Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 03:38 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 36
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?

According to recent Chess Life maagazines (see, for example, March Chess
Life page 7. Life Memberships apparently may not be getting Chess Life
magazines in the mail after 2010.

This is a reasonable interpretation of the statement "Premium benefits for
life and sustaining member are only guaranteed through 2010" on that page,
along with a classification of a life membership as a non-premium
membership.

That would be a surprising kick in the teeth of all those members over the
years who believed in the USCF enough to pay double the annual rate, or
whatever lump sum was required by the USCF at any given time.

Although this would seem a fascinating way of generating excess cash flow,
it runs counter to what I believed I was getting when I became a Life Member
a few decades ago. I did not pay all that money just to be able to play in
tournaments. I paid to also get the magazine, and if and when I get ahold of
some of my back issues from the attic, I am sure I will find that my
expectations were most reasonable. I believe that this was also the
expectations of the ten thousand or so (I believe) current Life Members.
Now, some will argue that online access is the same as a physical magzine. I
wish them luck.

In fact, by making these repeated assertions, I do wonder if we are not
seeing what is called "anticipatory breach of contract."

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_...ipatory_breach

Also, there are certain civil wrongs dealing with interference with
contractual relationships, and I do wonder if any out there might be
responsible for such a breach, if it exists.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intenti...al_relation s

I really do wonder if 10,000 people (or maybe even 5,000 people) are not
going to notice that all of a sudden they have stopped delivering their
Chess Life.

Of course, this is all apart from the sheer stupidity of no longer having a
monthly connection to the organization with lists of tournaments and the
like. But that's a whole other matter.

What do you all think You think someone on Rector street or in Cookeville
will be interested in this one?


  #2   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 04:31 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,194
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?



Israel Silverman wrote:
According to recent Chess Life maagazines (see, for example, March Chess
Life page 7. Life Memberships apparently may not be getting Chess Life
magazines in the mail after 2010.

This is a reasonable interpretation of the statement "Premium benefits for
life and sustaining member are only guaranteed through 2010" on that page,
along with a classification of a life membership as a non-premium
membership.

That would be a surprising kick in the teeth of all those members over the
years who believed in the USCF enough to pay double the annual rate, or
whatever lump sum was required by the USCF at any given time.

Although this would seem a fascinating way of generating excess cash flow,
it runs counter to what I believed I was getting when I became a Life Member
a few decades ago. I did not pay all that money just to be able to play in
tournaments. I paid to also get the magazine, and if and when I get ahold of
some of my back issues from the attic, I am sure I will find that my
expectations were most reasonable. I believe that this was also the
expectations of the ten thousand or so (I believe) current Life Members.
Now, some will argue that online access is the same as a physical magzine. I
wish them luck.

In fact, by making these repeated assertions, I do wonder if we are not
seeing what is called "anticipatory breach of contract."

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_...ipatory_breach

Also, there are certain civil wrongs dealing with interference with
contractual relationships, and I do wonder if any out there might be
responsible for such a breach, if it exists.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intenti...al_relation s

I really do wonder if 10,000 people (or maybe even 5,000 people) are not
going to notice that all of a sudden they have stopped delivering their
Chess Life.

Of course, this is all apart from the sheer stupidity of no longer having a
monthly connection to the organization with lists of tournaments and the
like. But that's a whole other matter.

What do you all think You think someone on Rector street or in Cookeville
will be interested in this one?



I think we've had far too much hysteria on this already. The EB has
repeatedly stated that there are no current plans to stop sending CL
to life members. Could they do so at some time in the future? Yes.
Could they stop publishing the magazine completely? Yes. Is it likely?
No. The only thing the USCF is planning to do at present is to send a
form letter to life members asking if they still _want_ to receive a
printed magazine. (Even if they don't., they can still read it on line
in PDF format.)
  #3   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 06:15 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?

On Mar 7, 10:38*pm, "Israel Silverman"
wrote:
According to recent Chess Life maagazines (see, for example, March Chess
Life page 7. Life Memberships apparently may not be getting Chess Life
magazines in the mail after 2010.

This is a reasonable interpretation of the statement "Premium benefits for
life and sustaining member are only guaranteed through 2010" on that page,
along with a classification of a life membership as a non-premium
membership.

That would be a surprising kick in the teeth of all those members over the
years who believed in the USCF enough to pay double the annual rate, or
whatever lump sum was required by the USCF at any given time.

Although this would seem a fascinating way of generating excess cash flow,
it runs counter to what I believed I was getting when I became a Life Member
a few decades ago. I did not pay all that money just to be able to play in
tournaments. I paid to also get the magazine, and if and when I get ahold of
some of my back issues from the attic, I am sure I will find that my
expectations were most reasonable. I believe that this was also the
expectations of the ten thousand or so (I believe) current Life Members.
Now, some will argue that online access is the same as a physical magzine.. I
wish them luck.

In fact, by making these repeated assertions, I do wonder if we are not
seeing what is called "anticipatory breach of contract."

Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_contract#Anticipatory_breach

Also, there are certain civil wrongs dealing with interference with
contractual relationships, and I do wonder if any out there might be
responsible for such a breach, if it exists.

Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_interference_with_contractua....

I really do wonder if 10,000 people (or maybe even 5,000 people) are not
going to notice that all of a sudden they have stopped delivering their
Chess Life.

Of course, this is all apart from the sheer stupidity of no longer having a
monthly connection to the organization with lists of tournaments and the
like. But that's a whole other matter.

What do you all think You think someone on Rector street or in Cookeville
will be interested in this one?


I have been complaining about this since the President announced that
they were going to do this last July.

Nobody noticed then. Will anybody else notice now?

Sam Sloan
  #4   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 08:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,194
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?



samsloan wrote:
On Mar 7, 10:38*pm, "Israel Silverman"
wrote:
According to recent Chess Life maagazines (see, for example, March Chess
Life page 7. Life Memberships apparently may not be getting Chess Life
magazines in the mail after 2010.

This is a reasonable interpretation of the statement "Premium benefits for
life and sustaining member are only guaranteed through 2010" on that page,
along with a classification of a life membership as a non-premium
membership.

That would be a surprising kick in the teeth of all those members over the
years who believed in the USCF enough to pay double the annual rate, or
whatever lump sum was required by the USCF at any given time.

Although this would seem a fascinating way of generating excess cash flow,
it runs counter to what I believed I was getting when I became a Life Member
a few decades ago. I did not pay all that money just to be able to play in
tournaments. I paid to also get the magazine, and if and when I get ahold of
some of my back issues from the attic, I am sure I will find that my
expectations were most reasonable. I believe that this was also the
expectations of the ten thousand or so (I believe) current Life Members..
Now, some will argue that online access is the same as a physical magzine. I
wish them luck.

In fact, by making these repeated assertions, I do wonder if we are not
seeing what is called "anticipatory breach of contract."

Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_contract#Anticipatory_breach

Also, there are certain civil wrongs dealing with interference with
contractual relationships, and I do wonder if any out there might be
responsible for such a breach, if it exists.

Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_interference_with_contractua...

I really do wonder if 10,000 people (or maybe even 5,000 people) are not
going to notice that all of a sudden they have stopped delivering their
Chess Life.

Of course, this is all apart from the sheer stupidity of no longer having a
monthly connection to the organization with lists of tournaments and the
like. But that's a whole other matter.

What do you all think You think someone on Rector street or in Cookeville
will be interested in this one?


I have been complaining about this since the President announced that
they were going to do this last July.

Nobody noticed then. Will anybody else notice now?

Sam Sloan



Going to do what, Sam? Publish that line in Chess Life? Try washing
your brain with lye and read this again: No one has yet proposed
ceasing to send CL to life members. They might if the USCF were to run
out of money in 2010, but in that case the USCF might stop doing a lot
of things. No wonder we have people getting hysterical, with nitwits
like you fanning the flames.
  #5   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 11:53 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 36
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?


wrote in message
...

I think we've had far too much hysteria on this already. The EB has
repeatedly stated that there are no current plans to stop sending CL
to life members.


Then why does the magazine say what it does? Classifying Life Members as
non-premium, and then saying that USCF won't "guarantee" them "premium"
benefits?

Maye the USCF has no "current" plan to stop sending those 10,000 members a
magazine, but to me it sure seems that they have a *current* plan to
possibly stop sending them the magazine, and are trying to lay the
groundwork for doing so. Pity many lLife Members are actually not senile and
actually have old copires of Chess Life where, I htink, it's clear that they
were supposed to get a magazine sent to them.

Could they do so at some time in the future? Yes.


USCF can do anything. Question is, can it legally do so?

Could they stop publishing the magazine completely? Yes. Is it likely?
No.


Straw man, and irrelevant.

The only thing the USCF is planning to do at present is to send a
form letter to life members asking if they still _want_ to receive a
printed magazine. (Even if they don't., they can still read it on line
in PDF format.)


That's nice, but I just wonder why USCF has to say *now* that it's not
guaranteeing a print magazine to Life Members if it will only stop sending
the magazine to those who decide not to get it. Doesn't make much sense if
your explanation is correct now, does it?




  #6   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 11:55 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 36
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?


"samsloan" wrote in message
...

I have been complaining about this since the President announced that
they were going to do this last July.


Nobody noticed then. Will anybody else notice now?


Sam Sloan


As usual with the USCF, no one notices until it's done. Frankly, I'm quite
impressed that there was even one thing that the USCF thought about that
exceeded a completion date expending past the following full moon. Pity it
had to be this.


  #7   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 01:01 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,194
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?


Israel Silverman wrote:
wrote in message
...

I think we've had far too much hysteria on this already. The EB has
repeatedly stated that there are no current plans to stop sending CL
to life members.


