I recently read the latest unofficial summary of the last board meeting in Monrovia, California. There were many ridiculous items that the entire board had waste time on due to one destructive board member. To make matters worse, the board is planning to schedule to have their next board meeting at the National Elementary Championship in Nashville, Tennessee later this May. Here is the link to the summary: http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/unofficialsummaryoffeb07uscfebmeeting.pdf
This is the exact quote: “The next Executive Board meeting, originally scheduled for the first weekend in May has been rescheduled to be heldthe second weekend in May in Nashville’s Grand Ole Opry Hotel, the site of the National Scholastics.”
I, as a Chess Mom, will not bring either of my children to this event if the board decides to play politics and have their next meeting at this National Scholastic Event. Mr. Sloan should not be anywhere near the children, especially when he just posted a link to a porn site where USCF young members have full access to. So much for putting the best interest of chess and our kids first instead of politics as usual! If the board wants to hold their meeting in Nashville, fine. But it should not be in the same venue as a National Scholastic Event.
I have banned Mr. Sam Sloan to the Polgar Chess Center. I have banned Mr. Sam Sloan, a current USCF board member, to all events organized by the Susan Polgar Foundation. I would never allow my children to be in the same room as Mr. Sam Sloan for security reasons. This is a man with a very disturbing past. I hope that parents will write to the Executive Director Bill Hall (bhall@uschess.org), Scholastic Director Jerry Nash (jnash@uschess.org) and USCF President Bill Goichberg (chessoffice@aol.com) and tell them not to involve our children with their politics!
Shortly after this post, USCF President Bill Goichberg posted the following response:
“At the last meeting I objected to meeting in Nashville, and as a result the date and location of the meeting were unresolved when we adjourned. About ten minutes after adjournment, most of the Board unofficially agreed to meet the first week in May in either Florida or Crossville. Recently there has been a new development; Frank Berry has invited the Board to meet at the US Championship in Oklahoma. I think this is a wonderful idea and much prefer it to meeting two weeks earlier in Florida or Tennessee. Bill Goichberg”
Thank you Bill for the correct objection. It is important to put the best interest of chess and our children before questionable politics.
Here is another response by USCF President Bill Goichberg:
“Hi Jack,
Truth is, the main reason I objected was that I knew bringing Sam to a National Scholastic was a poor idea, but I didn’t want to say so in open session as he was relatively well behaved at the meeting and it might have appeared to some as an unprovoked attack. After we adjourned and I told the other Board members this, they readily agreed that meeting in Nashville was out. You can post this on Susan’s blog if you wish.
Thanks for writing,
Bill Goichberg”
Correctly done Susan!
Your information is incorrect. There are no plans to have the Board’s next meeting in Nashville. My preference is Boca Raton but more likely than not, it will be in Oklahoma.
Don Schultz
So…what exactly did this Sam Sloan do wrong?
You seem not to like him very much, Susan…?!
Ann
“A number of people told me” – you should stay away from this kind of staement. Just gives the bad guys something to jump on.
“the board is planning to schedule to have their next board meeting at the National Elementary Championship in Nashville, Tennessee later this May” – was this in the unofficial summary you mentioned or just heresay? Again, stick to facts. It’a the only way to beat these jokers. If it was in the summary, then I don’t understand Schultz’s comment at all. If it wasn’t, then it shouldn’t be stated as fact.
I also can’t help but wonder why the current board is fighting so hard. Has an independent financial audit ever been done? Are funds being embezzeled? Is this why the USCF is almost broke? Is this the reason why they will fight to the end, to cover the corruption? You just have to wonder what the hell is really going on over there….
This is in the board transcript. So ChessDon misled the members again.
“The next Executive Board meeting, originally scheduled for the first weekend in May has been rescheduled to be held the second weekend in May in Nashville’s Grand Ole Opry Hotel, the site of the National Scholastics.”
http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/unofficialsummaryoffeb07uscfebmeeting.pdf
Thanks for looking out for all of us Susan! Thank you!!!
Mr. Schultz said that Susan is lying. I read the same thing Susan read on the USCF EB meeting transcript from Monrovia, CA. So who’s lying?
