Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

USCF Issues Forum: "Personal Attacks and Divisive Leadership"

1 view

Skip to first unread message

politi...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 10, 2007, 2:02:32 PM2/10/07

gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:09 pm Post subject: Personal attacks
and divisive leadership Reply with quote
Beatriz Marinello wrote:
Susan' statements are quite arrogant. I do not think she truly
understand scholastic chess and the work that many of us do in the
schools.

Sam Sloan is a secundary issue for scholastic chess. Susan did not
even go to school herself, she was a home schooler. Working in the
schools, specialy for those who teach as part of the curriculum,
requires very specific skills and credentials. These statements are so
out touch with reality. Its true that the USCF can do a better job
promoting scholastic chess, developing teaching materials and
providind more resources for teachers and coaches, but at the moment
no group will walk away from the USCF. Most schools programs are not
even relate with the USCF, except for the top players which play over
the board chess.

I teach 35 hours a weeks of chess classes..and I have been involved in
teaching chess in the schools since 1990.

All the best,

Beatriz Marinello

PS: Please forget my spelling, I am writing from the school.

Hi Beatriz,

I must state that I am saddened by your comments. Susan Polgar is
enormously influential and positively contributes to chess. I would
hope that even her distracters' will admit that she is energetic and
she creates an overall positive value to the USCF. You are also very
influential yourself, and I believe that you have done some wonderful
things as well. However, I am deeply dismayed by the amount of
personal and public in-fighting that the USCF has within its
leadership. This infighting only hurts the USCF and it makes it much
harder apply leadership skills to benefit chess. There should be no
wonder that our members are deeply skeptical of the USCF, we see this
skepticism in our leadership, and understand that they don't often
trust each other.

Due to this skepticism, the membership becomes highly skeptical of all
of our leaders to complete the mission of the USCF. Furthermore, the
general membership becomes divided and often become at odds with each
other when our leaders publically fight. When this occurs, the members
are almost forced to take a certain view of leader 'x', while others
support leader 'y'. The third general group decides to stay neutral,
and more often that not; do not accept the credibility of any leader,
or the USCF. Furthermore, the personal dislike between the leaders can
spill over and cause the general membership to fight each other even
if they don't fully understand all of theissues involved. Most of the
times they can't as the issues are just personal.

IMO, revealing your personal objections with Susan Polgar are hurting
everybody in the USCF, and I personally wish that it would stop. Most
of our leaders have wonderful credentials, so why can't they at least
publicly support each other and keep their personal feelings to
themselves? Does this type of petty bickering help? I think not...

Just my take,

Gregory
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/02/special-college-chess-league.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com

Last edited by gregory 13474581 on Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:46 pm; edited 5
times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
SteveTN 12467003

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 338
Location: Nashville, TN

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:24 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Greg, one of the big problems right now is the weakened status of the
ED position as a result of the Niro years and some other things.
Exacerbating this is the back biting resulting from some EB members
not getting their way and/or trying to usurp the USCF President's role
and authority.

Leaders are supposed to lead. We have too many "deputy" leaders trying
to impose their will on those higher up the chain of command. A
perfect example of this is the last FIDE election campaign where the
USCF stated a position and one EB member, instead of being loyal (and
I suspect with some vengeance for no longer being THE power), went the
other way. Another example is how a new EB member repeatedly tries
(and in one instance was successful) to usurp the president's power
when all the power an EB member should have is the ability to propose,
debate and vote on EB motions.

When a policy is decided upon, every EB member should fall in line
behind that policy and support the federation. That is currently not
the case. Minority EB members strive to undermine any action that they
do not like. No board can competently operate like this.

One a policy decision is made the EB members should either get behind
the President and Director or shut up and get out of the way.

Let the leaders lead. We can't all be chiefs.
_________________
Steve in Tennessee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:44 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Thanks Steve for your comments,

Can someone provide a quick, yet neutral, summary of the Niro years?
Is this when the infighting started getting bad? I was not here at the
time, and I don't understand what went on. PM me if necessary.

Take care,
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/02/special-college-chess-league.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
rfeditor 10010250

Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 1414

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:39 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
gregory wrote:
Thanks Steve for your comments,

Can someone provide a quick, yet neutral, summary of the Niro years?

I strongly doubt it.

Quote:
Is this when the infighting started getting bad?

No. Not even close. Look up the tenures of De Feis, Filippone, or
Cavallo. The last "strong" ED was Al Lawrence, and the PB eventually
decided he was too strong. In my opinion, they've been
overcompensating for this ever since.
_________________
John Hillery

Last edited by rfeditor 10010250 on Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:01 pm; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:47 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
" The last "strong" ED was Al Lawrence, and the PB eventually decided
he was too strong. In my opinion, they've been overcompensating for
this ever since."

