Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 04:46 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,misc.kids,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem

Oldtimer, whose real name is Todd Miller, has posted the following
over on the USCF Issues Forum:

[quote="oldtimer"]I believe there are times when it is appropriate to
delve into a board members personal life. For example, if there is a
coach who the authorities have forbidden him from being alone with his
own children as it puts a bad face on the USCF and the USCF should be
advertising such a person as a coach. But I agree that merely rumor or
speculation without any evidence is inappropriate. Unfortunately, in
this censored forum frequently only the false rumor and speculation is
what remains. Other examples might include when the board member
accuses members of being deranged on some other censored website or
when the board member publishes phony emails under a pseudonym.[/
quote]

The casual reader will naturally assume that this is just a
hypothetical case. However, this is a real case. Judge Mildred Negron
specifically ordered that Paul Truong is not to be left along with
Susan Polgar's children. The Court order states:

RESPONDENT MOTHER IS NOT TO LEAVE CHILDREN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
HER PARAMOUR, KNOWN AS "PAUL" PENDING FURTHER INVESTIGATION. INGESTION
OF HOT SAUCE IS NOT TO BE USED AS A FORM OF DISCIPLINE. ADJOURN DATE;
DECEMBER 19, 2006.
PT-42

Dated: November 15, 2006

Susan Polgar repeatedly on her blog states that this is a personal
matter and the Executive Board has no business being involved in this.

However, do not the members of the USCF and in particular the parents
of our 30,000 scholastic members have a right to know that a member of
the board of the USCF is under court order not to be left alone with
his own step-children?

Next, note how Todd Miller carefully phrases his words. This is
because the USCF Issues Forum is heavily censored by known fanatical
Polgaristas Herbert Rodney Vaughn and Tim Sawmiller. Todd Miller knows
that if he comes out and writes that his remarks refer specifically to
Paul Truong, he will be censored and more than that he will likely be
banned from posting there altogether. Anybody familiar with these
cases knows that all three examples provided by Todd Miller in his
quote above refer to Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, who have done all
those things. Now, the other USCF Members who post there are not
allowed to know about these problems unless they happen to come over
here. Many if not most of the regulars over here never come here so
they will never know about this.

I think an appropriate analogy is the examples of Catholic Priests
who, when caught in acts of pedophilia, were simply transferred to
another parish where they could do it again and again and keep being
transferred and their new supervisors could never know why they had
been transferred there, and thus would not be alerted to the serious
problem.

Now, has not the USCF put itself in serious jeopardy of a major
lawsuit by a parent who only after the fact finds out that Paul Truong
is considered by the courts to be a danger to his own children? Since
the pro-Polgar moderators, Vaughn and Sawmiller, were appointed by
Bill Hall and Bill Goichberg for the specific purpose of censoring any
anti-Polgar remarks, are not they in jeopardy and putting the USCF in
jeopardy by leaving Vaughn and Sawmiller in positions where they can
keep the membership from finding out the true background of Truong and
Polgar?

Sam Sloan

  #2   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 05:14 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 782
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem

Sam,

You have real issues to deal with involving impersonation. The issue
of what kind of a parent anyone is has absolutely no relevance to the
case. Look at it this way.

If the fake Sam Sloan posts were by Truong, everyone seems to be in
agreement that he must resign, no matter what goes on within the
family.

If the fake Sam Sloan posts were not by Truong, nobody would support
an investigation into the family to determine what happens within the
family.

Why do you fritter away the opportunity to take the high moral ground,
and bring in something which will only be a distraction taking
attention from the real issue?

I think that it is absurd to justify this on the basis of posing a
danger as a chess coach. I believe lots of children have been coached
by Polgar, and there have been no incidents. I would have no problem
sending my own children for such coaching, even though I believe that
Truong made the fake Sam Sloan posts.

Try to stay focused on the real issue; it will be good for the case,
for your image, and is the morally correct thing to do.