It seems that the board made a stupid decision and changed their minds because of the potential backlash.
I have a rather low opinion of Don Schultz, for reasons previously articulated elsewhere.
Having said that, I think that many of the comments upthread with respect to Mr. Schultz are wildly inappropriate, and should be deleted.
Bill,
I removed 6 posts already. Please let me know which other do you think I should remove.
Thanks!
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
Amazing that ChessDon jumps to defend his friend Channing and himself when he sits and allows Sloan to lie and attack Susan Polgar almost daily on the USCF forum. This stinks to high heaven ChessDon. If you’re a man of honor, you should defend all USCF members the way you defend yourself and your friend Joel Channing. Your silence makes things look very political.
Bill,
There were many nasty posts about Don Schultz which Susan already deleted. You can’t expect people not to speak out when such low level of politics are being played against Susan and other candidates by sitting board members.
I applaud Susan for deleting those posts even though Mr. Schultz continues to allow Mr. Sloan to attack and lie about Susan and other candidates.
USCF Lifer
Ann: Google Sam Sloan and you will find that the content of his website and some of the links contained thereon are wildly inappropriate for someone serving on the board of an organization with tens of thousands of scholastic members.
BTW, I went to Steve Goldberg’s website and read the transcript. It definitely said that the next board meeting would be in Nashville. So I think it’s at best disingenuous for Mr. Schults to claim that “there are no plans to have the Board’s next meeting in Nashville.”
Correction: the ‘being’ above was meant to be ‘not being’ – of course.
It’s not a rumour. It is on the unofficial transcript of the meeting which has been posted for weeks on Steve Goldberg’s scholastic blog. Look it up for youself.
FYI – Pres. Bill Goichberg just announced on the USCF Forum that the meeting was not planned to be in Nashville. He says that the Board left the meeting venue up in the air.
This was in response to my placing the issue onto the USCF Forum. The tone of what I wrote was that I would like to see peace made here. However, I must say so that no one mistakes what I believe, in the last analysis Susan does seem to be right.
The one silver lining in the whole Sloan EB crisis that we had was the defacto assurance that his office would not place him near the children. If that goes away, then I’m afraid it’s going to split.
All this is based upon the unofficial board minutes.
It is quite clear, when listening to the actual audio of the board meeting, that President Goichberg did not concede to the next board meeting being at Nashville. You can also hear the other board members saying that they would discuss it by email during the next week.
This is can be heard by anyone at the following link:
http://beta.uschess.org/frontend/section_107.php
http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/feb07/SUN020407-2.m3u
Goichberg himself posted on the forums that the date of the next meeting was not firmly decided at the last meeting. Moreover, they have been invited to hold it during the US Championship in Stillwater OK, so Mr. Schultz’s comment appears to be accurate.
Here is the text of Goichberg’s remarks:
At the last meeting I objected to meeting in Nashville, and as a result the date and location of the meeting were unresolved when we adjourned. About ten minutes after adjournment, most of the Board unofficially agreed to meet the first week in May in either Florida or Crossville.
Recently there has been a new development; Frank Berry has invited the Board to meet at the US Championship in Oklahoma. I think this is a wonderful idea and much prefer it to meeting two weeks earlier in Florida or Tennessee.
I’m sorry to post again, but the last post was too gentle for this situation. In the last analysis I stand with Susan and I expect all decent people to stand with her, too.
There, that better describes where I stand.
I am relieved if it is true that the Executive Board will not be meeting in Nashville at the same time as the Nationals and glad to hear that Mr. Goichberg had the sense to object to the meeting in Nashville (though who knows for what reasons) but I’m curious to know which member(s) of the board proposed meeting in Nashville and/or voted for it, knowing that the history and public statements of one of its members would be objectionable to a huge number of parents of players there.
There’s a sentence or three in the 7:27 p.m. post that goes way over the line.
Anne,
Here is a link to a watered down version of Mr. Sloan’s posts:
http://www.tatiana.net/forum/index.cfm?fPage=topic&topicID=198. Even though it has been watered down, this content should be restricted to adults only.
Regards,
Gregory
Anonymous at 8:54pm, please go listen for yourself at:
http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/feb07/SUN020407-2.m3u
part 11 and 12.
