Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
USCF Board Members Continue to Attack Beatriz and FIDE
26 views
Skip to first unread message
samsloan
Jun 17, 2013, 3:53:38 PM6/17/13
to
[quote="Grayson"]How is Kirsan remaining in power the applicable
fact? I'm cheerful to debate, but I'm not going to guess at your
rationale, argue against it, and then have you come back and say "I
never said that." There's no righteous indignation. I don't often
give in to indignation. Kirsan's conduct is disreputable and reflects
on the game. I don't even have to back that up--it's known. I get
that some want to see his ability to buy votes in various areas of the
world as the bottom line. The argument goes that he will win, so don't
oppose him. If that's the prevailing opinion, we'll get what we
deserve.[/quote]
For a man who knows very little about chess and nothing about FIDE,
you seem to be awfully sure of yourself.
Have you ever attended a FIDE meeting? I do not believe you have.
Have you ever met Kirsan Ilyumzhinov? I have met him many times.
Are you aware that Kirsan is now essentially a figurehead? The day-to-
day operations of FIDE are being conducted by Nigel Freeman of
Bermuda. At the most recent FIDE Congress in Istanbul, Kirsan gave the
opening speech in Russian which few could understand and then left for
parts unknown, leaving others to run the show.
Since you know nothing of this, you say "I don't even have to back
that up--it's known".
What is it exactly that you know? What are your sources of
information? It is just that you have heard something from Bill
Goichberg, who has never himself attended a FIDE meeting, or is it
something you read in the newspapers or on this group?
As a lawyer you should be aware of the rule against hearsay evidence.
Every meeting of FIDE is open. There are no closed sessions in FIDE.
No secret votes. The doors are open. Anybody can attend. Roberts Rules
of Order are followed.
On the other hand, the board of which you are a member does almost
everything in secret. The vast majority of USCF board meetings are in
closed session. We the members have been allowed almost no information
about what is going on.
WE are not saying that you were required to support Beatriz for
election for FIDE Vice-President. You had the right to support your
choice, however wrong, which was Karpov. Apparently you were not aware
of the long-standing belief that Karpov was a member of the KGB or you
chose to ignore that fact.
What is objectionable is you entered into a court arbitration to kick
Beatriz off the ballot as a candidate for FIDE Vice-President. You did
this without consulting the membership. This may have been against the
best interests of the general members.
Now, you are using your influence to stop Beatriz, a former USCF
President, from being elected to the board, based upon your distorted
version of the facts.
Sam Sloan
fact? I'm cheerful to debate, but I'm not going to guess at your
rationale, argue against it, and then have you come back and say "I
never said that." There's no righteous indignation. I don't often
give in to indignation. Kirsan's conduct is disreputable and reflects
on the game. I don't even have to back that up--it's known. I get
that some want to see his ability to buy votes in various areas of the
world as the bottom line. The argument goes that he will win, so don't
oppose him. If that's the prevailing opinion, we'll get what we
deserve.[/quote]
For a man who knows very little about chess and nothing about FIDE,
you seem to be awfully sure of yourself.
Have you ever attended a FIDE meeting? I do not believe you have.
Have you ever met Kirsan Ilyumzhinov? I have met him many times.
Are you aware that Kirsan is now essentially a figurehead? The day-to-
day operations of FIDE are being conducted by Nigel Freeman of
Bermuda. At the most recent FIDE Congress in Istanbul, Kirsan gave the
opening speech in Russian which few could understand and then left for
parts unknown, leaving others to run the show.
Since you know nothing of this, you say "I don't even have to back
that up--it's known".
What is it exactly that you know? What are your sources of
information? It is just that you have heard something from Bill
Goichberg, who has never himself attended a FIDE meeting, or is it
something you read in the newspapers or on this group?
As a lawyer you should be aware of the rule against hearsay evidence.
Every meeting of FIDE is open. There are no closed sessions in FIDE.
No secret votes. The doors are open. Anybody can attend. Roberts Rules
of Order are followed.
On the other hand, the board of which you are a member does almost
everything in secret. The vast majority of USCF board meetings are in
closed session. We the members have been allowed almost no information
about what is going on.
WE are not saying that you were required to support Beatriz for
election for FIDE Vice-President. You had the right to support your
choice, however wrong, which was Karpov. Apparently you were not aware
of the long-standing belief that Karpov was a member of the KGB or you
chose to ignore that fact.
What is objectionable is you entered into a court arbitration to kick
Beatriz off the ballot as a candidate for FIDE Vice-President. You did
this without consulting the membership. This may have been against the
best interests of the general members.
