2007 Executive Board Election
Updated January 18, 2007
In 2007 the USCF will hold an election to elect three (3) members to the USCF Executive Board for terms of four (4) years beginning at the conclusion of the 2007 Delegates Meeting and one (1) member to complete the remaining two (2) years of Robert Tanner’s term, effective with the certification of election results.
The original Call for Nominations appeared in the November 2006 issue of Chess Life. An updated version of it is available HERE. A random drawing was held at the USCF office on January 18th to determine the order that the candidates will appear on the ballot.
The 10 candidates, in the order in which they will appear on the ballot, are: (4 will be elected)
1. Susan Polgar (Even though there are a number of good candidates, I recommend the names in bold in this election for their special skills that can help the USCF right now.)
2. Randy Bauer (Finance / budget expert)
3. Mike Goodall
4. Joe Lux
5. (Name not published here* – Banned from this blog for unethical and illegal conducts. I wrote a lot more about this individual on my US Chess Discussion Blog)
6. Stephen Jones
7. Paul Truong (Chess Marketing & PR expert)
8. Jim Bery
9. Don Schultz
10. Mikhail Korenman (Organizer, promoter, scholastic council member)
Candidate statements will appear in the April issue of Chess Life and each candidate will be allotted 1/2 page in the May and June issues of Chess Life, and will be posted on the USCF website.
The ballots will be distributed to voting members in June (the method of distribution still to be determined) and will be counted in July. The ballot counting will commence at the USCF offices in Crossville TN on Wednesday, July 25th. Any USCF member is welcome to observe the ballot counting.
Here* is the complete posting on the USCF website.
One matter that ought to occupy your immediate attention (after you get back from England) is the ballots. You stated that in the last election you didn’t get one nor did anybody at the Polgar Chess Center, either.
Hopefully everybody who wants to vote and is eligible to vote gets a ballot this time. But what measures are going to be taken to ensure that they do?
This week the USCF officials stated that they checked the ballot mailing against their list. I just wonder if the list they used to generate the ballots might have been faulty. I can understand their point that many people mistook their ballots for junk mail and just threw them away. However, it is difficult to believe that somebody like you would have done so.
(Typo in US Chess link)
http://www.uschess.blogspot.com/
I think the sanctions should be reversed. USCF should be more transparent and have less confidential stuff.
More fundamentally I think Susan is concentrating on the wrong issues. I respect her very much but the USCF is fundamentally broken and her approach to fixing it isn’t going to help that much. It’s not a matter of failure to accomplish goals, it’s that the goals themselves are wrong. I don’t think the USCF is worthy of Susan’s time and attention. I’m sure this blog has more readers than Chess Life has. And she gets more respect than the USCF will ever get. If she really wants this board membership them I’m sure the members will give it to her, but all I can say is I wish her good luck with it.
The mysterious candidate 5 must be Larry Flint…or Bobby Fischer…or Charles Manson.
Can I write in a candidate or two?
Why not Hilary Clinton?
I have to admit that I agree with the last anonymous poster. You are certainly entitled to ban Sam Sloan from your website and I would do the same based on his history of lying and personal attacks but not to include his name on the list of candidates strikes me as a bit juvenile. Also, it reminds me of the Harry Potter series where everyone except Harry refers to the evil Voldemort as “he who must not be named.” It actually invests him with more power. You should list his name along with the other candidates and invite people to google it. Let them find his website and then they will know exactly why they should not vote for him.
Who cares about politics? Let’s just play Chess!
😀
I agree. Most of us come to this blog for the great reporting of chess news, analysis of games, puzzles, etc. That said, I plan to vote for Susan Polgar, Paul Truong, Randy Bauer and Korenman because I think that they will help to move the USCF in the right direction.
Actually the financials and minutes of meetings are posted online. Go to the governance section of the USCF website.
I have to agree with the other posters. Not listing Mr Sloans name in a listing of candidates seems kind of childish na-na-nanana nonsense. In addition, Mr Truong will not get my vote for one reason. His incessant doomsday posts on the USCF forums after the last election made him look like a loon.
Susan,
I have to agree with some of the others that your refusal to even mention Sloan’s name looks petty and petulant. Since you’ve made professionalism a core of your campaign, actions like this can only weaken your case, however slightly. You should really edit the post to include Sloan’s name, but keep the link to your other blog.
I respect many of your opinions but that is my final decision. I will not promote his name in this forum. This is a man who lied about countless people and issues.
This is a man who should be arrested for his conducts. This is a man who my parents allowed to stay in our family home for a few days and he tried to make advances to me when I was a minor.
He was asked to leave and he was never invited back again. So he moved on and tried with others. If I would be living in the US at that time, I would have contacted the police for soliciting a minor.
This is a man who sued the USCF and its officers many times and forced everyone to waste time and money to defend his frivilous lawsuits.
He has enough support from other people who endorse these kind of behaviors. He will not have that here with me.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
I’m just curious as to what happened to the Saturday open forum discussion that was up yesterday. There were many intersting comments and posts. Did the trolls get loose after I left?
I fully agree with Susan about not including Sloan’s name. He doesn’t belong with other decent people in this forum. We must take a stance against criminals. We have to fight for our kids.
Why is GM William Lombardy ebuliently endorsing Mr Sloan for the Exec. Board of the USCF. He is a Catholic Priest no less. Take a look:
http://www.ishipress.com/lombardi.htm
What is happening here?
Hmmm…I’m leaning toward Randy, Mike Goodall, Susan, and I’m still undecided on my forth pick
I like Don Schulz’s style myself.
my last post was deleted
she listens to jack le moine aparently, and why he hasnt said this i dont know since he supports her.
my point and others have said it as well, is that Susan has been saying how she is going to have higher standards, to not throw dirt, to simply be the better person. Doing that also means acknowledging Sloan’s name. People here already know who you mean when you dont show the name anyways.
Being the better person means allowing Sloan to exist no matter how much you dont like it. You are glad to live in the USA now, well its freedom of speach here. Sure it is your blog and you can do as you wish, but its about being the better person to put up with it.
I think Sloan gets more interest from people because of his “Bas Boy” image. Uscf is messed up and everyone always points at Sloan. He is a mistake sure enough, but he’s rather convienient whipping boy for everyone else. I think he is rather irrelevant more than anything. In short putting up with Sloan is like dealing with stuff like white spremecy groups. We dont like them, but every understanding person in the USA knows that the extremists need their rights so that everyone else can make sure they have their own.
I’m white and better than everybody else, but its not cause i’m white. Perfection to me is a pretty Puerto Rican girl right from the island.
Anonymous said… “she listens to jack le moine aparently, and why he hasnt said this i dont know since he supports her.”
———–
While I’m extremely flattered, I’m afraid that Susan does not pay any more attention to what I put out on these blogs than she does to what you say or anybody else.
As I’ve grown more knowledgeable about chess affairs, I notice that I disagree with Susan on a number of things. One of them is the subject of your post.
Why I haven’t said anything about this matter, even though I agree with your side of the issue, is because Susan has announced that her decision is final. We can’t keep poking at our leaders at every single thing. We’ve got to look to the larger issues.
Susan Polgar represents all that is good in chess, commitment, leadership, and a track record of results. She has an idea of how to rescue the USCF and take chess to the next level. And that’s why we should keep our focus here even though we individually might not agree with every single thing she does.