Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 06:32 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Parr's election analysis

SO WHERE DO WE STAND IN THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN?

One ticket and one "side" have formed up. In
support of the current Board majority and its
president Beatriz Marinello, you have a formal ticket
composed of Randy Bauer, George John, Stephen Shutt
and Elizabeth Shaughnessy. The opposition is less
united, a traditional election "side," and its
candidates include Bill Goichberg, Joel Channing, Greg
Shahade, Robert Tanner, and maverick Sam Sloan.

Behind the ticket candidates stand Dr. Leroy
Dubeck and Jim Eade, who are mapping strategies and
putting up bucks. Behind the opposition candidates
are Don Schultz and portions of the New York,
California and Seattle chess establishments.

Is this a blue vs. red state battle -- the
coasts versus Jesusland? Probably not, though the
comparison suggests itself.

The campaign thus far has not gone well for the
opposition candidates. The ticket candidates have
come up with several surprises in a well-planned
operation mapped out by Leroy Dubeck, rightly regarded
as a 2700-level Federation campaign grossmeister; by
real-life politician Randy Bauer, a man of steely
resolve and ruthlessness; and by deep-pocketed Jim
Eade, who is half-Dubeck, half-Bauer. A formidable team.

The opposition has taken three stiff jabs on
the snoot (a mailing announcing the "ticket"; a letter
of endorsement by COO Beatriz Marinello of some of
those who hired her; the Booz-Dubeck article in the
May Chess Life), and the opposition's collective head
has been snapping back like the light bag being worked
by Marciano at his peak. More is to come. What is
planned for the June issue of Chess Life? Will there
be announcements on the Federation web page of new
heroic endeavours by the Board majority? Will COO
Beatriz Marinello or other office employees send out
additional endorsement letters? Will there be a
Federation presence at upcoming major tournaments,
working for the Board majority? Will the governor of
Tennessee or the pones of Crossville send out messages
of support? Or, as is most likely, will there be a
coordinated multi-media attack against Bill Goichberg
in which the opposition candidates are lumped together
with him?

Look for the last-mentioned.

The opposition appears to have no plan to
stanch the elan of the ticket candidates. To be sure,
Don Schultz, who is another 2700-rated Federation
campaign grossmeister, is tendering advice and
managing the promising Channing operation. Yet one
senses a politics-as-usual approach on the part of the
opposition: mail out a few letters and buy some ads.
This approach cannot prevail against the Blitzkrieg of
the Board majority. Polish cavalry cannot prevail
over diving Stukas.

The opposition's lead candidate is Bill
Goichberg, who will almost certainly win election.
His name familiarity quadruples the entire
ticket-group put together. Another powerful
opposition candidate is Joel Channing, who has the
wherewithal to make mailings as well as a resume of
success that will attract many CL readers. Greg
Shahade, the young face who has a cruel education
ahead if he is so unfortunate as to get elected, has
the goodwill of many, including some supporters of the
Board majority. But can he withstand the political
hurricanes as sturdily as the deeply rooted Stephen
Shutt and Elizabeth Shaughnessy with their scholastic
and other political connections?

What about Bob Tanner and Sam Sloan, whom I
take to be the dark horses? Mr. Tanner, an election
veteran, has never run as well as his supporters might
wish. Sam Sloan has lately run better than his
detractors feared. I think Mr. Tanner will be the man
left out when voters split their tickets, whereas Mr.
Sloan does not have the financial resources to mount a
winning campaign.

I have praised the campaign thus far of the
Board majority. A minor cavil would be one part of
the group mailing that was sent out. I'm speaking
about the photographs. Randy Bauer looks likes an
enforcer, meaner than Tom de Lay, whereas Mrs.
Shaughnessy appears as a benign non-entity. Mr. Shutt
is somehow washed out, and Mr. John looks like a
mid-European Mephistopheles, a Fairfield Hoban
redivivus.

My editorial advice to the Board majority is to
change the pictures in future mailings: find a photo
in which Randy Bauer looks less buttoned-down or, if
you will, less buttoned-up. An unforced smile is
needed - or something that suggests he has had a bowel
movement in the last 730 days. The exact opposite
advice goes to Mrs. Shaughnessy: find a photo where
there is more acuity and less vacuity. Both she and
the mild Mr. Shutt need to find photos in which they
try to look about half as mean as Mr. Bauer does when
he is at his most human. As for Mr. John, not much
can be done with his mug. He can't get away with
substituting a picture of Cary Grant, which is to say,
you have to play the hand you're dealt.