Now, you are using your influence to stop Beatriz, a former USCF
President, from being elected to the board, based upon your distorted
version of the facts.
Sam Sloan
Phil Innes
Jun 18, 2013, 2:44:05 PM6/18/13
to
On Monday, June 17, 2013 3:53:38 PM UTC-4, samsloan wrote:
> [quote="Grayson"]How is Kirsan remaining in power the applicable
>
> fact? I'm cheerful to debate, but I'm not going to guess at your
>
> rationale, argue against it, and then have you come back and say "I
>
> never said that." There's no righteous indignation. I don't often
>
> give in to indignation. Kirsan's conduct is disreputable and reflects
>
> on the game. I don't even have to back that up--it's known. I get
>
> that some want to see his ability to buy votes in various areas of the
>
> world as the bottom line. The argument goes that he will win, so don't
>
> oppose him. If that's the prevailing opinion, we'll get what we
>
> deserve.[/quote]
>
>
>
> For a man who knows very little about chess and nothing about FIDE,
>
> you seem to be awfully sure of yourself.
>
Kirsan is in power because of oil to answer question at top, because of oil the Czar of all the Russias will support him.
> [quote="Grayson"]How is Kirsan remaining in power the applicable
>
> fact? I'm cheerful to debate, but I'm not going to guess at your
>
> rationale, argue against it, and then have you come back and say "I
>
> never said that." There's no righteous indignation. I don't often
>
> give in to indignation. Kirsan's conduct is disreputable and reflects
>
> on the game. I don't even have to back that up--it's known. I get
>
> that some want to see his ability to buy votes in various areas of the
>
> world as the bottom line. The argument goes that he will win, so don't
>
> oppose him. If that's the prevailing opinion, we'll get what we
>
> deserve.[/quote]
>
>
>
> For a man who knows very little about chess and nothing about FIDE,
>
> you seem to be awfully sure of yourself.
>
>
> Have you ever attended a FIDE meeting? I do not believe you have.
>
> Have you ever met Kirsan Ilyumzhinov? I have met him many times.
>
> Are you aware that Kirsan is now essentially a figurehead? The day-to-
>
> day operations of FIDE are being conducted by Nigel Freeman of
>
> Bermuda. At the most recent FIDE Congress in Istanbul, Kirsan gave the
>
> opening speech in Russian which few could understand and then left for
>
> parts unknown, leaving others to run the show.
You say you know Fide, but you don't seem to indicate which of these two is the real agenda, whereas those who really know Fide know what's what.
>
> Since you know nothing of this, you say "I don't even have to back
>
> that up--it's known".
>
>
>
> What is it exactly that you know? What are your sources of
>
> information? It is just that you have heard something from Bill
>
> Goichberg, who has never himself attended a FIDE meeting, or is it
>
> something you read in the newspapers or on this group?
>
>
>
> As a lawyer you should be aware of the rule against hearsay evidence.
>
>
>
> Every meeting of FIDE is open. There are no closed sessions in FIDE.
>
> No secret votes. The doors are open. Anybody can attend. Roberts Rules
>
> of Order are followed.
Public meetings are all very well, but where are decisions really being made?
>
> On the other hand, the board of which you are a member does almost
>
> everything in secret. The vast majority of USCF board meetings are in
>
> closed session. We the members have been allowed almost no information
>
> about what is going on.
Having said that, secrecy is a poor means for what is after all a very small group of chess freaks, organizing not chess in the USA but themselves. No wonder no money, no growth, no-one attracted to such an org who could do anything about it. Last try was by Polgar and Truong who definitely could have, but ipso facto, popularizing chess is the last thing on USCF's mind.
>
> WE are not saying that you were required to support Beatriz for
>
> election for FIDE Vice-President. You had the right to support your
>
> choice, however wrong, which was Karpov. Apparently you were not aware
>
> of the long-standing belief that Karpov was a member of the KGB or you
>
> chose to ignore that fact.
> What is objectionable is you entered into a court arbitration to kick
>
> Beatriz off the ballot as a candidate for FIDE Vice-President. You did
>
> this without consulting the membership. This may have been against the
>
> best interests of the general members.
> Now, you are using your influence to stop Beatriz, a former USCF
>
> President, from being elected to the board, based upon your distorted
>
> version of the facts.
This is not to say that other views are not distorted, but from the evidence of this writing, not proved! Of course, both may be true, that this message is as distorted as USCF's actions.
