Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 10:04 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?

CAN'T FIND THE LINK

I thought this straw vote was a bad idea from the start
and I said so because it lacked safeguards against ballot
stuffing. Indeed, it soon became evident that Neil Brennen
and a small band of Evans-haters were engaging in these
sleazy tactics. "Vote early and vote often" was their motto.

Nonetheless, at last count GM Evans was leading
154-139 with 10 abstentions -- not that anyone on the
board seems to care about axing the last independent
voice in their house organ.

Strangely enough, some critics thought that some sort
of scientific poll of Chess Life readers was required -- yet
they hinted the results shouldn't be binding on the editor.

Nor did Mike Nolan or any of the USCF loyalists
raise a stink about Paul Hoffman getting $50,000 for
a redesign of the magazine and website without any kind
of open bidding process. Indeed, Mr. Hoffman himself, who
proudly proclaims that he is "a mainstream journalist"
deign to be interviewed by GM Evans, one of the three
GMs he recommended firing from Chess Life. When
asked to see his written reports, Mr. Hoffman said that
he submitted none despite getting $10,000 in advance.

Neil Brennen went so far as to suggest that Mr. Hoffman
ignore legitimate questions from "hacks" like Larry Evans
and yours truly. Yes, "hack" was the word he used to
describe the 5-time U.S. Champion and Hall of Famer.

As usual, an iron curtain of silence has descended
from the USCF leadership. Board member Don Schultz
even claimed that the first he heard of the firings was
only after I reported it here!

One wonders whether the left hand knows what the
right hand is doing.

Instead of answering any questions, we are told to wait
until the June issue of Chess Life appears so that we can
all see for ourselves the wonders of the redesign.

And so it goes.

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 02:27 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Chess One
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?


wrote in message
ups.com...
CAN'T FIND THE LINK


I asked for the poll to be ended.

I thought this straw vote was a bad idea from the start
and I said so because it lacked safeguards against ballot
stuffing. Indeed, it soon became evident that Neil Brennen
and a small band of Evans-haters were engaging in these
sleazy tactics. "Vote early and vote often" was their motto.

Nonetheless, at last count GM Evans was leading
154-139 with 10 abstentions -- not that anyone on the
board seems to care about axing the last independent
voice in their house organ.

Strangely enough, some critics thought that some sort
of scientific poll of Chess Life readers was required -- yet
they hinted the results shouldn't be binding on the editor.


It is difficult to discover what anyone wants in CL - I can't get an opinion
from pro- or anti- Evans factions. Individuals who wrote here may be older,
and have their own chess libraries - but usually represent their own
interests. I don't think there exists any resentment from people whose own
interests are not represented by the mass of readers - but no one knows what
that general scope of interest is! In order to determine anything about the
mass of CL readers there is no alternative but to survey them.

One problem with the poll as-is may be that it doesn't describe Evans'
contribution within the whole range of CL material. That would be a better
test of what CL readers want to cover on a month-by-month basis. In other
words, to rank a range of columns.

But I don't think this is going to happen - and instead friends of
government are going to be paid for articles such as the board's retreat,
and the June issue will feature Jerry Hanken having a go at criticism of
politicians and writing about 'fundamental changes'.



Nor did Mike Nolan or any of the USCF loyalists
raise a stink about Paul Hoffman getting $50,000 for
a redesign of the magazine and website without any kind
of open bidding process. Indeed, Mr. Hoffman himself, who
proudly proclaims that he is "a mainstream journalist"
deign to be interviewed by GM Evans, one of the three
GMs he recommended firing from Chess Life. When
asked to see his written reports, Mr. Hoffman said that
he submitted none despite getting $10,000 in advance.


An even more painstaking comment was that Hoffman /had/ no written report.
So his presentation which gained him 10 grand in advance, and 50 grand
overall was verbal! Not a chart nor a statistic survives, and I somehow
doubt if there are minutes.

Neil Brennen went so far as to suggest that Mr. Hoffman
ignore legitimate questions from "hacks" like Larry Evans
and yours truly. Yes, "hack" was the word he used to
describe the 5-time U.S. Champion and Hall of Famer.

As usual, an iron curtain of silence has descended
from the USCF leadership. Board member Don Schultz
even claimed that the first he heard of the firings was
only after I reported it here!


Down there in the Cumberland gap the Pine Curtain casts a gloomy silence
round ChessHut. Fortunately these matters are being exampled and over the
coming month more American chess players will read them than the entire USCF
membership. They have to read them somewhere!

ACTION ITEM? What I understand as the implication is that Hoffman made a
presentation that did not address the firings - since otherwise Shultz would
have known of them. So what did he present? In what sense was he empowered
to make radical changes without a shred of ojective evidence?

The corollary is what non-objective basis there was for his actions - who
actually whispered in his ear? Apparently these were not board members, but
only apparently, since we can only eliminate Shultz. Did other board members
known of his intention, but not discuss it at board level while privately
instructing the new boy?