Joel Channing's mailing was slick and
well-produced. There was a notable lapse in taste
when he included yours truly in one of the photos, and
the opposition ought to make a campaign issue of my
appalling presence. (I'm the grey and red stain --
suggestive of an undercooked beef rib -- in the back
row.)

If Mr. Channing makes future mailings, here is my
advice: You are an important man of business, and a
lot of chessplayers, given the travails of the USCF in
recent years, are prepared to consider an authentic
entrepreneur on the board. You need to make an
explicit case that you can help develop a climate of
sound yet creative decision-making. You must also
address, once again quite explicitly, the campaign
innuendo being used against you: you won't treat the
Federation seriously but rather as a retreat from the
serious business that you do when tending to the
Channing Corporation. I would raise this issue
upfront and then dispel it in very plain language.
Just write, "Here is what the opponents say about me
..... and here is what I actually intend to do."

One final point for Mr. Channing: another rap
against you is that you lack the internal USCF
political credentials, not having served within the
bureaucracy. My advice is to make that a virtue:
point out your work in the active world of chess
organization and promotion, noting that you are an
entrepreneur who will wake up Rip Van Winkle.

My advice to Don Schultz is to recognize that
thus far you have been out-thought and outhustled by
Dubeck-Bauer-Eade. You have to begin to think
proactively in this campaign rather than reactively.
The opposition can't win with half-measures.

Why?

Because the great truth of this campaign, which
may attract many thousands more voters than ever
before, is that Campaign '05 is the first real
campaign of the OMOV era.

Learn that lesson RIGHT NOW -- or lose.

-- Larry Parr

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 07:27 AM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry,

Yours is an excellent report. Thank you for your very astute, insider look,
at who is representing what agenda, and what it could mean to the
membership.

I never thought that I would live to see the day when true OMOV elections
were held at the USCF. Afterall, Sam Sloan had reported my death many years
ago, and goodness, could he have known something which I didn't? Apparently
not

Whatever the outcome of this election, it is clear to me that the USCF needs
very much to continue on the road where "less is more" and the use of human
assets, other than in the major market centers, are realizing economies of
scale necessary to both our survival, and eventual prosperity and
accomplishment of the mission statement.

Personally, I must say that though I had many reservations in the beginning
about Beatriz, she and Tim, Randy, even Don Schultz (to name a few), have
performed something of a miracle in turning around the USCF. As much as it
is possible for an outsider like myself to understand the dynamics of
internecine squabbling at USCF, I believe that a good deal of what used to
pass for vitriole at USCF, has passed on into history.

My advice to the readership is, to stay on track with the incumbent team.
They are working hard to give us a USCF we can all be proud of.

Sincerely,
Tom Klem
---candidate for nothing

wrote in message
oups.com...
SO WHERE DO WE STAND IN THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN?

One ticket and one "side" have formed up. In
support of the current Board majority and its
president Beatriz Marinello, you have a formal ticket
composed of Randy Bauer, George John, Stephen Shutt
and Elizabeth Shaughnessy. The opposition is less
united, a traditional election "side," and its
candidates include Bill Goichberg, Joel Channing, Greg
Shahade, Robert Tanner, and maverick Sam Sloan.

Behind the ticket candidates stand Dr. Leroy
Dubeck and Jim Eade, who are mapping strategies and
putting up bucks. Behind the opposition candidates
are Don Schultz and portions of the New York,
California and Seattle chess establishments.

Is this a blue vs. red state battle -- the
coasts versus Jesusland? Probably not, though the
comparison suggests itself.

The campaign thus far has not gone well for the
opposition candidates. The ticket candidates have
come up with several surprises in a well-planned
operation mapped out by Leroy Dubeck, rightly regarded
as a 2700-level Federation campaign grossmeister; by
real-life politician Randy Bauer, a man of steely
resolve and ruthlessness; and by deep-pocketed Jim
Eade, who is half-Dubeck, half-Bauer. A formidable team.