Then why does the magazine say what it does? Classifying Life Members as
non-premium, and then saying that USCF won't "guarantee" them "premium"
benefits?

Maye the USCF has no "current" plan to stop sending those 10,000 members a
magazine, but to me it sure seems that they have a *current* plan to
possibly stop sending them the magazine, and are trying to lay the
groundwork for doing so. Pity many lLife Members are actually not senile and
actually have old copires of Chess Life where, I htink, it's clear that they
were supposed to get a magazine sent to them.

Could they do so at some time in the future? Yes.


USCF can do anything. Question is, can it legally do so?

Could they stop publishing the magazine completely? Yes. Is it likely?
No.


Straw man, and irrelevant.

The only thing the USCF is planning to do at present is to send a
form letter to life members asking if they still _want_ to receive a
printed magazine. (Even if they don't., they can still read it on line
in PDF format.)


That's nice, but I just wonder why USCF has to say *now* that it's not
guaranteeing a print magazine to Life Members if it will only stop sending
the magazine to those who decide not to get it. Doesn't make much sense if
your explanation is correct now, does it?



My "explanation" is a report of the facts. Since by your own account
you're completely ignorant of what's going on, you are hardly in a
position to dispute it. However, there is, in fact, a reason the USCF
did it that way. The USCF Bylaws say that Life Members get the same
deal as "Regular" members. Last August, the membership categories were
shuffled, so that "Regular" members no longer get a printed magazine,
while "Premium" members (who pay about the same amount "Regular"
members used to) do receive it. The line you're making such a big deal
about was intended to tell Life Members that they _would_ continue to
receive CL, even though "Regular" members would not.

The letter to Life Members asking if they still want to receive a
printed magazine is a separate matter. They're hoping to save some
money by finding life members who are a) dead, b) out of chess, or c)
prefer to read the magazine on line.

And do you really think bitching about it here is going to do you any
good? Talk to one of your Delegates. Or run for Delegate yourself.

  #8   Report Post  
Old March 8th 09, 01:49 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 36
Default USCF Possible Anticipatory Breach of Contract?


wrote in message
...

Israel Silverman wrote:
wrote in message
...


That's nice, but I just wonder why USCF has to say *now* that it's not
guaranteeing a print magazine to Life Members if it will only stop
sending
the magazine to those who decide not to get it. Doesn't make much sense
if
your explanation is correct now, does it?



My "explanation" is a report of the facts. Since by your own account
you're completely ignorant of what's going on, you are hardly in a
position to dispute it. However, there is, in fact, a reason the USCF
did it that way. The USCF Bylaws say that Life Members get the same
deal as "Regular" members. Last August, the membership categories were
shuffled, so that "Regular" members no longer get a printed magazine,
while "Premium" members (who pay about the same amount "Regular"
members used to) do receive it. The line you're making such a big deal
about was intended to tell Life Members that they _would_ continue to
receive CL, even though "Regular" members would not.


My knowledge begins and ends in what I see in print in Chess Life. Noy by
what anyone associated with the USCF says, which I've found has a
distressing quality of letting me down.

That suffices for me to ask.

As for your "report of the facts" at the time I bought a life membership,
and at or about the same time many of the 10,.000 others did, my
recollection is that there was one general higher category of membership
(call it "regular," "stanard" or "prunes") and that membership was sold to
me was for life, my life, and it guaranteed copies of chess life and the
right to play in tournaments. If you think someone will convince a judge or
jury that people spent $1,000 or whatever just for the right to play in
tournaments, methinks you have another think coming.

As for the nice little game of shuffling life members into a lower "regular"
category, I don't think that will fly either.

Finally, as for your last point, that "The line you're making such a big
deal
about was intended to tell Life Members that they _would_ continue to
receive CL, even though "Regular" members would not." is contradicted by the
plain words themselves.

The plain words, again, say nothing about life members, in their new
category of being "regular members," continuing to get the print Chess Life
past 2010. If necessary, I will admit that I am not as clever or inventive
as you. Do show me how you prod the existing words into saying that.


The letter to Life Members asking if they still want to receive a
printed magazine is a separate matter. They're hoping to save some
money by finding life members who are a) dead, b) out of chess, or c)
prefer to read the magazine on line.


I didn't raise that. Someone else or you did.

And do you really think bitching about it here is going to do you any
good? Talk to one of your Delegates. Or run for Delegate yourself.


No, thanks.


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
Letter from the Lawfirm of Loney and Looney Demanding that the USCFMove to Crossville samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 4 January 29th 09 01:29 AM
Letter from the Lawfirm of Loney and Looney Demanding that the USCFMove to Crossville samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 4 January 29th 09 01:29 AM
First Draft: Blue Book Encyclopedia of Chess samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 8 February 29th 08 03:55 PM
"half-truths, unsupported rumors and paranoid fantasies" samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 June 23rd 07 02:06 AM
$am $loan for USCF Executive Board Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 10 May 2nd 06 02:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:49 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