One wonders whether the left hand knows what the
right hand is doing.


"Speaking out of either side of the mouth". The irony is they fired the
straight talker, then spent another 10 grand on a retreat to listen to
'critics'. ROFL!!!

Instead of answering any questions, we are told to wait
until the June issue of Chess Life appears so that we can
all see for ourselves the wonders of the redesign.


And how exciting new graphic design will [email protected] If CL were actually purchased
as a normal magazine I could understand the need to make it attractive and
address the current 17 type sizes per page, and maybe decide on 2 or 3
column formats - though 50 grand is expensive advice!

But we are assured that Hoffman is a professional journalist, rather than a
graphic designer, so I assume that it is the /content/ which will be
different. Professional just means you get paid for work - like Ezra Pound
for Mussolini. He did a good job of it too, completely silencing all critics
of the regime. That might be professional, but is it good?

But who cares?

Members won't get to make any choices - not in what they are obliged to
read, and certainly not in any other form of representation - maybe we'll
soon see an article and 'reassessment' of the value of Chess City, and the
next 5-year plan [pipeline permitting], with tri-lingual
Spanish-Russian-English text.

Phil Innes

And so it goes.



  #4   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 05:01 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
jr
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?

*True to form ratpacker Neil Brennen -- who is not even in GM
Larry Evans' league -- is rooting for him to lose the straw vote.
So are Louis Blair and Taylor Kingston, no doubt.* (Parr)

I thought this straw vote was a bad idea from the start
and I said so because it lacked safeguards against ballot
stuffing. Indeed, it soon became evident that Neil Brennen
and a small band of Evans-haters were engaging in these
sleazy tactics. "Vote early and vote often" was their motto. (Parr)


*"It soon became evident"? That would mean that you
have evidence of this. Please show it to us, Larry. Please
show us this "evidence."* (Kingston

In an earlier post Parr made clear he had no evidence and
couldn't prove it. Nobody can. Kingston knows that. He can
play all his clever little word games, but "evident" simply means
obvious -- especially since the vote count was dramatically in
favor of Evans before Innes posted it on this forum.

It's OBVIOUS to me and, I daresay, OBVIOUS to most
reasonable people that Kingston, who inflated his rating by
about 500 points, is certainly among that "small band of
Evans-haters" who are rejoicing at his ouster from Chess Life.

I can't prove it either, but I believe that Blair, Brennen and
Kingston voted early and often against Evans, no matter how
early and often they deny it.

That's my opinion. If you don't like it, you can lump it.

  #5   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 05:18 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?


jr wrote:
*True to form ratpacker Neil Brennen -- who is not even in GM
Larry Evans' league -- is rooting for him to lose the straw vote.
So are Louis Blair and Taylor Kingston, no doubt.* (Parr)

I thought this straw vote was a bad idea from the start
and I said so because it lacked safeguards against ballot
stuffing. Indeed, it soon became evident that Neil Brennen
and a small band of Evans-haters were engaging in these
sleazy tactics. "Vote early and vote often" was their motto. (Parr)


*"It soon became evident"? That would mean that you
have evidence of this. Please show it to us, Larry. Please
show us this "evidence."* (Kingston

In an earlier post Parr made clear he had no evidence and
couldn't prove it. Nobody can. Kingston knows that. He can
play all his clever little word games, but "evident" simply means
obvious -- especially since the vote count was dramatically in
favor of Evans before Innes posted it on this forum.

It's OBVIOUS to me and, I daresay, OBVIOUS to most
reasonable people that Kingston, who inflated his rating by
about 500 points, is certainly among that "small band of
Evans-haters" who are rejoicing at his ouster from Chess Life.

I can't prove it either, but I believe that Blair, Brennen and
Kingston voted early and often against Evans, no matter how
early and often they deny it.

That's my opinion. If you don't like it, you can lump it.


Actually you will be the one lumping it. The column is being
discontinued regardless of what you or I think.

You also can't prove that no one padded the vote for the Yes side
either...

I am totally ambivalent on the issue and actually do like some of the
Evans' article. Tha facts are though, that the column is indeed
discontinued. This is similar to pawns. They can't be moved backwards
only forwards, for better or worse.

Ron Suarez



  #6   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 05:26 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?


So Phil, what were the final totals?

Inquiring minds want to know.

I believe that my personal were mirrored in the results. I feel that
there are some good merits of the column, while tiring of some of the
redundancies in it. I could easily see the column being kept and enjoy
78.687% of it and I could also easily see the column replaced with
something else of greater chess interest to the reading public.

We will see...

Ron Suarez

  #7   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 06:42 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Taylor Kingston
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?


jr wrote:
I thought this straw vote was a bad idea from the start
and I said so because it lacked safeguards against ballot
stuffing. Indeed, it soon became evident that Neil Brennen
and a small band of Evans-haters were engaging in these
sleazy tactics. "Vote early and vote often" was their motto. (Parr)


*"It soon became evident"? That would mean that you
have evidence of this. Please show it to us, Larry. Please
show us this "evidence."* (Kingston

In an earlier post Parr made clear he had no evidence and
couldn't prove it.