Sorry, but I don't get it Rolling Eyes . What is 'PB', and how did
they overcompensate? From a newcomers perspective, I have the opinion
that there is way too much unnecessary fighting going on instead of
working as a team. I researched some of the prior leaders, and they
all seemed to have strong business or chess related qualifications, so
why does this bitter (and sometimes petty) acrimony exist in our
leadership circles at times? Maybe there is no answer, but I do hope
that it can soon change.

Thanks for the comment,

Gregory
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/02/special-college-chess-league.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com

Last edited by gregory 13474581 on Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:51 pm; edited 2
times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
nolan 10339324

Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
When the political structure of the USCF was changed in 1998, the
Executive Board became the new name for what was previously called the
Policy Board.

As to the infighting, I think Henry Kissinger said it best:

University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so
small

Last edited by nolan 10339324 on Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:53 pm; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:50 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Ahhh... thanks Mike.

LOL Laughing
_________________
Gregory Alexander

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:14 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Gregory, it's time to get specific. One of the criticisms of Susan is
that her generalities tar all chess politicians with the same brush.
She tries to be nice but people inevitably ask, who do you mean? Are
they all bad? Like any group of people, some politicians are bad and
some are good.

With the statement that heads up this thread, the time has come for
the members to take another look at Marinello's leadership record and
make the appropriate conclusions. In the past, she probably did a lot
of good things. But her leadership record now - let's just say that
she ought to have quit in 2006. 2007 has not been kind to Beatriz
Marinello.

Her position on professional responsibilities are, shall we say,
peculiar. She was sanctioned and then her sanction was overturned on
appeal. One of Marinello's legacies to the USCF will be that "he did
it first" is now a valid reason to break confidentiality.

Then there was her hysterical posts on this forum regarding this issue
- which she tied into a she said/she said leg-touching set-to with
Joel Channing.

And now this. I refer to the post quoted by Gregory above. She comes
down on Susan for being "home-schooled". How I wish I could have
graduated from the same "home-school" Susan did! She can speak all of
those languages; I can only speak English.

What really gets me about all of Marinello's latest rant is that it
ends with a P.S. that we ought to excuse her spelling because she is
writing from a school. How I wish I could have used that excuse with
my teachers when I went to school! - And this from an EB Member!

There's a point to this. We don't want personal attacks. We also don't
want to imply that everybody is unprofessional, either. If we really
want to tackle the topic of this thread, then we are going to have to
distinguish between the weak links and the rest. There's a trade-off
here: generalities vs. individuals. We need to seek some middle ground
between the two.

I suggest this. Sam Sloan and Beatriz are weak links. One can only be
gotten shed of by election; the other is a lame duck. If we are only
patient for a few more months, we will be rid of one and hopefully
both.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CHESSDON 10516790

Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Posts: 212
Location: Highland Beach, Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:32 pm Post subject: Weakening of the
ED: Attempt at a brief and fair summary Reply with quote
rfeditor wrote:
gregory wrote:
Thanks Steve for your comments,

Can someone provide a quick, yet neutral, summary of the Niro years?

I strongly doubt it.

Is this when the infighting started getting bad?

John: "No. Not even close. Look up the tenures of De Feis, Filippone,
or Cavallo. The last "strong" ED was Al Lawrence, and the PB
eventually decided he was too strong. In my opinion, they've been
overcompensating for this ever since."

DS: John Hillery. IMO, has it right though I think he is wrong on
Cavallo.

Cerainly Lawrence was a strong ED with most of the qualities we would
like to see in an ED.

When Defies came in, he did not know the USCF and was at the mercy of
informed volunteeer organizers. Defeis ran the organization through
appeasement of the most vocal of them.

In my personal opinion, Niro was a strong con man. He made a great
impression and IMO fooled us all. He always said yes and covered up
well until the walls came down.

By the time Beatriz took over as president, the position of ED was
dominated by a Borad micro-managing every key decision. Beatriz was
was a tiger of a president. The Marinello Board was down to two
choices for ED: Bill Hall and a strong willed talented senior
government official. They gave the job to the one they thought they
could control. I voted for the other one because I believed Bill was
unqualified.

I was wrong about Hall. Whether unqualified at the start or not, Bill
Hall is sharp and doing a good job working under two strong leaders
Goichberg and Channing both of whom are very demanding. The effect is
some bumps but a federation back on track and doing well, IMO.

Along side the normal management are a focus by USCF critics on
mistakes of the past and an evolution of the Internet publicly
bringing to the fore personnal attacks and counter attacks. How to
cope with the situation is guided by many who feel they must correct
the record, a desire by some to purge from the organization those that
they feel must be purged to save the USCF and a reluctance by others
to bypass what they feel is due process. Added to all this are an
assorment of posters deliberately posting false statements and even
using the names of others to make them look bad.