The opposition has taken three stiff jabs on
the snoot (a mailing announcing the "ticket"; a letter
of endorsement by COO Beatriz Marinello of some of
those who hired her; the Booz-Dubeck article in the
May Chess Life), and the opposition's collective head
has been snapping back like the light bag being worked
by Marciano at his peak. More is to come. What is
planned for the June issue of Chess Life? Will there
be announcements on the Federation web page of new
heroic endeavours by the Board majority? Will COO
Beatriz Marinello or other office employees send out
additional endorsement letters? Will there be a
Federation presence at upcoming major tournaments,
working for the Board majority? Will the governor of
Tennessee or the pones of Crossville send out messages
of support? Or, as is most likely, will there be a
coordinated multi-media attack against Bill Goichberg
in which the opposition candidates are lumped together
with him?

Look for the last-mentioned.

The opposition appears to have no plan to
stanch the elan of the ticket candidates. To be sure,
Don Schultz, who is another 2700-rated Federation
campaign grossmeister, is tendering advice and
managing the promising Channing operation. Yet one
senses a politics-as-usual approach on the part of the
opposition: mail out a few letters and buy some ads.
This approach cannot prevail against the Blitzkrieg of
the Board majority. Polish cavalry cannot prevail
over diving Stukas.

The opposition's lead candidate is Bill
Goichberg, who will almost certainly win election.
His name familiarity quadruples the entire
ticket-group put together. Another powerful
opposition candidate is Joel Channing, who has the
wherewithal to make mailings as well as a resume of
success that will attract many CL readers. Greg
Shahade, the young face who has a cruel education
ahead if he is so unfortunate as to get elected, has
the goodwill of many, including some supporters of the
Board majority. But can he withstand the political
hurricanes as sturdily as the deeply rooted Stephen
Shutt and Elizabeth Shaughnessy with their scholastic
and other political connections?

What about Bob Tanner and Sam Sloan, whom I
take to be the dark horses? Mr. Tanner, an election
veteran, has never run as well as his supporters might
wish. Sam Sloan has lately run better than his
detractors feared. I think Mr. Tanner will be the man
left out when voters split their tickets, whereas Mr.
Sloan does not have the financial resources to mount a
winning campaign.

I have praised the campaign thus far of the
Board majority. A minor cavil would be one part of
the group mailing that was sent out. I'm speaking
about the photographs. Randy Bauer looks likes an
enforcer, meaner than Tom de Lay, whereas Mrs.
Shaughnessy appears as a benign non-entity. Mr. Shutt
is somehow washed out, and Mr. John looks like a
mid-European Mephistopheles, a Fairfield Hoban
redivivus.

My editorial advice to the Board majority is to
change the pictures in future mailings: find a photo
in which Randy Bauer looks less buttoned-down or, if
you will, less buttoned-up. An unforced smile is
needed - or something that suggests he has had a bowel
movement in the last 730 days. The exact opposite
advice goes to Mrs. Shaughnessy: find a photo where
there is more acuity and less vacuity. Both she and
the mild Mr. Shutt need to find photos in which they
try to look about half as mean as Mr. Bauer does when
he is at his most human. As for Mr. John, not much
can be done with his mug. He can't get away with
substituting a picture of Cary Grant, which is to say,
you have to play the hand you're dealt.

Joel Channing's mailing was slick and
well-produced. There was a notable lapse in taste
when he included yours truly in one of the photos, and
the opposition ought to make a campaign issue of my
appalling presence. (I'm the grey and red stain --
suggestive of an undercooked beef rib -- in the back
row.)

If Mr. Channing makes future mailings, here is my
advice: You are an important man of business, and a
lot of chessplayers, given the travails of the USCF in
recent years, are prepared to consider an authentic
entrepreneur on the board. You need to make an
explicit case that you can help develop a climate of
sound yet creative decision-making. You must also
address, once again quite explicitly, the campaign
innuendo being used against you: you won't treat the
Federation seriously but rather as a retreat from the
serious business that you do when tending to the
Channing Corporation. I would raise this issue
upfront and then dispel it in very plain language.
Just write, "Here is what the opponents say about me
.... and here is what I actually intend to do."

One final point for Mr. Channing: another rap
against you is that you lack the internal USCF
political credentials, not having served within the
bureaucracy. My advice is to make that a virtue:
point out your work in the active world of chess
organization and promotion, noting that you are an
entrepreneur who will wake up Rip Van Winkle.