And yet he feels perfectly free to say it as if it were fact? What a
guy! All Parr need do is wave his magic wand, say "J'accuse" and
presto! -- Q.E.D. Meanwhile, he turns a blind eye to sock-puppet jr's
documented mendacity, and refuses to believe the least bad thing about
Sam Sloan unless he's convicted in a court of law. Wave that Double
Standard high!
Well, turnabout is fair play, right? Let's see, what might we accuse
Larry of, and assume him guilty until proven otherwise? How about:

The 9/11 attacks -- Notice that Larry made sure he was out of the
country that day!
The Larisa Yudina murder -- His anti-Ilyumzhinov spiel is an obvious
smokescreen.
The Nicole Simpson murder -- If OJ didn't do it, Larry must have!
The Tate/LaBianca murders -- Larry's connections to the Manson
"family" have never been fully explained.
The Martin Luther King assassination -- Larry's whereabouts on that
day have never been divulged, and his disparaging remarks about King
are a matter of public record.
Who killed Cock Robin? -- It's time to reopen this case, in view of
Larry's obvious role in so many other deaths.




Nobody can. Kingston knows that. He can
play all his clever little word games, but "evident" simply means
obvious -- especially since the vote count was dramatically in
favor of Evans before Innes posted it on this forum.

It's OBVIOUS to me and, I daresay, OBVIOUS to most
reasonable people that Kingston, who inflated his rating by
about 500 points, is certainly among that "small band of
Evans-haters" who are rejoicing at his ouster from Chess Life.

I can't prove it either, but I believe that Blair, Brennen and
Kingston voted early and often against Evans, no matter how
early and often they deny it.

That's my opinion. If you don't like it, you can lump it.


  #8   Report Post  
Old May 20th 06, 10:42 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Chess One
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?


wrote in message
oups.com...

So Phil, what were the final totals?


So, Ron, what do you care?

Inquiring minds want to know.


Whose? Not yours, unless...

Do you want CL readers to choose what they have to read? Yes or No?

I believe that my personal were mirrored in the results. I feel that
there are some good merits of the column, while tiring of some of the
redundancies in it. I could easily see the column being kept and enjoy
78.687% of it and I could also easily see the column replaced with
something else of greater chess interest to the reading public.

We will see...


No we won't! There is no chance of reinstating the column - which was killed
by secret political fiat.

The editor is totally unresponsive, and if you read the Parrot this week,
you can read Evans on Hoffman.

Phil Innes


Ron Suarez



  #9   Report Post  
Old May 21st 06, 12:00 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
jr
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?

*So Phil, what were the final totals?* (Suarez)

*Nonetheless, at last count GM Evans was leading
154-139 with 10 abstentions -- not that anyone on the
board seems to care about axing the last independent
voice in their house organ.* (Parr)

  #10   Report Post  
Old May 21st 06, 02:08 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Evans poll down?

So, Ron, what do you care?

I would like to see what results you had. I think the vote padding, if
it existed, was probably non-consequential and most likely evened out
by either side's doing it.

By the way, I am equivocal on the matter. I do like GM Evans and his
writings. I also do think his column needed a bit of trimming of the
redundancies. While I was not there and privy to all the details, I
most likely would not have cancelled him totally. I would have talked
with him to edit the content for saliability in today's chess scene. I
probably would have looked to cut other things before his column if I
needed space for other things. I am not privy though to the dealings
and details of the dude that is editor.


Inquiring minds want to know.


Whose? Not yours, unless...

Do you want CL readers to choose what they have to read? Yes or No?


Sure I do, why not? I don't know though that they don't. I have read
a lot of complaints of this column on the internet. As I stated above
and in other posts, I liked about 80% of GM Evans' column. I do agree
that he was and is without graft and calls the shots the way he sees
them.

I believe that my personal were mirrored in the results. I feel that
there are some good merits of the column, while tiring of some of the
redundancies in it. I could easily see the column being kept and enjoy
78.687% of it and I could also easily see the column replaced with
something else of greater chess interest to the reading public.

We will see...


No we won't! There is no chance of reinstating the column - which was killed
by secret political fiat.


Why can't we go back and correct errors? I think if the June product
does not come up to standards and if there is enough outcry, the
Delegates Meeting may force the Admin dudes to bring GM Evans back.


The editor is totally unresponsive, and if you read the Parrot this week,
you can read Evans on Hoffman.


Fair enough, I'll go read it. I didn't have a chance this week to read
it. I will.

Ron Suarez

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
New editor fires GM Evans! [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 31 April 10th 06 12:32 AM
New editor fires GM Evans! [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 30 April 10th 06 12:32 AM
Parr on Winter [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 39 April 6th 06 09:05 PM
Parr on Winter [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 38 April 6th 06 09:05 PM
New editor fires GM Evans! [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 182 April 5th 06 09:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:23 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