Where do we go from here and how? Ten candidates will be answering
this question. I urge everyone to listen and vote on who THEY believe
will do the best. My advice: Don't be told how you must vote,
certainly listen to advice and recommendations but vote for whom you
think will do the best job.

Where will it end. My take - Despite tough challenges ahead; "The best
is yet to come!"

Don Schultz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Hi Jack,

While I personally agree that it is time to vote for change, your post
does not address what I meant. Weak link, or not, most of our leaders,
both former and current, need to recognize that there is a shared goal
that we are seeking, that is to promote our shared community and the
game of chess, and I would like to believe that most of our leadership
tries honestly to promote the game. Mistakes may have been made, but I
bet that the biggest mistake was not combining the talents of the
whole group and march forward as a team.

I can understand our leaders getting passionate, but they need to
attack the idea that they don't like, not the personality.
Furthermore, every individual approaches a problem a different way,
and there needs to be more patience and respect for their qualities. I
hope that our leaders, past, present, and future, can recognize that
most of leadership tried hard to promote our game, and lay-off the
personal attacks. It is not needed. The divisive personal attacks
effect our entire community.

Just my overly-idealistic take,

Gregory
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/02/special-college-chess-league.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com

Last edited by gregory 13474581 on Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:30 pm; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
rfeditor 10010250

Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 1414

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject: Re: Weakening of
the ED: Attempt at a brief and fair summary Reply with quote
CHESSDON wrote:

DS: John Hillery. IMO, has it right though I think he is wrong on
Cavallo.

I'm not sure what you mean. If you read it as comparing the
performance of the three named, I apologize. I do have an opinion on
that, but I'm not giving it here. Cavallo was forced out after a
fairly short period, which illustrates the Board/ED imbalance I was
referring to.
_________________
John Hillery
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
CHESSDON 10516790

Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Posts: 212
Location: Highland Beach, Florida

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject: Re: Weakening of
the ED: Attempt at a brief and fair summary Reply with quote
rfeditor wrote:
CHESSDON wrote:

DS: John Hillery. IMO, has it right though I think he is wrong on
Cavallo.

Right, I think he was in a different class than the other two. no need
to apologize, I probably interpreted you wrong.

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
ICC-TD Duncan 12614202

Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Marina, California USA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:39 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
Gregory, it's time to get specific. One of the criticisms of Susan is
that her generalities tar all chess politicians with the same brush.
She tries to be nice but people inevitably ask, who do you mean? Are
they all bad? Like any group of people, some politicians are bad and
some are good.

Then there was her hysterical posts on this forum regarding this issue
- which she tied into a she said/she said leg-touching set-to with
Joel Channing.

Excuse me Jack but this personal attack from someone who is so
concerned with "cleaning up the Forums" is completely off target.

You might disagree with Beatriz but let me tell you that she has the
done 1000 times more than I, you or most anyone here for the USCF.

She was instrumental in saving the USCF from bankruptcy. She was the
driving force in getting the new HQ built in Crossville. Just to name
two things I think are so incredibly important. Would the USCF still
be here if she had not stepped in and made some drastic changes?
Probably. But maybe not. Think about THAT.

Please, do me a personal favor: Think about what you just posted.

I don't think you were fair and you are letting personal bias (and the
feelings of other influential chess politicians) sway you.

And to pick at her grammar is a low blow. She is not a native English
speaker.

Thanks Jack for listening! Very Happy
_________________
--Duncan R Oxley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
jacklemoine 10509327

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:59 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Gregory, I wonder if we may be arriving at the same conclusions but
from different directions. Consider your last statement

gregory wrote:
Just my overly-idealistic take,

Gregory

John F. Kennedy once was asked to describe himself as a politician. He
said, "an idealist without illusions." I liked that. It described a
middle ground between over-idealism and cynicism.

It's easy to be theoretical. It's easy to say, "you two boys should
try to get along." But when you're one of the two boys and you've been
slammed down to the pavement, and the bully is whipping the tar out of
you, how are you supposed to "get along?"

The point I tried to make with my first post above was that just
sticking to generalities does not describe, much less address the
point you are trying to make. When we paint everybody with the same
brush we equalize the behavior and exhalt the guilty at the expense of
the innocent.

Yes, everybody on the EB ought to do the things you describe, yet some
try and some do not. Imagine how discouraging it must be to receive no
recognition for one's efforts, to suffer the attacks, and then to be
lumped in with the attackers! Also, imagine how enabling it is to
attack, to lie, to do all these bad things, and then to see your
victims treated the same as yourself!

