Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 12:57 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 570
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:
----------------------------------------
In a message dated 1/7/2009 8:51:21 P.M. Central Standard Time,
JABerryCG writes:

EB
I move the USCF EB approve 5 year bid for G/60 & G/30 Championships for
Sevan Muradian.

I move and vote yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/7/2009 9:01:18 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Paultruong writes:

I believe the voting process cannot be kept confidential. Therefore, I
copy it to binfo instead of confidential binfo.

I vote yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/7/2009 9:03:05 P.M. Central Standard Time,
SusanPolgar writes:

Yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/7/2009 9:23:12 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Chessoffice writes:

I don't think it's wise to commit these events to one organizer for that
long and keep others from bidding. I vote no.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/7/2009 9:30:44 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Paultruong writes:

I do NOT think you should vote in this motion since you clearly have a
direct conflict of interest from organizing major tournaments in Chicago.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 6:16:29 P.M. Central Standard Time,
SusanPolgar writes:

This is a gray area at best and I would prefer if you abstain on this
matter, especially when you organize one of your major for profit
tournaments in the same city.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 7:57:34 P.M. Central Standard Time,
randallhough writes:

I wouldn't dismiss Muradian's proposal out of hand, but I'm much more
concerned about his past efforts to undermine USCF than I am about any
(real or, more likely, perceived) conflicts of interest on Bill's part.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 10:12:55 P.M. Central Standard Time,
randybauer writes:

There are lots of grey areas.

Susan and Paul, didn't you vote on (or offer) motions relating to Texas
Tech and/or Lubbock to receive awards from the USCF last year? Don't
these meet this same threshold - voting on a city from which you profit
from your work?

I vote no.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 10:36:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Paultruong writes:

No, you are mistaken. It was actually the under the table deal between
Bill Goichberg and Jim Berry for various USCF awards for people he
selected way in advance. This includes the last minute negotiation to
switch awards to please a family member and a friend.

I specifically remember the reason Jim Berry gave for his brother
wanting the TD of the year award instead of organizer of the year award
and giving that award to another individual.

Do you want the entire world to know the reason given? If you wish, we
can open the closed session recording for all USCF members to listen to
understand how the EB members conduct business. The members can then
decide which one of us is correct.

This is also the same committee which includes a close friend of the
USCF President who purposely left off deserving nominees for political
reason. In fact, why don't we open ALL USCF Confidential BINFO and
recordings for all members to see how board members conduct business? We
are totally for opening up the confidential BINFO. Are you? Do you and
your board majority have something to hide?

And here is the actual vote:

EB08 049 Board - The Chess College of the Year award is given to the
University of Texas at Dallas. PASSED 4-0 2 with Susan Polgar and Paul
Truong abstaining.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Paultruong writes:

I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.

I vote yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:19:28 P.M. Central Standard Time,
SusanPolgar writes:

I vote yes.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Goichberg immediately rejected the motion.
Susan Polgar
http://www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com

SusanPolgar
MOD

Posts: 731
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Top
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about one of the board member move to ask Polgar and Truong to
produce all correspondence, email and otherwise between Polgat, Truong
and Muradian? That might be of interest. --- BL
  #2   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 01:16 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 114
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Jan 9, 6:57*am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
*From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:

In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,

Paultruong writes:

I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.

I vote yes.


Paraphrased: I move to examine all of USCF's confidential and
privileged documents and discussions regarding litigation involving my
wife.

Conflict of interest, much?


  #3   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 01:26 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 570
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

Wick wrote:
On Jan 9, 6:57 am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:

In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,

Paultruong writes:

I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.

I vote yes.


Paraphrased: I move to examine all of USCF's confidential and
privileged documents and discussions regarding litigation involving my
wife.

Conflict of interest, much?


Here's another idea. How about Susan and Paul open up the records of
all the money flowing into and out of their Florida corporation(s)?

Let's start a pool as to how many figures have pass though in the past
few years. I'm betting seven or eight digits.
  #4   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 02:22 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Rob Rob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,053
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Jan 9, 7:26*am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
Wick wrote:
On Jan 9, 6:57 am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
*From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:


In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,


Paultruong writes:


I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.


I vote yes.


Paraphrased: *I move to examine all of USCF's confidential and
privileged documents and discussions regarding litigation involving my
wife.


Conflict of interest, much?


