Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 29th 05, 06:06 PM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

I admit it Larry, you did have me spinning into the Latin past for that one
(excelsis). After about two minutes, my wife informed me that the word could
be remembered (if only I tried in an old Catholic hymn we used to sing
every Sunday. Gloria in Excelsis Deo. Or perhaps you prefer the Poulenc
Gloria. I know I do.

I still think that no matter who is in power, whether it be the not too
often mentioned reds (don't hear that moniker too much anymore), or the hard
working blacks (working just to keep abreast of the law suits generated by
erstwhile but unaccredited reds), a fair amount of secrecy is, um, let me
see, ... fair.

Delicate negotiations, in our modern "instant coffee" society, are perceived
by some as obstruction.

"How long have those talks been going on?"

"Three weeks"

"Ain't nothing leaked out of the board yet?"

"Goodness no, they are exercising obstructionist delays"

Can you imagine? General Motors holds one stockholders meeting a year, and
other than the occasional interview with the Detroit Free Press, the only
thing you hear from them is which direction the stock is going. All other
stockholder issues are dealt with once a year, not every two weeks.

Instant gratification of your "need to know" Larry, is not necessarily a
good thing. Having to know everything all the time could cost the USCF
hundreds of thousands of dollars lost to competitors who knowing our game
plan, because Larry needed to know, cut their margins by forty percent, and
leave the Hanon Russell conglomerate swinging in the wind, begging on our
doorstep for more relief.

The din of the cries for "sunshine" and other euphemisms for "giving away
the store" bounce off the electronic walls of this little cage we have
constructed for ourselves called rec.games.chess.politics. But as Poe was
heard to say, the tintinnabulation (or the clanging of empty brass vessels)
is swell or more precisely, "the tintinnabulation that so volumnously
swells from the ringing and the dinging of the bells"--E. A. Poe

Don't forget Larry, you need a belfry. Without it, you have nothing to hang
your bells on, and the bats would have no place to sleep. Unless, of course,
they were house sitting in Brooklyn.

Tom Klem


  #2   Report Post  
Old October 30th 05, 03:28 PM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

Um, three weeks was an example.

By the way, what did you know (about this deal), and when did you know it ??


Then there's always Oprah-cities (markets where Oprah Winfrey is shown).
Could be used in the following sentence: We don't go in for lesser
oprah-cities.

Actually Larry, it would be hard to accuse me of parroting others' words
here. I'm nearly completely blind now (it varies from day to day, though my
doctors are optimistic) and reading the monitor is more or less reserved for
your Zildjian and Sabian mendacities. (Or was that oprah-cities??)

I do wish that I had your gift for prose.

Stay well,
Tom Klem


wrote in message
ups.com...
NEGOTIATION, RENEGOTIATION, SECRECY CYCLE

Instant gratification of your "need to know" Larry, is not necessarily
a
good thing. Having to know everything all the time could cost the USCF
hundreds of thousands of dollars lost to competitors who knowing our
game
plan, because Larry needed to know, cut their margins by forty percent,
and leave the Hanon Russell conglomerate swinging in the wind, begging
on our doorstep for more relief..."How long have those talks been going
on?" "Three weeks" "Ain't nothing leaked out of the board yet?"
"Goodness no, they are exercising obstructionist delays." -- Tom Klem

Gloria in excelsis -- think in terms of the
greater doxology. We don't go in for lesser opacities.

At least you don't make Randy Bauer's argument
which is: secrecy-money-politicians means that you
should not even consider the "possibility" of
hanky-panky. Yeah, right.

For the rest, you do a psittacine job with Randy:
it is better for readers not to know what is taking place.
The negotiations have not been going on for three weeks
with the Cafe but for several months, by the way.

We are now in the re-renegotiation state of the negotiations,
renegotiations, more negotiations cycle.



  #3   Report Post  
Old October 30th 05, 09:29 PM
Chess One
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis


wrote in message
ups.com...
NEGOTIATION, RENEGOTIATION, SECRECY CYCLE


We are now in the re-renegotiation state of the negotiations,
renegotiations, more negotiations cycle.


USCF having already offered to 'forgive' most of the debt while also
extended the currently losing contact until 2008 - which was turned down by
Russel Enterprises!!!!

USCF **immediately** re-offered the same deal, forgiving the huge debt
[legally or not - we are not entitled to know or investigate a mere quarte
rmillio bucks 'til afterwards] and extending the currently losing
relationship to 2012. Which would be fine, well - it would suck. But it
would be fine if...