I'm proposing that we arrive at the goals you seek by traveling a
middle road. Be an idealist without illusions; combining the practical
with the theoretical.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ueschessmom 13470792

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:21 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
With all due respect Mr. Oxley, let's remember how this whole thing
started. It was when Ms. Marinello came out of nowhere (really, when
was her last post on this forum?) to refer to Susan Polgar as
"arrogant" and "out of touch with reality." I think that those of us
who have seen Susan in action, working with children and inspiring
them whether at a simul at the Nationals or at the monthly tournaments
at her own chess center, were taken aback by the remark. I guess I
would like to think that the leaders of this organization are above
that kind of personal attack.

artichoke 10167825

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 971
Location: Connecticut

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:26 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Those who haven't been to an EB meeting should try to go. You'll see
that these people on the EB really aren't raving maniacs, not a one of
them. At least they weren't at the November meeting, and I understand
they weren't at the February meeting either.

This is not to say that they don't have their own micro-agendas,
within the general goal of moving USCF forward.

This forum is endless politics but there really is some real work
being done. It's hard to believe given all the **** one reads here but
nevertheless, people are ignoring it when they need to get things
done. I don't think the worst of the flaming here starts with the EB.
This forum will be a nuthouse as long as there are nutty people
posting here. And everyone will think that the other guy is nutty, so
it's gonna continue like this, and it's OK because it doesn't affect
the actual work being done by some of us and on behalf of all of us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jacklemoine 10509327

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:55 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Duncan, okay I thought about what I said but I am afraid that I must
stick to my guns on this one - for now, at least. There may be some
points that I'm missing here. My problem is that the points in your
post do not make it for me. Let's consider them but first see my reply
to Gregory above. I'm not trying to just make an attack. I'm trying to
find a middle road here that can do us some good.

Now to your points:

ICC-TD Duncan wrote:
You might disagree with Beatriz but let me tell you that she has the
done 1000 times more than I, you or most anyone here for the USCF.

First, this isn't about disagreeing with Beatriz, it is about
Beatriz's personal attacks and unethical actions. There is a
difference between a person making personal attacks and a person
saying the person was wrong to make personal attacks. The first is an
attack; the second is not.

As for what she has done in the past, perhaps you missed the
applicable part of my statement you quoted.

jacklemoine wrote:
In the past, she probably did a lot of good things. But her leadership
record now - let's just say that she ought to have quit in 2006. 2007
has not been kind to Beatriz Marinello.

The principle here is that a politician's past record do not enable
him/her to behave badly in the present, nor ought it immunize him/her
from criticism for present misconduct.

ICC-TD Duncan wrote:
I don't think you were fair and you are letting personal bias (and the
feelings of other influential chess politicians) sway you.

This is a very broad brush statement. I've spoken out repeatedly
against the over-partisanship in our culture generally, as well as the
USCF. It was in that vein that I started the thread, "The Case Against
Susan Polgar" in these forums and made my best effort to make one and
invited Susan's enemies to advance theirs. Then I posted my criticisms
of Susan (my "personal attacks", if you will) directly onto her blog
for her to examine and comment on herself. I try very hard not to be
partisan.

ICC-TD Duncan wrote:
And to pick at her grammar is a low blow. She is not a native English
speaker.

Thanks Jack for listening!

Actually, her statement was what drove me over the edge and caused me
to reply in the first place. She made such a big deal in her own post
that Susan wasn't certified, that she was home-schooled, and so forth
compared with Beatriz herself who taught 35 hours each week since
1990.

Now, Duncan, if somebody - anybody - is going to go on about how
credentialed they are and how uncredentialed somebody else is, how
educated they are and how uneducated somebody else is, what an
experienced educator they are and how unexperienced somebody else is,
then they ought not end their statement with "PS: Please forget my
spelling, I am writing from the school."

BTW, I note that Susan, in addition to her claimed inferior education
and teaching skills does not have problems with elementary spelling
and grammar. She's not a native English speaker, either!

Duncan, here's why I am dwelling on this matter at such length: if my
statement is the low blow here and Beatriz's is not; or even if BOTH
our statements are "low blows", then how are we ever going to be able
to clean up the USCF? People will always attack one another with
impunity because the second anyone calls them on it, then that anyone
is accused of "attacking" and "low blows" himself.

My whole point here is that if we want to accomplish what Gregory
called for, we have got to be able to distinguish between the guilty
and the innocent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ICC-TD Duncan 12614202

Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Marina, California USA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:03 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
Duncan, okay I thought about what I said

Wow, this is actually a much better answer than I thought would come!

Please, give me until tomorrow to reply.

Thank you Jack.
_________________
--Duncan R Oxley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
SteveTN 12467003

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 338
Location: Nashville, TN

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:

My whole point here is that if we want to accomplish what Gregory
called for, we have got to be able to distinguish between the guilty
and the innocent.