My advice to Don Schultz is to recognize that
thus far you have been out-thought and outhustled by
Dubeck-Bauer-Eade. You have to begin to think
proactively in this campaign rather than reactively.
The opposition can't win with half-measures.

Why?

Because the great truth of this campaign, which
may attract many thousands more voters than ever
before, is that Campaign '05 is the first real
campaign of the OMOV era.

Learn that lesson RIGHT NOW -- or lose.

-- Larry Parr



  #3   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 11:16 AM
Greg Shahade
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I don't know why I keep getting grouped with a "slate", when of all
the candidates, the person I know the most and would greatly want to be
on the board with me, should I get elected, is Steve Shutt.

For those whom don't know, he was my chess coach at high school and
I've always known him to look at things with an objective and open
mind. I also like that he stays out of some of the ugly political
happenings that go on behind the scenes.

Anyway I've tried to go out of my way to state alliances or anything
of that nature, because I just don't want to get into that side of
this. However it just annoys me to see the person that I'm closest to
of all the candidates being put by everyone on another "slate" than me.
I will be happy if he gets elected and I promise you he will be if I am
elected.

  #4   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 12:48 PM
Sam Sloan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 5 May 2005 22:32:34 -0700, "
wrote:

The campaign thus far has not gone well for the opposition candidates.


I happen to agree with you. I think that the opposition candidates are
losing, the incumbents are winning. I have been trying to sound the
alarm, but they are not listening.

Tanner had better get on the stick soon or he is toast and Shahade has
already been almost completely written off as a sure looser.

Even Goichberg cannot be guaranteed to win. You can be sure that there
will be coordinated attacks on him in the June Chess Life and in the
last days before the ballots go out.

Sam Sloan
  #5   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 02:07 PM
Larry Tapper
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Greg Shahade wrote:
I don't know why I keep getting grouped with a "slate", when of all
the candidates, the person I know the most and would greatly want to

be
on the board with me, should I get elected, is Steve Shutt.

For those whom don't know, he was my chess coach at high school and
I've always known him to look at things with an objective and open
mind. I also like that he stays out of some of the ugly political
happenings that go on behind the scenes.

Anyway I've tried to go out of my way to state alliances or anything
of that nature, because I just don't want to get into that side of
this. However it just annoys me to see the person that I'm closest to
of all the candidates being put by everyone on another "slate" than

me.
I will be happy if he gets elected and I promise you he will be if I

am
elected.


Greg,

Actually I doubt that more than a hundred or two USCF members take all
this rgcp blather about "slates" all that seriously. It seems to me
that the resident rgcp pundits have often had an absurdly inflated view
of their own significance.

You have my vote because you appear to be sane and reasonable, you
definitely know how to play chess, and you have a notable track record
promoting and organizing master-level tournaments. And given your
endorsement, I will now consider voting for Steve Shutt as well. I have
no idea why Sloan thinks you have been "written off". It seems to me
that in addition to objective factors, you should also benefit to some
degree from name recognition, coming as you do from a well-known chess
family.

Larry Tapper



  #6   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 03:23 PM
samsloan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Tapper wrote:

Greg,

Actually I doubt that more than a hundred or two USCF members take

all
this rgcp blather about "slates" all that seriously. It seems to me
that the resident rgcp pundits have often had an absurdly inflated

view
of their own significance.

You have my vote because you appear to be sane and reasonable, you
definitely know how to play chess, and you have a notable track

record
promoting and organizing master-level tournaments. And given your
endorsement, I will now consider voting for Steve Shutt as well. I

have
no idea why Sloan thinks you have been "written off". It seems to me
that in addition to objective factors, you should also benefit to

some
degree from name recognition, coming as you do from a well-known

chess
family.

Larry Tapper


I strongly support Greg Shahade. I signed his petition to run for
election and I hope he wins.

However, aside from a few occasional postings to this group, Greg has
not been campaigning at all. He also made a statement on this group a
few weeks ago which I feel was a big mistake. (I will not repeat what
he wrote.)

I am hoping to light a fire under Greg and get him to go out and
campaign.

