I don't know how this thread got hijacked so quickly, but what do you expect for an international publication? They have to ship it there, you know.
Hmmmmm, you are always taking pot shots at me loomis, you gotta problem with me? If you do just spit it out and dont be shy.
I don't know what your perceived issue is. I guess I've commented on some of your posts, but I've never made a personal attack or taken a shot at you. If you have an issue with me, maybe this thread isn't the right place for it (no need to get in the way of people having a real discussion).
So the problem I have is that it comes down to which figure you trust more - Mr. Goichberg or Ms. Polgar. (I don't count Mr. Sloan.) The problem is that I have no reason to distrust either one - I just know that they for some reason can't really coexist. I don't believe either one when they say "we cannot allow the federation to fall into the hands of the other, it would bankrupt the federation", because I don't think either one would do that.
Sorry if this sounds not well thought out, but I really don't know how to make heads or tails of this. And what better place to discuss this than on a chess website!
Realistically, a different federation would start up and USCF would sell it's assets to that new federation, which presumably would include the ratings and rating history for each player.
I guess if we can make a lot of money from an IPO it wouldn't be all bad, right? Then maybe we can put up some Nakamura for World Champion posters...
So I should not be trusting Ms. Polgar then. What about Mr. Goichberg. I have never met Ms. Polgar, but I have met Mr. Goichberg many times, so I do have an opinion of him already.
Wow, you guys are constructive and helpful today. He would like to get a chess life at least because that seems the easiest say to have gotten a ballot.
The USCF decided recently they could save money by converting many regular membership types to online memberships. This means you don't get the magazine mailed to you, you have to go online for the content. As far as I know there wasn't really an anouncement about this. I think you can request to receive the magazine.
That's not quite how it works. If you have been receiving the magazine you will continue to receive it until your membership expires. When you renew your membership you have the option of continuing to receive the magazine or opt for the online version only (which I did).
And what is your opinion of Mr. Sam Sloan?
The best thing that can be said about Mr. Sloan is that he publishes chess books that are no longer in circulation or difficult to obtain.
Wow, you guys are constructive and helpful today. He would like to get a chess life at least because that seems the easiest say to have gotten a ballot.
The USCF decided recently they could save money by converting many regular membership types to online memberships. This means you don't get the magazine mailed to you, you have to go online for the content. As far as I know there wasn't really an anouncement about this. I think you can request to receive the magazine.
That's not quite how it works. If you have been receiving the magazine you will continue to receive it until your membership expires. When you renew your membership you have the option of continuing to receive the magazine or opt for the online version only (which I did).
When I registered for USCF membership earlier this year, I had the option of purchasing a "Deluxe Membership" in which I reciece a year's subscription to Chess Life magazine. The online version was available to all memberships.
...
The Zombie Chess Federation perhaps.
Don't knock it...: http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/undead-members
A single issue of Chess Life costs about $8- $9 here in Lisbon ! Incredible.
The magazine is an absolute rag now. Its not even worth paying extra to get, and the coverage is months late, and not even that well done or thourough.
Banjoman, I would like to comment on your points:
1. I don't know on what info besides the candidate statements you base you claim as those three candidates have been virtually silent on anything. Even the current attempt to promote their candidacy on Susan's website is merely a reprint of the candidate statements. Dr. Korenman appears to run the same dispassionate campaign that he ran two years ago. He is well respected but appears to lack enthusiasm that he really wants to be on the board. Does anyone really believe that Jimmy Carter or Anatoly Karpov have an opinion about the USCF elections?
2. Onishuk and Shulman are on record to support Korenman's candidacy, I don't know what their position is in regards to other candidates. At least, in Shulman's case it is hardly surprising as he worked with Korenman for a long time. So his support may very well be the support for a longtime friend rather than a vote against the other candidates.
3. I don't think that Goichberg and Berry are to blame for the current mess. A little history: Two years ago, Berry, Bauer, Polgar and Truong were voted onto the EB. Polgar ran an aggressive campaig for change promoting a slate of four (Bauer, Korenman, Polgar and Truong) with Berry being a acceptable alternative.
Polgar's and Truong's tenure on the board has been an utter disappointment. Out of 98 EB motions they sponsored 8 (2 in 2007/08, 6 in 08/09). Granted, there are motions sponsored by the whole board but it certainly does not reflect a record matching the campaign promises. Lately, they no longer show up to the board meetings in person or skipped them altogether as recently in St. Louis (claiming an unspecified tragedy that caused both of them to leave St. Louis without a chance to inform the other board members).
I will skip the legal mess. Anyone who wants to can register for the USCF issues forum or may want to check out the excellent blogs by Wick Deer (http://www.wduscf.blogspot.com/) or John Hillery (http://westernchess.blogspot.com/search/label/USCF%20politics).
Obviously, all the legal disputes cost a ton of money. I fail to see based on the facts I have how Goichberg et. al. can be held responsible for it.
One thing I like to add. My confidence in Polgar was shattered when it came out that her husband filed for bankruptcy in the first half of 2007 while being touted as a supersuccessful businessman and chess promoter that rescued multi-Billion corporations. I mean I am used to politicians exaggerating a bit their accomplishments but claiming success while filing for bankruptcy is a bit much.
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.
If you go to Polgar's blog you'll find lots of USCF political views, but just those in consonance with Ms. Polgar's views. Any contray opinion by blog visitors is edited out promptly and completely. Perhaps this is just to be expected, but I'd think if she were confident in her positions she could tolerate some disagreement. No chance for robust intercourse there.
When I posted a criticism of the circus color boards and pieces she sells, in response to her post of that equipment, those comments were quickly deleted each time. She/they really can't stand anyone standing agasint them even a little. It's just petty and small of them.
If you go to Polgar's blog you'll find lots of USCF political views, but just those in consonance with Ms. Polgar's views. Any contray opinion by blog visitors is edited out promptly and completely. Perhaps this is just to be expected, but I'd think if she were confident in her positions she could tolerate some disagreement. No chance for robust intercourse there.
When I posted a criticism of the circus color boards and pieces she sells, in response to her post of that equipment, those comments were quickly deleted each time. She/they really can't stand anyone standing agasint them even a little. It's just petty and small of them.
Your observation is spot on. She certainly has every right to control the contents on her blog and which opinions may see the light of day. In all fairness, there is at least one administrator that is overly sensitive to even mildly critical comments. It is uncertain how much Susan is involved in the day-to-day operation of her blog. Regardless of that, her blog is certainly not a place for frank discussion. It is however, a great source for chess related news and chess puzzles.
Keep me away from all that. I "dropped out" about 10 years ago. That is so tragic.
It seems everything has become like college football.
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.
So what would happen if Mr. Goichberg's supporters get elected?
What will happen if Ms. Polgar's supporters get elected?
What will happen if Ms. Polgar's supporters get elected?
Further use of the federation to generate capital for Ms Polgar.
But what would actually happen? What would be Mr. Goichberg's next move? What would Ms. Polgar do if she was in control, other than probably stop her lawsuit?
Is the worst case scenario a stalemate where neither side has enough power to get what they want and the federation goes bankrupt?
The MIT Technology Review is also moving to an online-only version to cut costs. I personally see that as the direction of the future; what I don't like is that they're doing it out of duress.
I have no idea who to support between Mr. Goichberg and Ms. Polgar. Both of them are clearly very passionate about the USCF, and want to see it succeed. (As long as you ignore the statements they make about each other.)
I already voted.