Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 19th 08, 09:50 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.

If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.

Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.

Don Schultz
I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.

I disagree with Don on several points.

I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"

My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.

Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.

Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.

A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.

Sam Sloan
  #2   Report Post  
Old December 19th 08, 10:33 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 4:50*pm, samsloan wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.

If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.

Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.

Don Schultz

I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.

I disagree with Don on several points.

I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"

My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.

Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.

Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.

A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.

Sam Sloan


Not a single word about We, The Chessplayers, in this message. What is
the effect on us who actually pay for the organization?

For myself, just like the Presidency of the United States, I don't
wish it on any candidate - the infrastructure being degraded to
catastrophic degree.

Though there are some more likely to act to promote chess than others;
and the same people would be more credible in doing so. Isn't that
USCF's mission statement?

If that doesn't matter, nothing at all matters about the USCF.

Phil Innes
  #3   Report Post  
Old December 19th 08, 10:44 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 5:33*pm, wrote:
On Dec 19, 4:50*pm, samsloan wrote:



Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.


If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.


Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.


Don Schultz


I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.


I disagree with Don on several points.


I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"


My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.


Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.


Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.


A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.


Sam Sloan


Not a single word about We, The Chessplayers, in this message. What is
the effect on us who actually pay for the organization?

For myself, just like the Presidency of the United States, I don't
wish it on any candidate - the infrastructure being degraded to
catastrophic degree.

Though there are some more likely to act to promote chess than others;
and the same people would be more credible in doing so. Isn't that
USCF's mission statement?

If that doesn't matter, nothing at all matters about the USCF.

Phil Innes


Who is this "we", white man?

You have not been a USCF member since 1996.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12529296

Sam Sloan
  #4   Report Post  
Old December 20th 08, 12:21 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 5:44*pm, samsloan wrote:
On Dec 19, 5:33*pm, wrote:



On Dec 19, 4:50*pm, samsloan wrote:


Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.


If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.


Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.


Don Schultz


I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.


I disagree with Don on several points.


I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"


My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.


Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.


Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.


A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.


Sam Sloan


Not a single word about We, The Chessplayers, in this message. What is
the effect on us who actually pay for the organization?


For myself, just like the Presidency of the United States, I don't
wish it on any candidate - the infrastructure being degraded to
catastrophic degree.


Though there are some more likely to act to promote chess than others;
and the same people would be more credible in doing so. Isn't that
USCF's mission statement?


If that doesn't matter, nothing at all matters about the USCF.


Phil Innes


Who is this "we", white man?

You have not been a USCF member since 1996.

http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12529296

Sam Sloan


What does being a USCF member have to do with playing chess? There are
more ICC members, alone. And what is this to do with rated chess, USCF
being a somewhat expensive current option - did you not see the
current Express Chess rates?

And what sort of daft response is this, Sloan - have you ever talked
about chess as it has to do with the majority of chess players, or
your own fortunes in it?

I think it is demonstrated by your own hand that which way you are.

What you write has nothing to do with chess players - so why do you
write here at all?

Phil Innes


  #5   Report Post  
Old December 20th 08, 04:08 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 324
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 6:21*pm, wrote:
On Dec 19, 5:44*pm, samsloan wrote:





On Dec 19, 5:33*pm, wrote:


On Dec 19, 4:50*pm, samsloan wrote:


Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.


If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.


Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.


Don Schultz


I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.


I disagree with Don on several points.


I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"


My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.


Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.


Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.


A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.


Sam Sloan


Not a single word about We, The Chessplayers, in this message. What is
the effect on us who actually pay for the organization?


For myself, just like the Presidency of the United States, I don't
wish it on any candidate - the infrastructure being degraded to
catastrophic degree.


Though there are some more likely to act to promote chess than others;
and the same people would be more credible in doing so. Isn't that
USCF's mission statement?


If that doesn't matter, nothing at all matters about the USCF.


Phil Innes


Who is this "we", white man?


You have not been a USCF member since 1996.


http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12529296


Sam Sloan


What does being a USCF member have to do with playing chess? There are
more ICC members, alone. And what is this to do with rated chess, USCF
being a somewhat expensive current option - did you not see the
current Express Chess rates?

And what sort of daft response is this, Sloan - have you ever talked
about chess as it has to do with the majority of chess players, or
your own fortunes in it?

I think it is demonstrated by your own hand that which way you are.

What you write has nothing to do with chess players - so why do you
write here at all?

Phil Innes- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Why would "WE" the paying members of the USCF care about the views of
non-members like you? If you care so much, buy a membership and
participate in the USCF electoral process. There are USCF members in
Vermont, no?