In the Polgar Marinello saga there is more than enough blame to go
around just as there is more than enough accolades to go around. Jack,
I think from what you have written that you do not know the whole
story (even those of us that were around the USCF the past decade or
so don't know it) and this is why what you think are justified
statements sound fairly hypocritical to others.

Marinello literally yanked the USCF from the precipice of the abyss
mere hours after she took over as President. A lot of hard, unpopular
decisions had to be made and she made them while enduring a lot worse
from many quarters. I'm not excusing the things like the FIDE election
debacle or the Natrol mess, but what Marinello achieved as USCF
President now enable you to complain about our current situation as
there would be no USCF without her direction.

Just the attacks on Marinello from Sloan, which make the stuff he says
here about Polgar pale in comparison, would have been enough to make
most run away screaming. She also had to deal with a lot of strife
from some of the people you now say are the gleaming white knights
riding to the rescue. How ironic that they are now coming "to save"
the organization when they helped create more problems when Marinello
was in the midst of saving the USCF from financial ruin.

The point is that there are no innocents in this one and I'm on record
as saying I'm going to vote for at least one those (Bauer) on the
slate that is not a slate. Polgar and the other two may make great EB
members, but please remember that when you speak of political sins no
robe in this race is without some fairly large spots.
_________________
Steve in Tennessee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:49 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Hi Steve, Duncan, et-al,

Just for the clarification, I understand Beatriz's vast contributions
to the USCF, and hold no ill will towards her and even wrote to defend
her choice to be neutral during the FIDE mess. I said the same thing
then to her opponents in that issue as I told her today; that is, why
can't we agree to disagree and work as a team? As ueschessmom already
stated, Beatriz came out of the blue with her comments-- they were
uncalled for. Unless you are forced to do so; don't take your personal
criticisms against each other publicly. Lets learn how to forgive and
move on...

Gregory
_________________
Gregory Alexander

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2007/02/special-college-chess-league.html#links
www.collegechessleague.com

Last edited by gregory 13474581 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:35 am; edited 1
time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
jacklemoine 10509327

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:01 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Steve, just to show you what an ignoramous I am, I don't even know
that the "Natrol" mess is. I'll even take you at your word and assume
the worst about Polgar's conduct during Marinello's Presidency.

I really don't see what any of that has anything to do with what I
wrote. I specifically stated that Beatriz Marinello did good before
2006.

Does that mean that we just give Marinello a blank check to behave
badly in 2007?

It is BM's 2007 conduct that I wrote about.

As for SP, I did a thread, "The Case Against Susan Polgar" just so I
and the rest of us wouldn't be surprised with posts like the above -
and nobody said a word about any of this. I just think that this is a
rotten way of doing things - just bring out innuendos drip, drip, drip
- and not just letting out what's what.

If SP is really so stained and guilty, then why couldn't the case
against her have been made in an honest, straight-forward manner, like
I attempted to do?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SusanPolgar 12452240

Joined: 25 Sep 2005
Posts: 78
Location: Forest Hills, NY

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:28 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
I would like to thank everyone for their comments about this issue.
Whether we agree or disagree with Beatriz, let's give her the respect
she deserves as the former President of the USCF. Let's also thank
Beatriz for her dedication to chess.

As I clearly stated in my candidate statement, some of my many goals
if I am elected are:

- Restore respectability, integrity, credibility and professionalism
to the USCF.
- End the petty and destructive politics.
- Develop strong cooperation and support for adult, scholastic,
collegiate, correspondence and military chess, etc.
- Re-establish a sound and balanced budget.
- Establish a strong professional marketing and PR system.

The USCF cannot afford to continue to endure the constant bickering,
finger pointing, hatred and animosity toward each other. I do not want
to engage in any war. I do not want to play any dirty or destructive
political game. I just want to help chess. We have a lot of work to
do.

Let's give Beatriz the last words and let's move on.

Thank you!
Susan Polgar
_________________
www.SusanPolgar.blogspot.com
www.SusanPolgarFoundation.org
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.uschess.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website
samsloan 11115292

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1002
Location: Bronx, New York

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:29 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
BTW, I note that Susan, in addition to her claimed inferior education
and teaching skills does not have problems with elementary spelling
and grammar. She's not a native English speaker, either!

How do you know this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
gregory 13474581

Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 376
Location: Seattle, Wa

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:33 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Well said Susan Polgar,
_________________
Gregory Alexander

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:41 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
samsloan wrote:
jacklemoine wrote:
BTW, I note that Susan, in addition to her claimed inferior education
and teaching skills does not have problems with elementary spelling
and grammar. She's not a native English speaker, either!

How do you know this?

Because she's Hungarian. Duh!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
samsloan 11115292

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1002
Location: Bronx, New York

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:50 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
samsloan wrote:
jacklemoine wrote:
BTW, I note that Susan, in addition to her claimed inferior education
and teaching skills does not have problems with elementary spelling
and grammar. She's not a native English speaker, either!