Sam Sloan

  #7   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 04:48 PM
George John
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greg Shahade wrote:

I don't know why I keep getting grouped with a "slate", when of all
the candidates, the person I know the most and would greatly want to

be
on the board with me, should I get elected, is Steve Shutt.

For those whom don't know, he was my chess coach at high school and
I've always known him to look at things with an objective and open
mind. I also like that he stays out of some of the ugly political
happenings that go on behind the scenes.

Anyway I've tried to go out of my way to state alliances or anything
of that nature, because I just don't want to get into that side of
this. However it just annoys me to see the person that I'm closest to
of all the candidates being put by everyone on another "slate" than

me.
I will be happy if he gets elected and I promise you he will be if I

am
elected.


Greg,

I will be happy if you are elected, too. I just will be more happy if
those I'm supporting are elected. -smile-

Steve is a great guy, with high character -- someone who strongly wants
to do the right thing. His many years (over 30 now?) of devotion to
and accomplishment in scholastic chess, including at the highest levels
of competition, is simply amazing. He is the USCF Vice-President, and
has four years of recent board experience under his belt. We need at
the very minimum one or two candidates who are solidly in the
scholastic camp. He is one of them. I fully share in your support of
his being reelected.

As for why you keep getting lumped into a slate, in the upside down
world of USCF politics, it's too often more about making certain other
people aren't elected than with getting the best people elected. Some
of the "old guard" seems to be quite upset about this move to
Crossville, and the Presidency of Beatriz Marinello, and are going
after any and all who supported her and this move, including Steve.

BTW, be careful about what you hear privately. Make certain to check
sources from all sides before you form any conclusions. You won't
believe what "credible" people sometimes say and do during the heat of
a campaign.

Finally, I do hope you will share with us more of your ideas about how
to improve the USCF and chess in the Unites States, and
internationally, too, if you like. I hope you will make another try at
the list of questions Bill, you, and I answered. IIRC, I think you
answered one of the points but not all. I will soon be answering
Wayne's questions. That's my final exam. -smile-

Best regards,

George John

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 05:49 PM
George John
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:

[SNIP]


As for Mr. John, not much
can be done with his mug. He can't get away with
substituting a picture of Cary Grant, which is to say,
you have to play the hand you're dealt.


For a picture of me in my 'natural habitat' -smile- please see
http://www.dallaschess.com/USJ2002/tie.html

[SNIP]

I wasn't aware that "good looks" would be an issue in this race, but
given what I have read of Larry's of late, nothing would surprise me at
this point. If he should make an issue of how tall the candidates are,
with no shoes I'm 6'3" tall (the reason I said no shoes is, I don't
want to be accused of misrepresenting my height).

Big Smile,

George John

  #9   Report Post  
Old May 6th 05, 11:21 PM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Parr has been repeatedly posting in this forum and other Internet
group some wrong fact about me (Beatriz Marinello).

For your information, I never used the title of COO because I consider
myself a volunteer who undertook very challenging
tasks which include the relocation of the USCF office to Crossville,
TN; overseeing the office in absence of an Executive Director and
additionally continue performing my duties as President of the USCF. I
never expected nor I expect a financial compensation for my services.
Furthermore, I have been working full time for the USCF expending my
personal savings and with the help of my family. I am not a wealthy
person, many years ago I desired to become a professional chess
teacher. Currently, I teach in one school in Harlem, inner city
children. When my current role in the USCF ends, I am looking forward
to comeback to teaching chess in the schools as part of the curriculum
and developing other educational projects. Also, I would like to get
involve in a leadership positions in the Latino community which much
need vision and support for a brighter future. Projections indicate
that by 2020, the United States population will be composed of a
majority of current minorities, I believe its crucial for our country
(I am a US Citizen) to educate and provide strong leadership to current
minorities. Therefore, do not be surprised if I move on to other areas
to use chess as an education tool which promotes academic values,
parent involvement and leadership in the Latino and African American
Communities.

I am sharing all these personal thoughts, because I would like for
people to understand my motivations in life and my strong commitment to
make a difference.

In many posting, Mr. Parr said that I was getting a payment in expenses
of $60,000, although in some latest posting he changed the amount to
$30,000 for six months.