  #6   Report Post  
Old December 20th 08, 04:42 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2005
Posts: 131
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election


What you write has nothing to do with chess players - so why do you
write here at all?


Phil Innes- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Why would "WE" the paying members of the USCF care about the views of
non-members like you? �If you care so much, buy a membership and
participate in the USCF electoral process. �There are USCF members in
Vermont, no?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Ah yes, Phil. Check your logic at the door.
Why not buy a USCF life membership which used to guarantee you a
lifetime of Chess Life.
At least it did when my son and I bought ours.

This isn't an electoral process. It is more like competing economic
interests ripping away the remains of the USCF.
Now they have decided the electors can only survive by screwing the
life members and the scholastic members. Such an organization to be
proud of.

The more they grey, the more the members pay.

Sheesh.
Rp
  #7   Report Post  
Old December 20th 08, 08:11 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 324
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 10:42*pm, wrote:
What you write has nothing to do with chess players - so why do you
write here at all?


Phil Innes- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Why would "WE" the paying members of the USCF care about the views of
non-members like you? If you care so much, buy a membership and
participate in the USCF electoral process. There are USCF members in
Vermont, no?- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Ah yes, Phil. *Check your logic at the door.
Why not buy a USCF life membership which used to guarantee you a
lifetime of Chess Life.
At least it did when my son and I bought ours.

This isn't an electoral process. *It is more like competing economic
interests ripping away the remains of the USCF.
Now they have decided the electors can only survive by screwing the
life members and the scholastic members. *Such an organization to be
proud of.

The more they grey, the more the members pay.

Sheesh.
Rp


I'm a life member too, and I expect I will still receive my Chess Life
for however many years I am still around - it may be delivered
electronoically, but it is still Chess Life. Is the content or the
paper what makes it Chess Life? I would suggest the content.

Randy Bauer
  #8   Report Post  
Old December 21st 08, 12:33 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 19, 11:08*pm, Randy Bauer wrote:
On Dec 19, 6:21*pm, wrote:



On Dec 19, 5:44*pm, samsloan wrote:


On Dec 19, 5:33*pm, wrote:


On Dec 19, 4:50*pm, samsloan wrote:


Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON
Fact is - "The Lawsuits - PRO and CON Polgar" are
what the coming EB election is all about. Unfortunately, it will be a
single issue election. The campaigning open and behind the scenes will
be enormous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESSDON

If the "PRO" Polgar side win in the election - the "USCF NEW Board"
will drop/reverse their positions on the lawsuits and issue a
statement highly favorable to the Polgars thus create a domino effect
causing the various lawsuits to whither away.


If the "CON" Polgar side wins the elections, the lawsuits will
continue until one side or the other becomes convinced they will lose
and a compromise will be reached that is highly favorable to the side
with the mostest.


Anyone seeking to run for the EB who does not openly support and and
have been endorsed either by the Polgars or the "USCF CURRENT Board",
IMO, stand little or no chance.


Don Schultz


I am glad to see Don back, since he has been away for a while.


I disagree with Don on several points.


I am running. I am definitely not going to be endorsed by the Polgars,
nor will I be endorsed by the USCF Current Board. Still I think I have
a chance. I may well be the only truly independent candidate. "Vote
for Sam, the only one who is not somebody's sycophant!!"


My chances will greatly improve if there are only four candidates, I
admit.


Even if you discount my chances, it could happen that another truly
independent candidate will arise, a White Knight. Such a candidate
will be welcomed by the voters.


Next, it is not true that a victory by the Polgar Group will cause the
lawsuits to wither away. Polgar made a major blunder by suing the
lawyer, Karl Kronenberger. His reputation is now at stake and I doubt
that a takeover by the Polgar Group after the election would cause him
to drop the case. Similarly, I do not see any of the other non-insider
defendants dropping out just because Polgar wins the election. The
only case that the Polgar group would have the power to drop would be
USCF vs. Polgar, pending in the San Francisco Federal Court. That case
is moving along a fast track and I except a decisive result before
election-time anyway.


A Polgar victory would likely mean that Goichberg is voted out of
office. Knowing what is likely to happen to his chess business if
Polgar takes power, I would expect Goichberg to accelerate the
lawsuits, not shut them down.


Sam Sloan


Not a single word about We, The Chessplayers, in this message. What is
the effect on us who actually pay for the organization?


For myself, just like the Presidency of the United States, I don't
wish it on any candidate - the infrastructure being degraded to
catastrophic degree.


Though there are some more likely to act to promote chess than others;
and the same people would be more credible in doing so. Isn't that
USCF's mission statement?