How do you know this?

Because she's Hungarian. Duh!

I mean, how do you know that she "does not have problems with
elementary spelling and grammar".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
ppwchess 11041957

Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 275
Location: Downstate NY

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:48 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
samsloan wrote:
jacklemoine wrote:
samsloan wrote:
jacklemoine wrote:
BTW, I note that Susan, in addition to her claimed inferior education
and teaching skills does not have problems with elementary spelling
and grammar. She's not a native English speaker, either!

How do you know this?

Because she's Hungarian. Duh!

I mean, how do you know that she "does not have problems with
elementary spelling and grammar".

Aren't there better things to discuss the spelling and grammar? I see
mispellings and typos on here all the time. Yes they should be fixed,
but sometimes in the heat of trying to get one's thoughts down they
happen. I have this habit of the word that coming out as taht. Most of
the time I catch it, but sometimes I don't. Spell checkers in
wordprocessing programs make the abitity to spell obsolete.

I'm getting thoroughly disgusted with all the bickering, name calling,
arguing over petty stuff. Let's get back to discussing issues, and
having the candidates discuss their vision and credentials without
opponents jumping down their throat. This campaign is barely a month
old and this reeks more then the attack letter campaigns of the early
90s before OMOV.

I am embarrassed by the slimey nature this campaign has taken on. My
husband who does not play chess, but has a financial background reads
some of this stuff, and says USCF is the most disfunctional
organization he's ever seen.

Over the years I've become friends with many people on the various
boards, and friends with both sides of the various factions. I keep my
voting decisions to myself, because no matter who was elected I want
to feel like I can talk to these people and express my concerns.

Right now I'm equally fed up with the people who demonize candidates,
and those that see that they can do no wrong. Enough of "He said, she
said." I'm not sure I can take 5 more months of this crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Tim Just 10334471

Joined: 21 Dec 2003
Posts: 306

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:20 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
IMHO: The USCF is a democratic organization. Democratic organizations
tend to be adversarial by nature. Adversity promotes a win-lose
mindset instead of a win-win mindset. Right now the politics happen to
be really intense. The tides of time, as they alwys seem to, will
change that.

Tim
_________________
There is a fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jacklemoine 10509327

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 247
Location: Atlanta, GA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:14 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
I'm going to have to leave off posting for awhile due to work
committments but I must say a few things before I go.

I'm a little irritated by the "holier than thou" tone some of the
people have been taking. Somebody comes in and makes a sincere effort
to make a difference and how are their efforts labeled? - "bickering,
name calling, arguing over petty stuff" - Other than the usual Sam
Sloan garbage, there was nothing petty about what we were discussing
here.

Note that: Other than the usual Sam Sloan garbage.

Nor was there anybody on this thread who disrespected Beatriz
Marinello or who failed to recognize her past achievements. I wonder
if people even read what folks write before they condemn them.

These statements only confirm what I'm concerned about. Gregory's and
Susan's platitudes will go nowhere unless people take the trouble to
discern the difference between the guilty and the innocent. How does
anybody expect people to try to help improve things if their efforts
are reduced to "petty bickering"?

My last thought before I go: Make an effort. How can we expect the
leaders to discern between right and wrong if we don't want to do so
ourselves?

Goodby for now. Take care. Jack
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Terry_Vibbert 13076592

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 102
Location: Evansville, IN

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:29 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
I'm going to have to leave off posting for awhile due to work
committments but I must say a few things before I go.

Note that: Other than the usual Sam Sloan garbage.

Nor was there anybody on this thread who disrespected Beatriz
Marinello or who failed to recognize her past achievements. I wonder
if people even read what folks write before they condemn them.

My last thought before I go: Make an effort. How can we expect the
leaders to discern between right and wrong if we don't want to do so
ourselves?

Goodby for now. Take care. Jack

Thank you, Jack for your attempts to clear a muddy stream. I
appreciate your clarity in analysis and fearless attempts to call
attention to important issues. Come back soon.

ueschessmom 13470792

Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:30 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
I agree with the previous post. I think that there is an issue of
moral equivalence. Yesterday began with Jack raising an interesting
substantive issue about whether there should be a split between adult
chess and scholastic chess. Some people responded in a substantive
manner. I am the parent of a scholastic player but I used examples
from tennis and skating to say that I didn't think there should be a
split. No personal attacks. Then one of the current Executive Board
members comes out of left field with a direct personal attack against
one of the candidates, accusing her of arrogance and being out of
touch with reality. Then another current Executive Board member
fabricates statements about that other candidate's background and
qualifications. They were demonstrably false. I and others called him
on it. Maybe some people think that's petty and I would rather
participate in discussions of substance than engage in "gotcha"
contests but when someone in a position of power/authority tells
blatant lies, someone has to call them on it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
samsloan 11115292

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1002
Location: Bronx, New York

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:33 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
On this subject, I challenge you or anybody to provide even one
example of a post by Polgar or Truong that does not attack somebody.