USCF have done this despite a guarantee of /more/ annual income per year
from another vendor, and an income which is also secured - unlike
Chesscafe's past arrangement with USCF [let's pass on which genius allowed
this to pass without ANY security] and which is currently the sticking
point.

-- nod to wise; this is privately obtained information, to which USCf
officially repsonded - "it may be or may not be true"-- )

Even USCF's deal with Chesscafe is not so sure, since according to President
Bill's note to me, even talking about this in public could sink the deal.
[how so?]

Tom Klem has given up on this issue. Members have not.

Neither have non-members who support other administrative systems for chess
in the USA, and who ask what the hell is going on in this public charity
that is so secret, which forgives debts to for-profits organisations [LOL]
and are related to Bill Goichberg as Exec Directors recommendations then,
and now as President, that...

[that the current Exec Dir is not even allowed to have his own opinion, when
asked about his own roel in things]

You will no doubt read more about it here from a re-immerged Randy Bauer or
someone else who still believes in personality over business sense. And who
still believes in an organisation that has gone fron $6Million per year to
$3M. without the slighest expressed doubt about pursuing similar policies,
decided in the dark, from the current basement site located somewhere in a
'temporary' HQ in the rural hinterland.

All the above will be disclosed to members via the magazine they have to pay
for, wanted or not as part of USCF's rating system, Chess Life, in due
course.

Phil Innes


  #4   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 12:56 AM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

Phil,

There is nothing to give up over. First of all, I don't have a dog in this
race.

The point which I have been making here for nearly ten years among others is
that, the B&E is a loser. Why should we surprised or even outraged (for that
matter), if even a slik businessman like Hanon Russell can't make money with
it?

The real point of what I have been talking about here is simple. The folks
running things at USCF have been trying (hey, they have succeeded) to fool
the members on this issue. Using 'mouthpieces' and surrogates to claim that
the B&E was making 3.2M 2.7M 1.2M (pick a number), yada yada. It has all
been lies.

Nothing good can come from a lie. And when a lie becomes the centerpiece of
a business relationship between two of the biggest liars in USCF history,
why should we even care.

I leave it up to the reader to discern the truth; that, if they have lied
continuously about this aspect of USCF life, then what else have they been
lying about all these years? This is not incompetence. This is a deliberate
pattern.

That being said, the only issue we have left to deal with is, will the USCF
survive? And, I say (in order to be contradicted and ridiculed here) that
there is simply too much money to be made in keeping the USCF weak, but
around.

Tom Klem
"I'm afraid that we are going to have to accept the fact that [...] is in
control of our planet"
---Chancellor Palpatine in Star Wars II to Padme


"Chess One" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

wrote in message
ups.com...
NEGOTIATION, RENEGOTIATION, SECRECY CYCLE


We are now in the re-renegotiation state of the negotiations,
renegotiations, more negotiations cycle.


USCF having already offered to 'forgive' most of the debt while also
extended the currently losing contact until 2008 - which was turned down

by
Russel Enterprises!!!!

USCF **immediately** re-offered the same deal, forgiving the huge debt
[legally or not - we are not entitled to know or investigate a mere quarte
rmillio bucks 'til afterwards] and extending the currently losing
relationship to 2012. Which would be fine, well - it would suck. But it
would be fine if...

USCF have done this despite a guarantee of /more/ annual income per year
from another vendor, and an income which is also secured - unlike
Chesscafe's past arrangement with USCF [let's pass on which genius allowed
this to pass without ANY security] and which is currently the sticking
point.

-- nod to wise; this is privately obtained information, to which USCf
officially repsonded - "it may be or may not be true"-- )

Even USCF's deal with Chesscafe is not so sure, since according to

President
Bill's note to me, even talking about this in public could sink the deal.
[how so?]

Tom Klem has given up on this issue. Members have not.

Neither have non-members who support other administrative systems for

chess
in the USA, and who ask what the hell is going on in this public charity
that is so secret, which forgives debts to for-profits organisations [LOL]
and are related to Bill Goichberg as Exec Directors recommendations then,
and now as President, that...

[that the current Exec Dir is not even allowed to have his own opinion,

when
asked about his own roel in things]

You will no doubt read more about it here from a re-immerged Randy Bauer

or
someone else who still believes in personality over business sense. And

who
still believes in an organisation that has gone fron $6Million per year to
$3M. without the slighest expressed doubt about pursuing similar policies,
decided in the dark, from the current basement site located somewhere in a
'temporary' HQ in the rural hinterland.

All the above will be disclosed to members via the magazine they have to

pay
for, wanted or not as part of USCF's rating system, Chess Life, in due
course.