Jerry Spinrad


On Apr 23, 10:46*am, samsloan wrote:
Oldtimer, whose real name is Todd Miller, has posted the following
over on the USCF Issues Forum:

[quote="oldtimer"]I believe there are times when it is appropriate to
delve into a board members personal life. *For example, *if there is a
coach who the authorities have forbidden him from being alone with his
own children as it puts a bad face on the USCF and the USCF should be
advertising such a person as a coach. But I agree that merely rumor or
speculation without any evidence is inappropriate. *Unfortunately, in
this censored forum frequently only the false rumor and speculation is
what remains. *Other examples might include when the board member
accuses members of being deranged on some other censored website or
when the board member publishes phony emails under a pseudonym.[/
quote]

The casual reader will naturally assume that this is just a
hypothetical case. However, this is a real case. Judge Mildred Negron
specifically ordered that Paul Truong is not to be left along with
Susan Polgar's children. The Court order states:

*RESPONDENT MOTHER IS NOT TO LEAVE CHILDREN UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
HER PARAMOUR, KNOWN AS "PAUL" PENDING FURTHER INVESTIGATION. INGESTION
OF HOT SAUCE IS NOT TO BE USED AS A FORM OF DISCIPLINE. ADJOURN DATE;
DECEMBER 19, 2006.
PT-42

Dated: November 15, 2006

Susan Polgar repeatedly on her blog states that this is a personal
matter and the Executive Board has no business being involved in this.

However, do not the members of the USCF and in particular the parents
of our 30,000 scholastic members have a right to know that a member of
the board of the USCF is under court order not to be left alone with
his own step-children?

Next, note how Todd Miller carefully phrases his words. This is
because the USCF Issues Forum is heavily censored by known fanatical
Polgaristas Herbert Rodney Vaughn and Tim Sawmiller. Todd Miller knows
that if he comes out and writes that his remarks refer specifically to
Paul Truong, he will be censored and more than that he will likely be
banned from posting there altogether. Anybody familiar with these
cases knows that all three examples provided by Todd Miller in his
quote above refer to Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, who have done all
those things. Now, the other USCF Members who post there are not
allowed to know about these problems unless they happen to come over
here. Many if not most of the regulars over here never come here so
they will never know about this.

I think an appropriate analogy is the examples of Catholic Priests
who, when caught in acts of pedophilia, were simply transferred to
another parish where they could do it again and again and keep being
transferred and their new supervisors could never know why they had
been transferred there, and thus would not be alerted to the serious
problem.

Now, has not the USCF put itself in serious jeopardy of a major
lawsuit by a parent who only after the fact finds out that Paul Truong
is considered by the courts to be a danger to his own children? Since
the pro-Polgar moderators, Vaughn and Sawmiller, were appointed by
Bill Hall and Bill Goichberg for the specific purpose of censoring any
anti-Polgar remarks, are not they in jeopardy and putting the USCF in
jeopardy by leaving Vaughn and Sawmiller in positions where they can
keep the membership from finding out the true background of Truong and
Polgar?

Sam Sloan


  #3   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 05:27 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 4
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem

Ha, ahahaaa, since when does Sloan see the virtue of taking the high moral
ground! You give way too much credit.
  #4   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 07:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,misc.kids,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 130
Default Stop LYING about Truong And Polgar

All other matters aside Sam I must say that I would
feel ALOT more comfortable bringing my children to
Susan and Paul for chess coaching (I doubt I would
be at all worried), especially my daughter, then I
would bringing them too you for the same
(like over my dead body, would never happen!)

Once again this has nothing whatsoever to do with
the USCF which seems to be stuck in a quagmire
of it's own making while the leadership does all it
can to suck the last vestigaes of life from it's dying
husk.
  #5   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 07:22 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,misc.kids,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem

On Apr 23, 11:14 am, "
wrote:
Sam,

You have real issues to deal with involving impersonation. The issue
of what kind of a parent anyone is has absolutely no relevance to the
case. Look at it this way.