Every posting by Polgar or Truong attacks somebody.

Please provide an example that proves me wrong.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
chrisfalter 12754009

Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:13 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
samsloan wrote:
On this subject, I challenge you or anybody to provide even one
example of a post by Polgar or Truong that does not attack somebody.

Every posting by Polgar or Truong attacks somebody.

Please provide an example that proves me wrong.

Sam Sloan

Completely unbelievable. This challenge is coming from an individual
who has a thoroughly documented history of writing fabrications and
outrageous libels.

Not only that, but it appears that Sloan does not even bother to read
the rest of the thread he posts in. It just so happens that 10 hours
before Sloan's challenge, Susan had written this:

SusanPolgar wrote:
I would like to thank everyone for their comments about this issue.
Whether we agree or disagree with Beatriz, let's give her the respect
she deserves as the former President of the USCF. Let's also thank
Beatriz for her dedication to chess.

As I clearly stated in my candidate statement, some of my many goals
if I am elected are:

Let's give Beatriz the last words and let's move on.

Thank you!
Susan Polgar

There is nothing remotely approaching an attack in this post. She does
observe that discord exists, but she doesn't attack any individual or
identifiable group.

You should start taking your own advice, Mr. Sloan: read more, write
less.
_________________
Chris Falter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
samsloan 11115292

Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1002
Location: Bronx, New York

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:27 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
chrisfalter wrote:
samsloan wrote:
On this subject, I challenge you or anybody to provide even one
example of a post by Polgar or Truong that does not attack somebody.

Every posting by Polgar or Truong attacks somebody.

Please provide an example that proves me wrong.

Sam Sloan

Completely unbelievable. This challenge is coming from an individual
who has a thoroughly documented history of writing fabrications and
outrageous libels.

Not only that, but it appears that Sloan does not even bother to read
the rest of the thread he posts in. It just so happens that 10 hours
before Sloan's challenge, Susan had written this:

As I clearly stated in my candidate statement, some of my many goals
if I am elected are:

Let's give Beatriz the last words and let's move on.

Thank you!
Susan Polgar

There is nothing remotely approaching an attack in this post. She does
observe that discord exists, but she doesn't attack any individual or
identifiable group.

You should start taking your own advice, Mr. Sloan: read more, write
less.

You have failed to note the last sentence in this standard "feel good"
Polgar post:

"Let's give Beatriz the last words and let's move on."

Obviously, in context, this is an attack on Beatriz.

So, you have failed to produce a Polgar post that does not attack
somebody.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's
website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Smith 12816225

Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 72

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:29 am Post subject: Reply with
quote
chrisfalter wrote:
samsloan wrote:
On this subject, I challenge you or anybody to provide even one
example of a post by Polgar or Truong that does not attack somebody.

Every posting by Polgar or Truong attacks somebody.

Please provide an example that proves me wrong.

Sam Sloan

Completely unbelievable. This challenge is coming from an individual
who has a thoroughly documented history of writing fabrications and
outrageous libels.

Not only that, but it appears that Sloan does not even bother to read
the rest of the thread he posts in. It just so happens that 10 hours
before Sloan's challenge, Susan had written this:

As I clearly stated in my candidate statement, some of my many goals
if I am elected are:

Let's give Beatriz the last words and let's move on.

Thank you!
Susan Polgar

There is nothing remotely approaching an attack in this post. She does
observe that discord exists, but she doesn't attack any individual or
identifiable group.

You should start taking your own advice, Mr. Sloan: read more, write
less.

She doesn't have to attack anyone because there are plenty of her
supporters who will do the dirty work for her. She can simply log on,
talk about unity and sound like a saint. She's playing the game well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chrisfalter 12754009

Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:24 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
samsloan wrote:

Obviously, in context, this is an attack on Beatriz.

Obviously, in Sloan's mind, this is an attack. I took Polgar's
admonition to mean "let's not worry about what Beatriz said. Time to
move on." Attack? NOT.

But since you seem so eager to play the game, Mr. Sloan, let's examine
some more of Susan's and Paul's most recent posts.

SusanPolgar wrote:

Best wishes to Mike [Goodall] for a speedy and full recovery!

Susan Polgar

SusanPolgar wrote:
artichoke wrote:
He [Razmik Abrahamyan] died too soon. I'm very sorry to hear this.

Yes, it is too soon and the family is devastated.

SusanPolgar wrote:
Sevan Muradian wrote:
I re-posted this [message about Razmik Abrahamyan's untimely death]
also on the IL forums. I would ask that anyone that access access to
your own state or city wide discussion forums to post this message
there as well.