Phil Innes




  #5   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 01:05 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

WHAT MENDACITIES, TOM?

Actually Larry, it would be hard to accuse me of parroting others' words here. I'm

nearly completely blind now (it varies from day to day, though my
doctors are optimistic) and reading the monitor is more or less
reserved for your Zildjian and Sabian mendacities. (Or was that
oprah-cities??) ---Tom Klem


Nearly blind? I would never have known that.
You are doing a spirited job here. I hope your
condition is reversible.

Zildjian and Sabian escape me as references, and
I admit or brag that I have never in my life seen
Oprah Winfrey, who runs some kind of interview program
during the daytime. As I have tried to explain to
Bill Brock and others, I am just not part of that culture.

I don't understand the reference to mendacities.
In your last posting you were not accusing me of
lying; you were accusing me of presenting material
that ought better to be left unknown to readers of
this forum, who should wait until they learn what the
authorities wish them to learn.

So far as I recollect, you were not picking
nits, let alone herring-bones with the content of
what I wrote. You just felt I should not be writing it.

What am I missing?



  #6   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 01:42 AM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

Larry,

Not writing it? Goodness no. You're doing fine. I have no objection to you
writing anything. What I would object to, is the USCF acceding to your
intimidation and actually revealing something which might hurt further the
B&E business. Nothing personal, though. By the way, I do not believe that
there is the slightest possibility that they will offer anything in response
to your queries, so most of my writings on this subject are simply a
diversion ... a way to pass the time, if you will.

Loathe as I am to discuss my medical conditions (note: plural), the eye
Doctors all say that I need further surgery, but that I am two to three
years away from getting it. The delay is for the sake of healing completely
from the previous operations. At various times, the world goes black, grey
or something murkily in between. I'm seeing pretty well today, though my
blitz chess on the servers wouldn't indicate that Have we perhaps
discovered a link between Chess blindness (which I suffered from for years
before) and actual blindness? Hmmm.

Zildjian and Sabian make the finest cymbals in the world (pie plates of
brass, clanging together to make a useless noise or crashing sound filled
with loud, vast, emptiness---unless you happen to be Ringo Starr) and,
sometimes I hear their bashing in this newsgroup. A sound with which I grew
familiar with having sat in close proximity to either the percussionist or
drum kit for nearly thirty years, watching both or either, highlight the
Follies or the Lido, or even Smokefried & Roy, giving joy to millions of
patrons but leaving me with various forms of tinnitis (sp?).

The use of the words excelsis, psittacine (meaning to parrot another's
words) opacity and so forth, brought forth the desire in me to add to the
cacaphonous mostly unimportant events taking place here with some
onomatopoeia of my own, hence launching the artistically licensed
Oprah-cities and menda-city, because of the delight I sometimes take in the
sounds which words make, not necessarily their meanings.

Art for Art's sake. Or was that Ophelia?

It could be the pain meds

Continue writing. Please.

Cordially,
Tom Klem





wrote in message
ups.com...
WHAT MENDACITIES, TOM?

Actually Larry, it would be hard to accuse me of parroting others' words

here. I'm
nearly completely blind now (it varies from day to day, though my
doctors are optimistic) and reading the monitor is more or less
reserved for your Zildjian and Sabian mendacities. (Or was that
oprah-cities??) ---Tom Klem


Nearly blind? I would never have known that.
You are doing a spirited job here. I hope your
condition is reversible.

Zildjian and Sabian escape me as references, and
I admit or brag that I have never in my life seen
Oprah Winfrey, who runs some kind of interview program
during the daytime. As I have tried to explain to
Bill Brock and others, I am just not part of that culture.

I don't understand the reference to mendacities.
In your last posting you were not accusing me of
lying; you were accusing me of presenting material
that ought better to be left unknown to readers of
this forum, who should wait until they learn what the
authorities wish them to learn.

So far as I recollect, you were not picking
nits, let alone herring-bones with the content of
what I wrote. You just felt I should not be writing it.

What am I missing?



  #7   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 03:19 AM
Randy Bauer
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis


"Chess One" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

You will no doubt read more about it here from a re-immerged Randy Bauer
or someone else who still believes in personality over business sense. And
who still believes in an organisation that has gone fron $6Million per
year to $3M. without the slighest expressed doubt about pursuing similar
policies, decided in the dark, from the current basement site located
somewhere in a 'temporary' HQ in the rural hinterland.


Re-immerged?? Once again, Phil shows his ability to write with clarity and
precision.