If the fake Sam Sloan posts were by Truong, everyone seems to be in
agreement that he must resign, no matter what goes on within the
family.

If the fake Sam Sloan posts were not by Truong, nobody would support
an investigation into the family to determine what happens within the
family.

Why do you fritter away the opportunity to take the high moral ground,
and bring in something which will only be a distraction taking
attention from the real issue?

I think that it is absurd to justify this on the basis of posing a
danger as a chess coach. I believe lots of children have been coached
by Polgar, and there have been no incidents. I would have no problem
sending my own children for such coaching, even though I believe that
Truong made the fake Sam Sloan posts.

Try to stay focused on the real issue; it will be good for the case,
for your image, and is the morally correct thing to do.

Jerry Spinrad


I am sorry but you have not addressed Oldtimer's basic point, which is
censorship.

If you, with full knowledge of the facts, decide that you want to have
your children trained in chess by Paul Truong and you have no problem
with this, then you have every right to chose him as your chess coach.

However, suppose that you did not know about this court order
prohibiting him from being left alone with Susan Polgar's children and
suppose that the reason that you did not about it because the board
has imposed censorship by appointing known Polgaristas Truong and
Sawmiller as moderators.

Now, let us say that something unfortunate happens. Would you not
expect for the USCF to be sued for keeping this information secret
through the moderators?

Let us take a real case: Last year one of the most prominent chess
coaches and a famous author and teacher of chess was convicted of
child molestation and sentenced to long years in prison.

About three years ago a USCF delegate and state chess association
president was convicted of rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 20
years in prison.

Then there was another chess teacher who last year was convicted of
incest with all his daughters.

The USCF has 86,000 members. Naturally, with such a large membership,
a certain percentage will get in trouble with the law. Nobody is
blaming the USCF for these incidents.

However, in the first case above, the chess coach in question had been
arrested for doing exactly the same thing in another state years
earlier. The jury had found him not guilty. That is why he was free to
do it again. This time he did not get away.

Now, suppose that in that case the reason the chess playing public had
not known was solely because the USCF Executive Board had imposed
censorship, saying that nothing bad could be said about that person.
Do not you think that the children molested by that chess coach would
have sued the USCF?

That is the reason why the censorship being imposed on the USCF Issues
Forum under which nobody is allowed to say anything of a negative
nature about Polgar, Truong or any other board member is a recipe for
disaster.

Sam Sloan


  #6   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 09:35 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,misc.kids,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:55 PM, wrote:

Sam, how about you put up the data about when the order was
vacated with consent of the person who filed the complaint in the
first place?

This is a smear tactic Sam - there is no other way to put it.
Again, take me off your email list. It is times like these that
create your loss of any credibility when there are valid issues of
concern.

Donna


From what I understand, it was NOT Susan's ex-husband who filed the
complaint. In fact he did not even know about it.

It was the guardian ad litem, and a court appointed investigator who
made the complaint. If you are familiar with the way the court system
works, a mere opposing party would not be able to bring in teachers,
nurses, doctors, and the school principal who became involved in this.
It must have been an official person such as the CPS who initiated
these proceedings.

Sam Sloan
  #7   Report Post  
Old April 23rd 08, 11:02 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,misc.kids,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 58
Default Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem


"Ray Gordon, who admits in her book he is not the creator of the "pivot""
wrote in message
om...
Also, isn't this the federation that made a big stink out of Sloan's
personal conduct, or, to a lesser extent, mine?

Why are you an issue at all. You are not a member of the USCF, and are only
on this forum because they did not anticipate that you would be here
pontificating, and didn't build in a mechanism for banning you. You
complain about things that are going on internal to the organization, but
you do not support it with your dues. Why should anyone care what you
think?



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
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
Oldtimer puts his finger on the Censorship Problem samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 4 April 23rd 08 11:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:21 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