Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 17th 07, 03:12 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

There are certain candidates for election about whom criticism on
http://www.uschess.org/forums is not allowed. Any remarks critical of
these candidates will be immediately deleted by the moderators.

On the other hand, there are other candidates about whom the most vile
accusations are allowed. Posters can say anything, no matter how bad,
about those candidates.

I think everyone knows who the protected candidates are.

How does this affect our status as a 501(c)(4) corporation?

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old February 17th 07, 04:52 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 Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed


I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority
of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is
in fact Sam Sloan.
--
Mike Nolan

"samsloan" writes:

Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed


There are certain candidates for election about whom criticism on
http://www.uschess.org/forums is not allowed. Any remarks critical of
these candidates will be immediately deleted by the moderators.


On the other hand, there are other candidates about whom the most vile
accusations are allowed. Posters can say anything, no matter how bad,
about those candidates.


I think everyone knows who the protected candidates are.


How does this affect our status as a 501(c)(4) corporation?


Sam Sloan


  #3   Report Post  
Old February 20th 07, 08:11 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

PROTECTION MONEY

I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority

of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is in
fact
Sam Sloan. -- Mike Nolan

Mike Nolan, who ruled USCF's Nolanland,
offers us a bit of his theater of the absurd.

Sam is probably the most maligned board member
in USCF history. He has been lambasted from A to Z
in the official USCF forum, whereas other candidates get
protection because Mike Nolan receives protection
money in the form of his salary.

Yours, Larry Parr



Mike Nolan wrote:
I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority
of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is
in fact Sam Sloan.
--
Mike Nolan

"samsloan" writes:

Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed


There are certain candidates for election about whom criticism on
http://www.uschess.org/forums is not allowed. Any remarks critical of
these candidates will be immediately deleted by the moderators.


On the other hand, there are other candidates about whom the most vile
accusations are allowed. Posters can say anything, no matter how bad,
about those candidates.


I think everyone knows who the protected candidates are.


How does this affect our status as a 501(c)(4) corporation?


Sam Sloan


  #4   Report Post  
Old February 20th 07, 11:26 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 49
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

because Mike Nolan receives protection
money in the form of his salary.


I bet Mike would sit at the door to the Crossgate Palace and give blowjobs
to visiting members if the price was right. Talk about a mercenary. He
admits that he used to be a local politician of some corrupt town, so that
should tell you everything.


  #5   Report Post  
Old February 20th 07, 12:47 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

On Feb 17, 11:52 am, (Mike Nolan) wrote:
I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority
of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is
in fact Sam Sloan.
--
Mike Nolan


I would like to know why you say that.

Although the most terrible, horrible things are written about me here
and on the USCF Forums or even on my own fide-chess Yahoo Group, I
have never asked that a posting be deleted or modified. I have never
asked for moderator intervention.

On my own Yahoo Group, although I am often attacked there I have never
modified or deleted a chess-related posting and I have never banned or
blacklisted a legitimate chess poster although many have written
objectionable or Anti-Sloan things.

By contrast, over on the USCf Forums, it constantly happens that Susan
Polgar or Paul Truong start a thread which almost always involves an
attack on somebody (most recently me) and then when anybody responds
with criticism of them, no matter how mild, they demand that the
moderator intervene and delete whatever negative comments are made
about them. Their wishes are usually granted.

On the Polgar created blogspots, susanpolgar.blogspot.com and
uschess.blogspot.com they will instantly delete or modify any negative
rebuttal so that these blogs are filled with words of praise for
Polgar and Truong whereas the reader will never realize that they are
very controversial people and there are a lot of questions about them
which they refuse to answer.

Also, I just spent the weekend at the US Amateur Team East, a
toutnament in New Jersey with 1170 players where I spent the weekend
handing out literature and talking to voters. I was prepared to answer
any question asked of me.

Byu contrast, you will not see Polgar or Truong at such a public event
fielding
So, why do you say that Sam Sloan is more "protected" than Polgar and
Truong.





  #6   Report Post  
Old February 20th 07, 01:08 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

On Feb 17, 11:52 am, (Mike Nolan) wrote:

I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority
of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is
in fact Sam Sloan.
--
Mike Nolan


I would like to know why you say that.

Although the most terrible, horrible things are written about me here
and on the USCF Forums or even on my own fide-chess Yahoo Group, I
have never asked that a posting be deleted or modified. I have never
asked for moderator intervention.

On my own Yahoo Group, although I am often attacked there I have never
modified or deleted a chess-related posting and I have never banned or
blacklisted a legitimate chess poster, although many have written
objectionable or Anti-Sloan things.

By contrast, over on the USCF Forums, it constantly happens that Susan
Polgar or Paul Truong start a thread which almost always involves an
attack on somebody (most recently me) and then when anybody responds
with a rebuttal or criticism of them, no matter how mild, they demand
that the moderator intervene and delete whatever negative comments are
made about them. Their wishes are usually granted.

On the Polgar created blogspots, susanpolgar.blogspot.com and
uschess.blogspot.com they will instantly delete or modify any negative
rebuttal so that these blogs are filled with words of praise for
Polgar and Truong whereas the reader will never realize that they are
very controversial people and there are a lot of questions about them
which they refuse to answer.