I have no interest in discussing these issues with the likes of Phil or
Larry, because they lack an honest perspective or approach.

For the record, I do not approve of the methods that Hannon Russell used to
negotiate a change in conditions with the USCF. That said, I believe the
USCF did about as well as it could in the re-negotiations. I abhor,
however, Parr's claims that there may have been kick-backs or the like as a
part of the new agreement.

Randy Bauer


  #8   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 03:45 AM
Tom Klem
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

Abhorrence, is not denial. I don't like the suggestion very much either;
however, it is the "past is prologue" argument which many of us (including
me) are attracted to, when we see such familiar and faded tactical
denouments emanate from the Chess Federation.

Now, I would agree considering that the board does not live in an three room
tudor mansion in Crossville, that all actions and activities are unknown at
all times.

By the same token, you Randy, could not make the claim that you are
confident in the veracity of your associates. There simply is no way to know
the hearts of such partners.

Therefore, since raising such odious claims here are the very woof and warf
of an rgcp existence, and since no one in authority is either interested or
going to get interested in the plight of our little hobby, we are left to
prattle around the praxis of this electronic La Cage aux Follies and enjoy
each others company while we can.

Tom Klem



"Randy Bauer" wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s72...

"Chess One" wrote in message
news:[email protected]

You will no doubt read more about it here from a re-immerged Randy Bauer
or someone else who still believes in personality over business sense.
And who still believes in an organisation that has gone fron $6Million
per year to $3M. without the slighest expressed doubt about pursuing
similar policies, decided in the dark, from the current basement site
located somewhere in a 'temporary' HQ in the rural hinterland.


Re-immerged?? Once again, Phil shows his ability to write with clarity
and precision.

I have no interest in discussing these issues with the likes of Phil or
Larry, because they lack an honest perspective or approach.

For the record, I do not approve of the methods that Hannon Russell used
to negotiate a change in conditions with the USCF. That said, I believe
the USCF did about as well as it could in the re-negotiations. I abhor,
however, Parr's claims that there may have been kick-backs or the like as
a part of the new agreement.

Randy Bauer




  #9   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 04:36 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis

RANDY BAUER'S ELEGANT ENNUI

I have no interest in discussing these issues with the likes of Phil
or Larry, because they lack an honest perspective or approach. --
Honest Randy Bauer

On other forums the pretense of elegant ennui is
better done. Randy Bauer proclaims an absence of
interest in discussing issues with this writer and
Phil Innes even as he discusses them. He describes his
delight at Parr-free weeks even as he defines his time
away from this forum in terms of my person.

Tom Klem says something heartening: he has a
medical line of attack against his optical malady.

Tom objects to the Federation acceding to my
"intimidation," which would be heartening were I
capable of intimidating of them. Tom himself appears
to agree in a following sentence when he figures there
is not a chance in the world that the Federation
officers will reveal much. I think he's wrong there.
The heat will eventually cause some flitting about
like a drop of water on a stover burner.

By the way, I do not believe that there is the slightest possibility
that they will
offer anything in response to your queries, so most of my writings on
this subject are simply a diversion ... a way to pass the time, if you
will. -- Tom Klem

  #10   Report Post  
Old October 31st 05, 04:51 AM
Randy Bauer
 
Posts: n/a
Default Opacity in excelsis


wrote in message
oups.com...
RANDY BAUER'S ELEGANT ENNUI

I have no interest in discussing these issues with the likes of Phil
or Larry, because they lack an honest perspective or approach. --
Honest Randy Bauer

On other forums the pretense of elegant ennui is
better done. Randy Bauer proclaims an absence of
interest in discussing issues with this writer and
Phil Innes even as he discusses them. He describes his
delight at Parr-free weeks even as he defines his time
away from this forum in terms of my person.


Parr wrote: "If, if, if the reports are true, this deal reeks
of cronyism and, perhaps, of money changing hands.
I.e., payoffs."

This is not an honest perspective or approach. It suggests, without a
scintilla of evidence, that the re-negotiated deal with ChessCafe "reeks" of
illegal activity. That is a total disservice to the current Board. I have
no ulterior motive in defending the current Board -- most of them were my
political opponents in the last election. I have no motive in defending the
contract with ChessCafe -- I wasn't part of it while on the Board, and I do
not approve of Hannon Russell's tactics in re-negotiating with the USCF.
However, I do not believe that any of the Board, who I view as decent and
honest people working for the good of the USCF, should be tarred by Parr's
usual invective. They deserve better.

Randy Bauer


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



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:31 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