I am pleased to announce that the relocation is almost complete, only
the Publications Department remains in the New Windsor office. The
success of the relocation project can be attribute to our loyal
employees and consultants: Mike Nolan, has been doing an outstanding
job. The US Chess Federation should be always grateful to him for this
services and role in moving the USCF into the 21 Century.
Grant Perks for the second time offered his much needed assistant to
help the USCF in difficult time, currently serving as an Acting CFO.
Our Senior Staff have been extremely helpful and willing to work under
very caotic circunstances.

I deeply feel for the employees that have lost their jobs, because
either they were not able to relocate or the reorganization of the
organization called for staff reductions due to the outsourcing of the
B&E and improvements in operations.

For your information, I am disclosing my expenses from JUNE 1, 2004-
MAY 2, 2005. In fact there many expenses that I did not submit
specially in first year as President of the USCF. I have nothing to
hide, I am just looking forward for the time that the USCF will have an
Executive Director, so I can resume my professional activities and have
more time for volunteer work. I was wrong to express interest in the
Executive Director's position, I must confess that I was never sure
that this position would be good for me as a person. I am a simple
person, who enjoy friends and love chess, I cannot picture myself to
continue exposing myself to personal vicious attacks. I love teaching
children and developing projects. I appreciate the opportunity to
serve as USCF President and a member of the Executive Board, it has
been a great learning experience for me, but I must also say that it
has been very stressful and painful on me personally, I am a very
sensitive person, I do not enjoy being as tough as I has to be.

Yours for Chess,

Beatriz Marinello
President
US Chess Federation

EXPENDITURES FOR BEATRIZ JUNE 1, 2004 THRU MAY 2, 2005
Date Check #
7/19/04 62500 612.59
AIRFA216.70/HOTEL ROOMS VEGA&HERBERT 195.80/EX. BOARD-FOOD 200.09


10/7/04 62816 215.70
CROSSVILLE MTG-FOOD:215.70

9/14/04 62725 1,283.89
EXP MTG HB FOUNDATION:252.00/AIRFARE SPAIN:733.60/EXECT BRD
MTG-FOOD:298.29

1/6/05 63250 824.79
HOTEL MTG-FOOD-:137.57/MILEAGE 175.00 HOTEL 92.22/MILEAGE 420.00
BREAK DOWN TOTALS
1/13/05 63306 185.81
AIRFARE NASHVILLE TO NY
CELL
1/13/05 63292 654.77 GARAGE
GARAGE 304.77/PERDIEM 350.00 (JAN3-13) TRAVEL
HOTEL
1/20/05 63314 320.00 FOOD
PERDIEM 200.00/CELL 120.00 EX BOARD
PERDIEM
2/3/05 63383 738.90 TOTAL:
GARAGE 305.00/TRANS TO CROSS 83.90/ PERDIEM 350.00

3/1/05 63529 3,898.36
JAN-FEB-MAR PER DIEM:3500.00/CELL120.00/HOTEL 112.86/RENTAL165.50

3/16/05 63566 668.30
FLIGHT TICKETS:548.30/CELL 120.00

4/12/05 64141 1,025.00
GARAGE 305.00/CELL 120.00/PERDIEM 600.00

5/2/05 64321 1,325.00
CELL 120.00/GARAGE 305.00/PERDIEM 900.00

$10,833.11

  #10   Report Post  
Old May 7th 05, 12:24 AM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default

CORRECTION:

I just realized that there was a mistake in the total amount, which
should be $11,453.11 from June 1, 2004-May 2, 2005.

From January 2005-May 2, 2005, the total is: $9,640.93


When Grant Perks made his legal statement, $1,325 where not in the
books.

The total includes: Airfares, accommodations, parking garage in NYC,
tel. bill and per diem. The per-diem includes gasoline, bridge tools
(I commute from New York City to New Windsor, I drive between three to
four hours a day). Previously, I never submitted phone bills nor other
small expenses related with my role as USCF President.

Beatriz Marinello
President
US Chess Federation

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Year of the USCF Election Fraud [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 41 March 20th 05 10:15 PM
Chess Assistant 7 Interactive Analysis broken Alberich rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 3 September 16th 03 07:42 PM
FRANK CAMARATTA SHOULD RESIGN FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD LWDubeck rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 31 September 9th 03 01:06 PM
L.A. Laws? Eric Mark rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 28 August 27th 03 01:50 PM
L.A. Laws? Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 7 August 25th 03 06:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:15 PM.

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