delegates and alternate
delegates. Those who prepared the mailing evidently didn't realize
that the bylaws had changed in reference to this.

There are 15 choices including Jim Eade. The last candidate has an * but
we are not told what this signifies.


The explanation for that appears in the letter on the other side of
the ballot. The first 14 names were submitted by your state affiliate
(in the order given). The names with *s were people nominated by a
petition rather than their state.

- Tom Martinak

"Duncan Oxley" [email protected] wrote in message
...
postscript: I also think that having the voter supply postage keeps the
voters away.

We get, what, something like 400-1,000 each election who bother to
participate?
If therewas prepaid postage this number would triple at a minimum.

Here is another idea. We have a chance for the first time to get the
member to answer
a few questions because the new website will need you to supply some
information the
first time you log on. This is a PERFECT time to ask them if they will do
a short survey.

One of the questions could be to see if they want Evans to continue and
another could
be to ask if they want ballots. The money saved from not having to mail
ballots to people
who clearly don't care and won't vote could be used to supply postage to
the people getting ballots.

--Duncan


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ] On
Behalf Of Duncan Oxley
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 6:18 AM
To:
; ;
;
Subject: [fide-chess] There are Screw-Ups, and then there are
really big Screw-Ups

My ballot arrived. It was held together by two small pieces of tape that
disintegrated.

It was also mangled by the USPS machinery because it was so thin. It looks
like it was printed on anyone's home PC printer.

In the Delegates section mine also says: "Vote for up to 14 candidates.
Minnesota,
Oregon, and Rhode Island did not provide candidates."

There are 15 choices including Jim Eade. The last candidate has an * but
we
are not told what this signifies.

I don't see much wrong with the main voting section. Well, except that
there are
spaces for write-ins yet these are not marked.

--Duncan


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
] On
Behalf Of

Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 5:23 AM
To:
; ;
; ;
; ;
; ; ;
;
Subject: [fide-chess] There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really
big Screw-Ups



Quote:
Originally Posted by GrantPerks

I suggest we wait and let the delegates decide. A possible solution is
to offer a revote on a state by state basis. While there might be a
few candidates who lose that would demand such a resolution, it is
highly unlikely that there will be all that many states involved. I
seriously doubt anyone in my home state of Ohio would contest the
election, and I assume most candidates in other states whould feel the
same way. This would keep the additional cost to a minimum.

This is a silly, stupid remark. Here in New York, the ballot says:
"Vote for up to 14 candidates. Minnesota, Oregon, and Rhode Island did
not provide candidates."

It then lists 13 candidates.

So we are told to vote for 14 candidates in a field of 13.

You do not have to pass an IQ test to realize that there is something
wrong with this.

In reality, there are only 7 delegate slots available, not 14.
Therefore, a new ballot will have to be sent out. Otherwise, we are
simply not having an election.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that?

Sam Sloan

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (4) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar


You are receiving Individual Emails Change Delivery Settings
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
We Made Changes

Your Yahoo! Groups email is all new.

Learn More

Share Feedback

Visit Your Group

SPONSORED LINKS

Board game store
Parker brother board game
Milton bradley board games
Collectible board game
Cranium board game
Chess board game
.


__,_._,___




  #8   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 06:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2004
Posts: 267
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

However, a voter in Northern California informs me that there in that state
there are 15
candidates for 14 slots. So, you have a choice. You can vote off one
guy, kind of like the reality shows that are popular on TV right now.
Not much, but better than nothing.

Sam Sloan


Actually in N Cal there are 13 candidates listed on the ballot. There are
also four slots for write-ins. I have no idea how many actual spots there
are because even though it says "Vote for no more than 12 candidates"
there seems to be some controversy as to the actual number.

Thanks again to Tom Martinak for pointing out the fine print on the obverse
side where it says:

"No employee of the USCF is eligible to be a Delegate or member of the
Executive Board".

This is important I think because at least one of the candidates appears to
meet
the definitions of an employee. I'd hate to see the USCF wasting more money
on
another of Sloan's lawsuits but this seems to be an opening for him to file
another.

--Duncan




  #9   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 06:28 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2005
Posts: 173
Default There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

Actually in N Cal there are 13 candidates listed on the ballot. There are
also four slots for write-ins. I have no idea how many actual spots there
are because even though it says "Vote for no more than 12 candidates"
there seems to be some controversy as to the actual number.


That means there would be 6 delegate and 6 alternate delegate slots
open for N Cal. The letter should have said "Vote for no more than 6
candidates". From reading the US Chess Forum, it sounds like they are
likely to accept a ballot from N Cal with up to 12 candidates marked
rather than going through the expense of sending out another ballot.
Like in previous years, the top 6 vote-getters would be delegates and
the second 6 would be alternate-delegates. Personally, I'll vote for
half of what they said (in PA that would be 5 rather than 10) in order
not to have to worry about election complaints about my ballot.

- Tom Martinak

  #10   Report Post  
Old June 20th 06, 06:32 PM 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 There are Screw-Ups, and then there are really big Screw-Ups

"Duncan Oxley" [email protected] writes:

postscript: I also think that having the voter supply postage keeps the
voters away.


We get, what, something like 400-1,000 each election who bother to
participate?
If therewas prepaid postage this number would triple at a minimum.


In the 2002 Delegate election there were around 1200 ballots received, in
2004 I think it was around 1500. Last year there were over 5000 ballots
received for the EB election, in part because of the separate mailing.
(About half of the unique ballots received in 2005 were from that separate
mailing, as I recall.)

With a special EB election again this year and a separate ballot mailing,
we may see 4000 or more ballots returned again this year.

I don't know if the USCF qualifies for the 11 cent 'high volume' rate on
business reply mail. If not, the additional per piece charge is 65
cents for a total of $1.04 per piece. Thus to pay the postage for 5000
ballots could cost either $2500 or $5200 at current rates.
--
Mike Nolan
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



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017