If that doesn't matter, nothing at all matters about the USCF.


Phil Innes


Who is this "we", white man?


You have not been a USCF member since 1996.


http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlTnmtHst.php?12529296


Sam Sloan


What does being a USCF member have to do with playing chess? There are
more ICC members, alone. And what is this to do with rated chess, USCF
being a somewhat expensive current option - did you not see the
current Express Chess rates?


And what sort of daft response is this, Sloan - have you ever talked
about chess as it has to do with the majority of chess players, or
your own fortunes in it?


I think it is demonstrated by your own hand that which way you are.


What you write has nothing to do with chess players - so why do you
write here at all?


Phil Innes- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Why would "WE" the paying members of the USCF care about the views of
non-members like you? *If you care so much, buy a membership and
participate in the USCF electoral process. *There are USCF members in
Vermont, no?


I can't answer Randy Bauer's question he poses to himself. Why should
the organization want currently active players like myself who used to
be members? Randy will no doubt ponder the answer to his own question.

Perhaps he will get around to wondering why members left in the first
place - and where they went when they left?

Playing chess on-line was certainly an inducement in my case, both 10
minute games and also correspondence. The magazine is no inducement
since as an active chess journalist I seem to have read all the news
about 2 months before CL ever arrived.

What I wrote above was a comment on the election process where the
writer only mentions himself and not chess players or chess playing
over which he would govern.

Here Randy Bauer weighs in to do the same thing - I should care about
the organization, he suggests, not if what the organization does for
chess is to my liking. In fact, I think my response is typical of ex-
members. We are active players, teachers, writers, and so on - and
found what we wanted to support our activity elsewhere - since USCF
seemed completely indifferent to our needs.

The idea of joining USCF to change it can only come from a chess
politician - as if we should join the Republican Party to make it more
liberal, rather than join the Liberal party.

Phil Ines
  #9   Report Post  
Old December 21st 08, 12:52 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 21, 7:33*am, wrote:

I can't answer Randy Bauer's question he poses to himself. Why should
the organization want currently active players like myself who used to
be members? Randy will no doubt ponder the answer to his own question.

Phil Ines


Where are you an active player?

We know that you have not played a rated game of chess in more than
ten years.

Have you played a game of chess of any kind anywhere in the last ten
years?

We know that you post a lot here to drive traffic to your website but
do you do anything else with regard to chess?

Can you give the name of one person who has ever played a game of
chess against you?

Sam Sloan
  #10   Report Post  
Old December 21st 08, 01:25 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Chessdon on the Coming USCF Election

On Dec 21, 7:52*am, samsloan wrote:
On Dec 21, 7:33*am, wrote:

I can't answer Randy Bauer's question he poses to himself. Why should
the organization want currently active players like myself who used to
be members? Randy will no doubt ponder the answer to his own question.


Phil Ines


Where are you an active player?


ROFL
What a fool you are Sloan. I've played everyone in this newsgroup who
cared to. When you were invited by Rob Mitchell it was /you/ who were
shy of playing.

But let us not make it all about you - the question for you politicos
is what is NOT about you, or your 'opinions' of other people. My
challenge to Bauer and yourself is to think of something to say about
chess management...


We know that you have not played a rated game of chess in more than
ten years.

Have you played a game of chess of any kind anywhere in the last ten
years?


About 700 corres games last year. Untold amounts of Blitz.

We know that you post a lot here to drive traffic to your website but
do you do anything else with regard to chess?


Isn't 'driving' people to 'my' website to do with chess?
Apart from that I report on a few events around the world to the chess
players in the group - this being chess misc and all.

Can you give the name of one person who has ever played a game of
chess against you?


Stop being a facetious slut, Sloan. Who do you think you are,
McCarthy?

Either address the issue of what chess politicos can do for the rest
of us real players, or get out! Get out of everyone's face with your
ENORMOUS EGO.

This is not about you. Its about IF you and current USCF board members
care anything for chess in this country - specifically, what that
means for the future activity of chess management.

So far I would say that you politicos can't think of a reason to
exist.

When you can, or if you can, by all means let us know what you can do
for We, the Chess Players.

Phil Innes


Sam Sloan


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
Motion for Summary Judgment in Polgar vs. USCF - First Draft samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 3 October 6th 08 03:55 AM
Motion for Summary Judgment in Polgar vs. USCF samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 October 5th 08 09:15 PM
Answer by Sam Sloan to Ethics Complaint by Grant Perks samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 0 January 27th 07 02:54 PM
$am $loan for USCF Executive Board Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 12 May 2nd 06 08:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 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