Here's another idea. *How about Susan and Paul open up the records of
all the money flowing into and out of their Florida corporation(s)?

Let's start a pool as to how many figures have pass though in the past
few years. *I'm betting seven or eight digits.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Why?
  #5   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 02:32 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Jan 9, 8:16*am, Wick wrote:
On Jan 9, 6:57*am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:

*From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:


In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,


Paultruong writes:


I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.


I vote yes.


Paraphrased: *I move to examine all of USCF's confidential and
privileged documents and discussions regarding litigation involving my
wife.

Conflict of interest, much?


Isn't it the precise opposite of a conflict of interest - it is the
exactly same interest. At least, the same interest as the members &
delegates have in electing anyone.

There are those talking about 'transparency' but cannot think of any
actual thing which should be made transparent.

If the secret material is revealed the terrible situation will come
about that people will make up their own minds about wbho is decent,
legal, honest and truthful: a state which currently does not prevail.

For whatever reasons it has to maintain such secrecy, evidently USCF
are terrified that others will come to their own opinions in a
membership organization about the people who manage it.

[email protected]

Phil Innes
Vermont


  #6   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 02:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 570
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

Rob wrote:
On Jan 9, 7:26 am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
Wick wrote:
On Jan 9, 6:57 am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:
From Polgar's Chessdiscussion. See below for another proposal:
In a message dated 1/8/2009 11:03:58 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Paultruong writes:
I move that the USCF opens up all Confidential BINFO and Confidential
Recordings and make them available for all USCF members to examine.
I vote yes.
Paraphrased: I move to examine all of USCF's confidential and
privileged documents and discussions regarding litigation involving my
wife.
Conflict of interest, much?

Here's another idea. How about Susan and Paul open up the records of
all the money flowing into and out of their Florida corporation(s)?

Let's start a pool as to how many figures have pass though in the past
few years. I'm betting seven or eight digits.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Why?

Why?
  #8   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 03:01 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,390
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:22:04 -0800 (PST), Rob
wrote:


Here's another idea. *How about Susan and Paul open up the records of
all the money flowing into and out of their Florida corporation(s)?


Let's start a pool as to how many figures have pass though in the past
few years. *I'm betting seven or eight digits.


Why?


Does "Mitchell" translate into French as "Clouseau" ?
  #9   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 04:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 879
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Jan 9, 9:55*am, Mike Murray wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:32:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:
If the secret material is revealed the terrible situation will come
about that people will make up their own minds about wbho is decent,
legal, honest and truthful


If this were a video chat group, we could see whether Phil could keep
a straight face while posting such crap.


Murray-land, home of the euphemism.

For whatever reasons it has to maintain such secrecy, evidently USCF
are terrified that others will come to their own opinions in a
membership organization about the people who manage it.


"Secrecy" *instead of "confidentiality" -- what a difference a choice
of word makes. *


It makes absolutely no difference to members or delegates, since
whatever term is used it provides them absolutely no information.

Secondly, [laugh] who is to say that what is claimed confidential is
truly and necessarily so, under any normal business standards such as
personnel records, or contracts-in-progress?

The classification of secret or confidential material is itself a
secret matter - and after all, it is another word for the same thing
except in Murrayland, since he thinks they are different, and because
he evidently doesn't want people making up their own minds - look at
his last contribution...

Not even parents should discern whether their own children are well
placed with other adults, since those who do so [100% in my
experience] are 'bible thumpers', opined Murray on several occasions.

Murray introduced his own terms to muddle the waters, since his own
motives are hardly transparent. He spends all his net-time putting
down those who simply own their own opinions. He doesn't want members
and delegates to know what goes on behind the big doors. Presumably
the members themselves are MCO-thumpers?

Phil Innes
  #10   Report Post  
Old January 9th 09, 04:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Trolgar Games and An Alternative Motion Idea

On Jan 9, 7:57*am, "B. Lafferty" wrote:

How about one of the board member move to ask Polgar and Truong to
produce all correspondence, email and otherwise between Polgat, Truong
and Muradian? *That might be of interest. *--- BL


So when does their correspondence with Innes and Mitchell come out?

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
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 December 19th 05 05:36 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 December 4th 05 05:29 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 November 18th 05 05:36 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 November 3rd 05 05:30 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 October 19th 05 05:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:18 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