--Sevan

Thank you Sevan! It is wonderful to see our chess community come
together to help a fellow chess member.

ChessPromotion wrote:
snits wrote:
Paul, if you are allowed can you tell us what some of the [forthcoming
ICC] improvements are?

To be honest, I do not know all the exact details and I do not want to
give wrong information. I believe that the ICC management will make
the official announcements soon. What I can say is from what I saw, it
will help more players and families (especially young people) stay in
chess longer.

ChessPromotion wrote:

Jon,

Both you and Dylan are correct. Chess is not big to the mainstream
people. But I have news for you, Katie Couric (CBS) will likely do a
story about chess very soon. The time has changed with new technology.
Blogging has become a major player in the media world. I have seen the
incredible numbers first hand.

Susan just finished filming for BBC, National Geographic, Discovery,
etc. and these shows will be shown in over 100 countries. The interest
is there but someone has to feed the media the "right" story. You have
to know what to sell and how to sell it.

There are 2 BIG stories in this election. This is not a "typical"
election. I expect it to get more coverage. It is too early for media
people but things will change in June / July. Dylan is not the only
one asking a lot of questions so far.

Best regards,
PT

ChessPromotion wrote:
gregory wrote:
I am not keeping up with the threads here, nor did I read Susan's site
today, Jack; thank-you for pointing this out.

I hope that you have a speedy and full recovery Susan!

Gregory

Thank you everyone! Susan asked me to post a thank you note on her
behalf. She was released from the hospital last night after spending
most of the day at the emergency room. The minor surgery went well but
she has to take it easy for the next week to ten days.

I could cite literally dozens more posts by Susan and Paul, but I
think I've made the point abundantly clear.

I suspect that you will be tempted to respond by quoting from one or
two of their posts, and then allege that one or both of your 2 rivals
did make an attack. That would be completely irrelevant to this
discussion. You didn't claim that some of their postings make attacks;
you stated categorically that every posting did. And you asked for a
single counter-example; I have provided many.

Mr. Sloan, you should be embarrassed, repentant, and apologetic for
stating something so ridiculous as "Every posting by Polgar or Truong
attacks somebody."

Sam Sloan's recent comment: "You should read more, and write less."

Indeed.
_________________
Chris Falter

Last edited by chrisfalter 12754009 on Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:29 pm;
edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
chrisfalter 12754009

Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:27 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
Smith wrote:

Sloan has supporters; he could do the same thing. Instead, he has
chosen to write fabrications and libels. Interesting leadership
style....
_________________
Chris Falter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
chrisfalter 12754009

Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 108

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:32 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
ueschessmom wrote:
I agree with the previous post. I think that there is an issue of
moral equivalence. Yesterday began with Jack raising an interesting
substantive issue about whether there should be a split between adult
chess and scholastic chess. Some people responded in a substantive
manner. I am the parent of a scholastic player but I used examples
from tennis and skating to say that I didn't think there should be a
split. No personal attacks. Then one of the current Executive Board
members comes out of left field with a direct personal attack against
one of the candidates, accusing her of arrogance and being out of
touch with reality. Then another current Executive Board member
fabricates statements about that other candidate's background and
qualifications. They were demonstrably false. I and others called him
on it. Maybe some people think that's petty and I would rather
participate in discussions of substance than engage in "gotcha"
contests but when someone in a position of power/authority tells
blatant lies, someone has to call them on it.

I could not have said it better.
_________________
Chris Falter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ppwchess 11041957

Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 275
Location: Downstate NY

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 1:29 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
I'm a little irritated by the "holier than thou" tone some of the
people have been taking. Somebody comes in and makes a sincere effort
to make a difference and how are their efforts labeled? - "bickering,
name calling, arguing over petty stuff" - Other than the usual Sam
Sloan garbage, there was nothing petty about what we were discussing
here.

My last thought before I go: Make an effort. How can we expect the
leaders to discern between right and wrong if we don't want to do so
ourselves?

Goodby for now. Take care. Jack

I am not trying to be holier then thou, but I though that it was very
petty to be making snarky comments about someone's inferior education,
and mispellings and grammar mistakes. That's what ticked me off.

This thread has had some some interesting points raised, and I've
appreciated the candidness of Don and Beatriz in discussing the issues
raised. I just get irritated when the discussion gets hijacked and
then we get a war of words between the hijacker, the opponents and the
fans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
ICC-TD Duncan 12614202

Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 142
Location: Marina, California USA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject: Reply with
quote
jacklemoine wrote:
Duncan, okay I thought about what I said but ...

Hi Jack,

You make some good points. Let's just agree to disagree on this one. I
like what Susan Polgar said as well in her post to this thread.
_________________
--Duncan R Oxley

0 new messages