Why does it have no book or equipment sales? I see the insert in the Chess Lifes that I get in the mail.
Current state of the USCF
Sort:
They are going to announce a new vendor soon--the previous vendor (Chess Cafe) stopped as of May 1 I think and is involved in a legal action with the USCF as well.
Also the original deal to outsource to Chess Cafe (rumored to be 30K a month) was quickly re-negotiated after some non-payment and I think the current deal was closer to 10K a month. There were not many bidders for the concession and it is hard to say how much revenue they will get. I am not sure who the new seller will be but one rumor I heard was Cajun Chess. (emphasis rumor)
Jun 19, 2009
0
#44
banjoman wrote:
Dietmar wrote:
4. I think another poster already responded to this in the same vein as I would. Promising to not sue the organization whose interest you claim to hold dear isn't a compelling argument.
This is a clumsy misreading of my argument. I don't believe Polgar or anyone is "promising not to sue," nor would it matter if she were. I don't care what Polgar wants or says. My argument is that, from the standpoint of voters like ourselves, I find it desirable to eliminate the conditions that give rise to these lawsuits. It seems obvious to me that electing new leadership would accomplish this goal, whereas re-electing the incumbents would not. The whole premise of my post was that it seems difficult to identify who is right or wrong in this political struggle between Polgar and Goichberg. I have read a lot of anecdotal pro and con about each of these people in this thread, but nothing that really clarifies the dispute. So why bother trying? Nobody among ordinary USCF members can really tell what is going on, so it is better to vote based on what is broadly in the best interests of the organization. I have tried to explain why a vote for the reformers accomplishes that goal, and I would really like to hear from supporters of the incumbents why they think their vote would do the same.
Your argument has several flaws. For one it would be wishful thinking that the lawsuits would just go away if those three candidates get elected. Secondly, your claim that it is difficult to determine who is wrong or right is false. Suing the organization that you have a fiduciary duty to is wrong - no matter the circumstance. If you feel you have a grievance then resign from the board and then sue. Further, look at the merit of the suit. Suing more than a dozen very diverse organizations and individuals that range from Sam Sloan to the USCF attorney without ever providing any specific charges ring more like an attempt of legal intimidation rather then anything else. Admittedly, you may have to do some reading to get to the bottom of it but simply reading Polgar's lawsuit should trigger some head scratching.
The thing that started all this was the FSS issue. Ironically, the other candidate that you voted for, Brian Mottershead, started to get the ball rolling by linking Paul Truong, to the posts. His analysis has yet to be shown to be flawed, Truong refuses to declare under oath that he had nothing to do with it, and whatever supporters are left no longer offer exculpatory evidence but rather flaws of process.
Re-electing the incumbents (or anyone else for that matter that decided to look at the evidence and come to the conclusion that the USCF point of view has merit - Mike Nietman comes to mind) means that the USCF cannot be held hostage by legal threats. The time for depositions and legal verdicts is drawing closer so what looks like a deadlock at this point could become a fluid situation in an instant. There is the annual meeting in August that could send a strong message. Unlike last year, many more delegates and members are informed. While the outcome of the recall votes will be by no means a foregone conclusion I doubt it will look similar to last year when the delegates decided that they knew too little to make such a drastic decision.
Bottom line the USCF is in trouble-as of now it has no book or equipment sales to bolster revenue (which in the prime brought in over $200,000 per year). The last 5 years or so the only way a US championship was held was by private sponsors paying for the event. The magazine Chess Life is a shell of its former self.
Scholastic chess is very strong and there are some great young players coming up through the system (Hess, Shankland to name two) but the organization is floundering with bitter divisions and lawsuits. Except for the post Fischer years (1972-75) the USCF has almost always had political turmoil.
Bottom line--does it effect the average player and does anyone really care?