Phil Innes
Vermont
> Sam Sloan
samsloan
Jun 19, 2013, 12:45:03 PM6/19/13
to
[quote="mfschulte"][quote="samsloan"]This is an excellent point which
should be made more often.
The same people who find it perfectly OK for the Owner Operator of the
Continental Chess Association to also be President of the USCF in an
obvious conflict of interest claim there is a conflict of interest for
the Vice-President of the World Chess Federation to also be on the
USCF Board.[/quote]
If, again, this is about me, you assume that I am okay with that. You
can't have any evidence to support that assumption, of course, but why
would that stop you from doing so? Evidence has never seemed to be
your strong point, at least obviously not in this case.
Several board members and candidates have expressed concern over the
potential conflict. I'm not so ready to dismiss it as others here may
be. I'm not saying it makes Ms. Marinello a horrible candidate, but
she hasn't addressed the matter at all, and there are other candidates
that do not pose the same risk.
Mike Schulte
Kalamazoo, MI
[/quote]
You have not explained to us exactly what is the conflict.
The conflict between the USCF and the CCA is obvious. The USCF sets
advertising rates that the CCA pays.
What is the potential conflict between the USCF and FIDE? For example,
there was a conflict in the time control rules. However, during the
FIDE meetings in 2012 in Istanbul FIDE modified its time control rules
to make the Goichberg Time controls legal for FIDE Events.
They also voted in favor of a USCF request that not all games in the
same event be played under the same time controls. The USCF made this
request because in the US most players bring their own clocks whereas
in Europe the organizers supply the clocks. These are good example of
FIDE bending over backwards to accommodate the USCF.
Sam Sloan
should be made more often.
The same people who find it perfectly OK for the Owner Operator of the
Continental Chess Association to also be President of the USCF in an
obvious conflict of interest claim there is a conflict of interest for
the Vice-President of the World Chess Federation to also be on the
USCF Board.[/quote]
If, again, this is about me, you assume that I am okay with that. You
can't have any evidence to support that assumption, of course, but why
would that stop you from doing so? Evidence has never seemed to be
your strong point, at least obviously not in this case.
Several board members and candidates have expressed concern over the
potential conflict. I'm not so ready to dismiss it as others here may
be. I'm not saying it makes Ms. Marinello a horrible candidate, but
she hasn't addressed the matter at all, and there are other candidates
that do not pose the same risk.
Mike Schulte
Kalamazoo, MI
[/quote]
You have not explained to us exactly what is the conflict.
The conflict between the USCF and the CCA is obvious. The USCF sets
advertising rates that the CCA pays.
What is the potential conflict between the USCF and FIDE? For example,
there was a conflict in the time control rules. However, during the
FIDE meetings in 2012 in Istanbul FIDE modified its time control rules
to make the Goichberg Time controls legal for FIDE Events.
They also voted in favor of a USCF request that not all games in the
same event be played under the same time controls. The USCF made this
request because in the US most players bring their own clocks whereas
in Europe the organizers supply the clocks. These are good example of
FIDE bending over backwards to accommodate the USCF.
Sam Sloan
samsloan
Jun 19, 2013, 2:07:07 PM6/19/13
to
[quote="mfschulte"][quote="samsloan"]You have not explained to us
exactly what is the conflict.[/quote]
Try going back and reading Randy Bauer's comments. He makes it plenty
clear.
Mike Schulte
Kalamazoo, MI
[/quote]
What he made clear is that the conflict was created by the USCF
instituting an arbitration proceeding against Beatriz Marinello and
FIDE based on objections by the USCF Board to Beatriz running as a
candidate for FIDE Vice-President.
The USCF lost the case (as I predicted it would) and Beatriz was
elected.
Now that court case is over.
What are the conflicts in interest now? Please tell us. Is the USCF
Board planning on filing another lawsuit against FIDE? If so, I hope
that the board informs the membership of what is involved this time
around.
Sam Sloan
exactly what is the conflict.[/quote]
Try going back and reading Randy Bauer's comments. He makes it plenty
clear.
Mike Schulte
Kalamazoo, MI
[/quote]
instituting an arbitration proceeding against Beatriz Marinello and
FIDE based on objections by the USCF Board to Beatriz running as a
candidate for FIDE Vice-President.
The USCF lost the case (as I predicted it would) and Beatriz was
elected.
Now that court case is over.
What are the conflicts in interest now? Please tell us. Is the USCF
Board planning on filing another lawsuit against FIDE? If so, I hope
that the board informs the membership of what is involved this time
around.
Sam Sloan
0 new messages