Also, I just spent the weekend at the US Amateur Team East, a
tournament in New Jersey with 1170 players, where I spent the weekend
handing out literature and talking to voters. I was prepared to answer
any question asked of me.

By contrast, you will not see Polgar or Truong at such a public event
fielding questions including embarrassing questions from the chess
public. You will also not see Susan Polgar playing chess at a public
event where anybody can play. The last time Susan played chess in an
open tournament was more than two years ago and there she lost to a
player rated 1700.

So, why do you say that Sam Sloan is more "protected" than Polgar and
Truong?

Sam Sloan

  #7   Report Post  
Old February 20th 07, 02:10 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

--- In , [email protected] wrote:


Sam,

Polgar played at the US Team two years ago...hardly a protected place,
whatever that means. Does she have to play there every year to be "unprotected"?


That was the tournament to which I refer below. Take a look at:

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

You will see that in the first round Polgar, player #91, lost to
Roberto Jose, player #385, who was rated 1796.

Since then, Polgar has never played in a rated tournament, other than
quick rated tournaments, except for the New York Mayor's Cup, a
tournament Truong organized for her. In the New York Mayor's Cup, she
refused to allow Hikaru Nakamura to play because he was a dangerous
opponent who would have beaten her and who could not have been bought
off.

Perhaps you missed what I wrote about this at the bottom of my
article:

"The last time Susan played chess in an open tournament was more than
two years ago and there she lost to a player rated 1700."

Sam Sloan

  #8   Report Post  
Old February 21st 07, 02:57 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2005
Posts: 589
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

"Mike Nolan" wrote in message
...

I think if you took a poll on the USCF Forums, the overwhelming majority
of people there would agree that the most 'protected' individual is
in fact Sam Sloan.
--
Mike Nolan


Mike, what on earth are you talking about here? Are you saying that posts
critical of Sam are deleted, to a greater extent than they might be if they
were directed against another candidate? I find that hard to believe.


  #9   Report Post  
Old February 21st 07, 02:59 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2005
Posts: 589
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed


"samsloan" wrote in message
oups.com...
--- In , [email protected] wrote:


Sam,

Polgar played at the US Team two years ago...hardly a protected place,
whatever that means. Does she have to play there every year to be
"unprotected"?


That was the tournament to which I refer below. Take a look at:

http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain....13881-12452240

You will see that in the first round Polgar, player #91, lost to
Roberto Jose, player #385, who was rated 1796.


My record against Roberto Jose is 2-0. Isn't that worth at least one GM
norm-by-association?


  #10   Report Post  
Old February 21st 07, 06:29 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 2,251
Default Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed

Sam Sloan ) (NNTP-Posting-Host:
69.124.205.180) wrote (20 Feb 2007 05:08:51 -0800):

7 ... I just spent the weekend at the US Amateur Team East,
7 a tournament in New Jersey with 1170 players, where I
7 spent the weekend handing out literature and talking to
7 voters. I was prepared toanswer anyquestionasked of me.
7 ...

_
What were the supposed "five specific allegations pertaining
to" Sam Sloan's "relationship with Susan Polgar"? What
was (were) the specific Bill Goichberg allegation(s) that
supposedly forced Sam Sloan to allege a past relationship
with Susan Polgar?
_
______"... As to my 'alleging a past relationship with her'
______Bill Goichberg forced me to do that ..." - Sam Sloan
______(Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:34 am)
_
______"... Can Sam Sloan identify a specific example of
______a Bill Goichberg quote that 'forced' Sam Sloan to
______allege a past relationship [with Susan Polgar]?"
______- Louis Blair (Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:39 pm)
_
______"... In August, 2006, just after I had been seated
______on the board, Bill Goichberg made a motion to
______reprimand me. This motion contained five specific
______allegations pertaining to my relationship with Susan
______Polgar. ..." - Sam Sloan (Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:41 pm)
_
______"Which specific Bill Goichberg allegation(s) forced
______Sam Sloan to allege a past relationship with Susan?"
______- Louis Blair (Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:57 pm)
_
______"* Subject: Matsler follow up
______* From: [Bill Goichberg]
______* Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:55:47 EDT
______
______Dear Board: ..." - Sam Sloan (Sat Jan 27, 2007
______9:32 am)
_
______"I did not ask for the entire letter. I asked for an
______identification of the 'specific Bill Goichberg
______allegation(s)' that supposedly forced Sam Sloan to
______allege a past relationship with Susan. I am still
______waiting for that identification. ...
______...
______By the way, does Sam Sloan still claim that there
______was an 'August, 2006' motion that 'contained five
______specific allegations pertaining to' Sam Sloan's
______'relationship with Susan Polgar'? ..." - Louis Blair
______(Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:25 pm)

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
Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 February 21st 07 06:29 AM
Protected Candidates About Whom Criticism is Not Allowed samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 9 February 21st 07 06:29 AM
USCF Issues Forum: "New York Times" [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 February 10th 07 06:52 PM
Candidate's Statement for the June Chess Life (500 words exactly) Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 35 April 18th 05 07:08 PM
Proposed Candidate's Statement for June Chess Life - Please Comment Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 49 April 17th 05 06:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 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