Bill,
I have deleted the post you mentioned and 8 other highly negative posts about Mr. Schultz and Mr. Sloan.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
according to the audio, it was originally Bill Hall’s idea to have the meeting in Nashville in conjunction with the nationals.
I agree with Bill Brock’s last post. The 7:27 post re: child porn crosses the line.
To: Brian Lafferty: I guess you didn’t want to use the “pie hole” reference on Susan’s own blog. I thought that post of yours on the forum was beyond rude.
In a way it is too bad that the Executive Board came to its senses and decided not to meet in Nashville as had been proposed. I think Sloan’s presence at the Nationals could have been the catalyst for a large number of chess parents joining the USCF to vote in the election.
Mr. Lafferty, in spite of some of your rude comments on the USCF forum, I gave you my full courtesy. Unfortunately, your tone became worse.
Your recent comment here was quite obnoxious and therefore it was deleted. Comments like that are not welcome here.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
Forget about Lafferty Susan. He’s just another one like Quinn and Bogner. Most of us are not like them.
And all this and I have not said a word.
So I will say I support Susan and her slate 100% on this issue and all issues and I vote for all 4 of them.
There see. Not one negative word. haha.
I read the uscf forums and I know a little tip of the iceburg what is happening there. I have been a uscf member for over 30 years continuous. This is the first opportunity for positive change. We really need Susan more than many people realize.
Go Susan Go.
The election is still a ways off. Look out as election day approaches. If anyone thinks this is bad. I suspect the days at election time are going to be a whole new low for USCF. But then Susan will begin a new Beginning.
Please make sure everyone votes.
Make sure everyone is an informed voter.
I never said Susan lied, I challenge te person that said thet here to post here what they are calling a lie. Folks, it won’t happen because it ain’t true! I think anyone will be hard presed to find anywhere my calling anyone a liar anytime as it has been very rare for me to call anyone a liar.
Yes, the meeting will be Oklahoma with a slight chance for Boca.
My plan is to campaign hard and be 100% positive. I expect to win. Susan, I wish you the best in your campaign and when you win, I will be there to help either as another EB member or a volunter.
:
Thanks, Susan.
I stopped by Sevan’s tournament the other night–very nice event.
Do you think Lafferty is typical of USCF membership? I have to say that most people I’ve spoken to about the coming election are unimpressed with most of the current board, creeped out by Sam Sloan and really excited by the possibility of change in the shape of Susan, Paul, Randy and Mikhail. Although she has her detractors (mainly 3 guys) on the USCF issues forum, Susan has a huge number of fans all over the country. Every time she shows up in Texas or Florida or Philadelphia for a tournament or simul or lecture, she makes hundreds of new friends and fans.
Great post! Don’t worry about people like Lafferty. You have thousands of us supporting everything you do. Don’t stop because of a few lunatics.
Just for context, the below was in response to a request I had made.
————————-
Hi Jack,
Truth is, the main reason I objected was that I knew bringing Sam to a National Scholastic was a poor idea, but I didn’t want to say so in open session as he was relatively well behaved at the meeting and it might have appeared to some as an unprovoked attack. After we adjourned and I told the other Board members this, they readily agreed that meeting in Nashville was out. You can post this on Susan’s blog if you wish.
Thanks for writing,
Bill Goichberg
So the truth is the board thinks Sam Sloan is a liability. And Sloan is running again to ruin the USCF for 4 more years?
I have a certain degree of empathy for Bill Goichberg’s predicament, and his decision was certainly correct, but his handling of the matter was suboptimal.
OK, Sloan has self-reported sexual relations with minors. Doesn’t Sloan deserve to know in open session that many parents fear his presence?
And don’t USCF members deserve to know that a majority of USCF Board members agree with these parents? Maybe we could even get this opinion on the record….
Doesn’t Don Schultz need to distance himself from Sloan publicly? Not because it’s convenient (it isn’t), or because it will improve his chances of being re-elected (who knows), but because it’s the right thing to do.
In contrast, Mr. Schultz’s friend and fellow Board member Joel Channing has not hesitated to distance himself from Sloan’s conduct.
Would any sitting Board member be so kind as to go on the record with respect to the following post by Mr. Sloan on the USCF BINFO system?
(My apologies to Susan for posting this scurrilous matter here.)
BEGIN QTN
BINFO 200603590
Date 2006-09-25
>From samsloan
Status Standard Release
Release Date 2006-10-03
Subject Resolution of the Executive Board
——————————————————————————–
To: Chessoffice@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Resolution of the Executive Board
From: Sam Sloan samsloan@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:47:41 -0400
Cc: Joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Beatchess@xxxxxxx, Rtannerae@xxxxxxx,
randallhough@xxxxxxxxx, samsloan@xxxxxxxxxxxx, CHESSJOEL@xxxxxxx,
bhall@xxxxxxxxxxx, Chessdon@xxxxxxx, pknight@xxxxxxxxxxx,
queencapa@xxxxxxx , USCF BINFO System, Chessoffice@xxxxxxx
Delivered-to: USCF BINFO Systemxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: USCF BINFO System
In-reply-to:
——————————————————————————–
At 11:00 AM 9/25/2006 -0400, Chessoffice@xxxxxxx wrote:>>I move in open
session that the Board approve the following resolution>written by our
attorney, Mike Matsler. I vote yes.
> >Bill Goichberg>I am deeply discouraged and disappointed that Bill, acting like a bull in a china shop, has brought this into the public forum by making a public motion and posting it to USCF BINFO System, as a result of which this
matter will disseminated and the entire world will know about it in due
course.The fact is that my relationship with Zsuzsa Polgar (who now
calls herself Susan) was not entirely Platonic. I have been discrete
and have not
revealed to anyone other than a few close friends the true nature of
our prior relationship, until now. Now, Bill’s public motion
effectively forces me to reveal what really happened those many years
ago. This will do no good either to me, Zsuzsa,
Bill or the USCF, but it appears that now I will have no real choice
but to tell the whole story. Sam Sloan
END QTN
What kind of lawyer is Brian Lafferty? I thought his remark about Susan’s “piehole” was boorish in the extreme. I wonder whether he wants to represent Sam Sloan in court.
No Bill! Schultz will keep quiet and allow Sloan attack his opponents. This is his tactic to win this election. But if anyone says something bad about him or Channing, he demands to have the post deleted right away! What obvious double political standard! This is why Schultz must go!
The sitting USCF Board members (Mr. Channing is a noteworthy exception) find it inconvenient to discuss such matters.
Let’s change that, now.
Again, my apologies to Susan (who has more than her share of intestinal fortitude) for posting such material here.
http://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2303
Perhaps Mr. Lafferty would be so kind as to discuss the cited materials authored by Sloan in this forum?
I would suggest a few possible scenarios to Mr. Lafferty:
a) Mr. Sloan is telling the truth, and Ms. Polgar (who vigorously denies Mr. Sloan’s account with respect to certain personal matters) is not;
b) Ms. Polgar is telling the truth, and Mr. Sloan is not;
c) Neither Mr. Sloan nor Ms. Polgar is telling the truth.
Which scenario makes Nashville look like a great idea?
😉
What is it with the Sam Sloan character???
Why is he featured so prominently in this blog and whenever USCF is mentioned???
Why dont we just get on with the election and see who wins???
@ anon 1:15 a.m. 3/11/07
I will hazard a guess that you don’t belong to any other nonprofit organization with a Board member who speaks of his (alleged) past sexual relations with another member, a minor at the time of the alleged conduct, and considers that speech a part of his fiduciary duty to the organization.
Is this merely a curious state of affairs, perhaps one that is even beneath notice?
Or perhaps this is a matter that deserves the full attention of the Board and voting members?
If the meeting is indeed in Oklahoma, then I hereby look forward to squaring off against him in a rapid match to redeem the respect of all 2300 rated “patzers” (not my term). I shall commence my study of the Grob opening tomorrow at the crack of dawn.
Michael Aigner
This is Susan’s blog. Mr. Lafferty wrote something along the lines of “Susan Polgar should shut her pie hole” on the USCF forum (I can’t quote from it directly because the moderators deleted it). If you insult someone in public and then show up at their house, I think they are justified in asking you to leave.
I’m not sure what his beef is but I am curious about his involvement in chess activities other than his snarky posts on the USCF issues forum. Does he teach chess as well as practicing law? His USCF history shows only two tournaments.
What has he done for United States chess in his lifetime? He is so quick to pick on Susan. His latest posts take pot shots at her parents for home schooling her as well as for having been raised in a Communist country. I may not agree 100% with what Susan says or does but I have to give her enormous credit for promoting chess in this country on a daily, if not hourly basis.
To: Anonymous who wrote at 8:27 a.m. “When children and events for children play such a bit part in this organization,” what planet are you on or, maybe, what are you drinking? I think you are a troll hoping to get a rise out of Susan but you are so off in your facts. Others will be able to provide the statistics but it is clear that scholastic chess is growing and adult chess is not. Most adults are content to get their chess fix from the ICC. State and National scholastic tournaments routinely attract hundreds (States) and thousands (Nationals) of children. How many adult tournaments can you say that about these days? (And, as others have noted, the adult tournaments are increasingly attended by the stronger scholastic players.) Anyway, I was prepared to agree with part of your post — regarding the hysteria around Sloan. I think the facts of his website speak for itself and reasonable minds can decide for themselves whether someone with his lifestyle and predilection for pokemon porn should be on the board of an organization with tens of thousands of scholastic members. I don’t think we need to use innuendo (i.e. sex offender list) when the facts speak quite clearly.
That was a typo. I meant “big” part, as should be obvious from the context.
I don’t think it’s cheeky at all. I think Susan is speaking as a mother of two young boys. At best, Sloan has shown incredible lack of judgment regarding potentially exposing children to inappropriate content on the internet. Look at his website — references/links to Pokemon porn. Recently he posted a link to a porn site on the USCF issues forum. Several people pointed out that if they had clicked on that link, they could have been fired from their jobs. Sloan acts with reckless disregard for the consequences of his actions.
This quote says it all “…..the main reason I objected was that I knew bringing Sam to a National Scholastic was a poor idea, but I didn’t want to say so in open session as he was relatively well behaved at the meeting and it might have appeared to some as an unprovoked attack….”.
He is saying that the board is terrified of the guy. Also I love this line “he was relatively well behaved”, if that isn’t an indictment I don’t know what is.
A kernel of honesty from the same person willing to sign his name to this embarassment “There are no plans to have the Board’s next meeting in Nashville”
The various (?) anons may wish to note that in addition to his claim to have had a “more than Platonic” and “seamy” relationship with a minor for whom he had fiduciary responsibilities, Mr. Sloan is also convicted felon who, some decades ago, co-authored a book that advocated that sexual liberation should begin in childhood.
His co-author, one Jefferson Poland, was (much later) convicted of child molestation for acts performed with a nine-year-old girl. Certainly Mr. Sloan is not responsible for the acts of others. However, Mr. Sloan is responsible for the 2006 public apologia he offered for Mr. Poland. (Mr. Poland’s public confession is available online: Google “Jefferson Poland” for details.)
I would be happy to discuss the accuracy of the account, either here or in a deposition.
However, this topic may not be discussed on the USCF Issues Forum.
The USCF Board not only tolerates but accomodates the presence of Sloan on their Board, who claims to have had sexual relations with minors. Simultaneously, the President and the other Board members privately acknowledge that they do not consider Sloan a fit fiduciary for minors.
I turn the floor over to Mr. Schultz.
Correction to previous post:
“…a minor for whom he had fiduciary responsibilities…”
should be
“…a minor for whom he claimed to have had fiduciary responsibilities …”
Come on Bill! You’re being unfair to Don. Do you expect Don to come right out and said he’s protecting Sloan so he can destroy his enemies? Of course not. You’re putting Don is a very bad corner.
I’m very disappointed that Don hasn’t dropped out and endorse Susan and her team. Don failed to lead. He failed to take control of the USCF finances. Don failed to take control of the USCF forum. He failed to take actions against Sam Sloan. And he wants another 4 years? For what?
So many of us would give Don the highest respect if he does the right thing by dropping out and endorsing the best team for the job. Maybe Don will change his mind but I doubt it. Don and Sloan are the same! Everything is about them, not chess or the USCF.
I’ve known Don for 40 years. He’s done many good things. But he also committed many whoppers. Time to let the younger people take over Don.
http://www.uschess.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=33815#33815
I would ask that the moderator allow Mr. Lafferty and others who identify themselves to post freely in this thread.
I would be interested to read Mr. Lafferty’s response to my previous posts.
While I believe that Mr. Schultz has made use of Mr. Sloan in the past, I suspect that he is wiser now.
Dear Bill,
Mr. Lafferty is no longer welcome to post here due to some of his distasteful and insulting comments. While those things may be welcome on the USCF forum, it is not on my blog. He violated the rules of this forum and therefore lost his privilege to post here.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
I’m glad you got rid of Lafferty. His posts are highly obnoxious.
Thank you!
JL
Too bad you banned Lafferty. I wanted to find out how someone with a USCF rating of 1194 and only two rated games is qualified to teach chess to scholastic players. Not that a high rating makes you a good teacher. There are plenty of IMs and GMs who can’t teach and plenty of 1900 to 2400 players who are exceptionally gifted teachers but I think most of them have more than two rated games under their belt.
Can we forget about people like Lafferty, Bogner, Quinn, etc? They have their own agenda. Leave them be. I don’t like any of them but so what? Everyone is entitled to be a dufus if he chooses to be. Just look at Sloan. Just leave them alone and don’t give them the attention they’re thriving for.
Like all petty beaureaucrats, Mr Schultz seems to specialize in semantic demagoguery and dancing around the truth while allowing his personal picadillioes to poison any chance at rational behavior, thought, or action. His days in power are numbered and so too those of the miscreant and convicted criminal, Sam Slime.
I look forward to Susan Polgar bringing her level of energy and ideas into the stale and cobwebbed halls of USCF leadership and am optimistic that things can be straightened out. But first, a heavy dose of colonics is needed to cleanse the decayed fecal matter currently impacted in the foul bowel of the USCF body politik.
~ Richard DeCredico
Good point, Papa. Let’s try not to feed the trolls. (But thank you to Bill Brock for further illuminating Mr. Sloan’s objectionable conduct.)
Why hasn’t Mr. Sloan been suspended for posting a porn link in the USCF forum? What do you have to say about it Mr. Schultz? Do you endorse and protect Mr. Sloan posting a porn link in a forum where children have access to it? Is this what you want another 4 year for? Shame on the board for not suspending Mr. Sam Sloan.
It would be ungracious not to note that Don Schultz (who has indeeed done many good things) organized and directed my first USCF event, the 1967 US Junior Open in Raleigh, NC.
I was 9 years old; some of the contestants were giving me two-rook odds in skittles and winning.
But I did win my Round Nine game!
Mr. Schultz has done many good things. But he’s no longer effective. He wants to be reelected so badly that he’s willing to allow Sam Sloan to unfairly attack some of the most important people in US Chess.
Mr. Schultz also lied to the USCF members. He said that he will not run again. He asked people not to vote for him if he changes his mind. He claimed that he’s too old. All of a sudden, when Susan announced her candidacy, he wants to go along for a ride.
How can we trust someone who directly lied to the USCF members and associating himself with Mr. Sam Sloan?
To those who are puzzled by Susan’s reactions to Sam Sloan, one might consider reading the following Widipedia article on Sam Sloan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sloan
Sam Sloan should have been banned by this board if they have the guts to do so. He has violated so many rules including posting a porno link where children can see it. That alone warrants a lifetime ban.
But of course Mr. Schultz and company will protect Sam Sloan so he can attack and lie about his opponents. This is the real USCF folks! This is how things are done for decades!
Lafferty is crying hysterically on the USCF forum because you deleted all his derogatory posts. He claims that he’s a lawyer but he doesn’t do anything else except watching this blog all day long and praising Sam Sloan. Strange!
Can we please not attack Mr. Laffery on a personal level? If you have some facts to show, please do so. Otherwise, please show him some respect regardless if you think he deserves it or not. He is no longer welcome to post here and therefore he cannot defend himself.
I have the ability to track the IP of some of the abusive posters and they came from the same 3-5 people. It will only take me one second to delete their posts.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
How do you track the IP’s of posters? I don’t see that function in blogger?
Thank-you Susan for bringing this issue into daylight. I am glad that this issue has been corrected and has a proper conclusion.
Take care,
Gregory
Zen telegram: some of us can no longer post here; others can no longer post on uschess.org. Doesn’t really matter, does it?
The Moon Cannot be Stolen
Ryokan, a Zen master, lived the simplest kind of life in a little hut at the foot of a mountain. One evening a thief visited the hut only to discover there was nothing to steal.
Kyokan returned and caught him. “You may have come a long way to visit me, ” he told the prowler, “and you should not return empty-handed. Please take my clothes as a gift.”
The thief was bewildered. He tool the clothes and slunk away.
Ryokan sat naked, watching the moon. “Poor fellow,” he mused, “I wish I could give him this beautiful moon.”
You can’t tell the poster’s IP if they use ghost surfing software.
Steven Craig Miller said…
To those who are puzzled by Susan’s reactions to Sam Sloan, one might consider reading the following Widipedia article on Sam Sloan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sloan
To be fair, this article is disputed and has been subject to numerous revisions because of this. Who authored the article?
What is clear from the text, which is not a minute of the meeting, is that Sam Sloan is regularly in a minority of 1 on the board.
Assuming the vote counts at least are correct, that’s a factual point which has gone unstated.
No need to get into whether SS’s proposals are ‘ridiculous’ or not: they don’t get backed by other than the proposer.
End of story.
In an earlier message, I pointed to the web-page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sloan and suggested that people who are puzzled by Susan’s reaction to Sam Sloan should read it. Someone writing under anonymity wrote: “To be fair, this article is disputed and has been subject to numerous revisions because of this.”
I am not privy to knowing to what degree this Wikipedia article as a whole is accurate, but, all characterizations aside, if only the statements attributed to Susan are authentic, and the statements attributed to Sam Sloan are authentic, then one should have some insight as to Susan’s attitude towards Mr. Sloan.
Steven Craig Miller said…
In an earlier message, I pointed to the web-page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Sloan and suggested that people who are puzzled by Susan’s reaction to Sam Sloan should read it. Someone writing under anonymity wrote: “To be fair, this article is disputed and has been subject to numerous revisions because of this.”
I am not privy to knowing to what degree this Wikipedia article as a whole is accurate, but, all characterizations aside, if only the statements attributed to Susan are authentic, and the statements attributed to Sam Sloan are authentic, then one should have some insight as to Susan’s attitude towards Mr. Sloan.
Monday, March 12, 2007 8:14:00 PM
There is a link on the top of the Wikipedia page that will take you to a complete history of the entry. I looked at the page again and can’t see who the original author was. I have been told that the original author was Paul Truong. Perhaps Susan can confirm that if it is true or tell us if it is not true.
I have nothing to do with Wikipedia. I do not post there. I do not know who made the post and I really have no interest to find out.
Paul Truong
On another note – sure is a lot of adjourning going on. Does anything get accomplished during USCF meetings or does it all occur after the meeting in multiple ad-hoc meetings after-the-fact?
Mark
These meetings are usually a waste of time, especially with Sam Sloan. Sloan is the one who wants to free Raymond Weinstein, a convicted murderer, and make him a USCF delegate. No wonder why the USCF has gone nowhere in decades.
In fairness to Sam Sloan, he also seems to be the one who busted Robert Tanner, formerly of the USCF Ethics Committee (!), for gaining his master rating through a series of fictitious tournaments against fictitious people. None of the other USCF muckety-mucks noticed or cared.
Sloan is a crusader. A crusader with strange tastes and poor judgment, perhaps, but a crusader true to his own peculiar moral compass.
Sloan is a vile individual who is a pathetic serial liar. I challenge Sloan to go 1 day without telling lies. Impossible!
As much as I despise Sloan, keep in mind that he’s less dangerous than those who share his sins, but keep them in secret.
Point conceded, Dan. But when an individual’s unacceptable conduct is known, do we cover up that conduct, as the Archdiocese of Boston did?