|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > October 2004 > Kudos to the EB
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| JimEade 2004-10-21, 5:46 pm |
| I commend the USCF's EB for its progress in cleaning up the mess left by
others. Short term expense reductions were painful, but necessary. There were
also three difficult more long term goals that had to be met:
1. Sell the building
2. Outsource books and equipment
3. Relocate
The board has accomplished 1 and 2, and is in the process of meeting their
third objective. Meanwhile, the Old Guard is up in arms. That is a sure sign
that the USCF is heading in the right direction.
I would be remiss, if I did not express my gratitude to Bill Goichberg for his
help in a time of great need. I think Bill is an honest businessman, and
sincere in his business dealings. I believe vendors can once again deal with
the USCF in good faith.
It is also time, perhaps past time, for Bill to move on. This Liberty business
is merely the latest in a long line of dustups that get way, way out of
control. Bill has no emotional self-control in these situations, and has
demonstrated this for the kazillionth time.
His crying about personal attacks that somehow justify his misbehavior is also
so, so familiar. He will throw his hissy fits until he somehow gets his way,
and it often works. This time it didn't. It was awful to witness Bill in this
mode when he was a member of the EB, but as ED it is beyond the pale.
The arguments against Crossville are just plain silly. I would've also
supported the Kansas bid. Maybe Liberty could've somehow been turned into a
viable option by a combination of millionaire and billionaire friends of the
USCF and maybe not. It no longer matters. The oddball assortment of dustup
addicts, will try to keep this thread going, but there is no real point.
The decision has been made. The delegates have indicated their support. It's
on to Crossville, a move which, I predict, will solidify the USCF's future.
After years of operational overruns, denied and/or covered up by the Old
Guardists, fiscal responsibility has returned. Finally.
Beatriz is the best USCF President I've known. She saw what needed to be done.
She didn't duck the hard choices, made the hard calls, and endured all the
political machinations in the, increasingly, desperate efforts to thwart her.
In my opinion, she is an unqualified success and she has my gratitude. I
congratulate the entire board, but she deserves special praise.
Now, will somebody please compare someone to Hitler in all those Crossville
threads ... please?
James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
| |
| Chess One 2004-10-21, 5:46 pm |
| So what is the strategic plan Jim - what will USCF now do? And how will they
do it? This is more important than where you park the car.
"JimEade" <jimeade@aol.comSheesh> wrote in message
news:20041021131208.01883.00002140@mb-m14.aol.com...
quote:
>I commend the USCF's EB for its progress in cleaning up the mess left by
> others. Short term expense reductions were painful, but necessary. There
> were
> also three difficult more long term goals that had to be met:
>
> 1. Sell the building
>
> 2. Outsource books and equipment
>
> 3. Relocate
So perhaps we can have a conversation [without mentioning Herr Hitler as you
note below] on a few strategic elements. I re-posted seven of 'em below.
Pick one, and kick it off.
quote:
> The board has accomplished 1 and 2, and is in the process of meeting their
> third objective. Meanwhile, the Old Guard is up in arms. That is a sure
> sign
> that the USCF is heading in the right direction.
>
> I would be remiss, if I did not express my gratitude to Bill Goichberg for
> his
> help in a time of great need. I think Bill is an honest businessman, and
> sincere in his business dealings. I believe vendors can once again deal
> with
> the USCF in good faith.
Yeah. All fears about Bill turned out to be flatulence.
quote:
> It is also time, perhaps past time, for Bill to move on. This Liberty
> business
> is merely the latest in a long line of dustups that get way, way out of
> control. Bill has no emotional self-control in these situations, and has
> demonstrated this for the kazillionth time.
Bill made a point about fair comparisons. I can't see that there was any,
from public writing, and board members certainly seem to think radically
different things from the same set of facts. It would be strange not to
comment on a split 4-3 decision; it is a members organisation after all. But
all in all, now its a done deal.
quote:
> His crying about personal attacks that somehow justify his misbehavior is
> also
> so, so familiar. He will throw his hissy fits until he somehow gets his
> way,
I would be pleased to take your advice, and since you feel, Jim, that the ED
should not voice his opinions on these 'hot' topics, maybe we should extend
him the courtesy of not provoking another one? Instead we could talk about a
topic! Like 'what next?' Pick a strategic area and give us your ten cents -
you are well qualified to do so.
quote:
> and it often works. This time it didn't. It was awful to witness Bill in
> this
> mode when he was a member of the EB, but as ED it is beyond the pale.
Passim.
quote:
> The arguments against Crossville are just plain silly. I would've also
> supported the Kansas bid. Maybe Liberty could've somehow been turned into
> a
> viable option by a combination of millionaire and billionaire friends of
> the
> USCF and maybe not. It no longer matters. The oddball assortment of
> dustup
> addicts, will try to keep this thread going, but there is no real point.
>
> The decision has been made. The delegates have indicated their support.
> It's
> on to Crossville, a move which, I predict, will solidify the USCF's
> future.
> After years of operational overruns, denied and/or covered up by the Old
> Guardists, fiscal responsibility has returned. Finally.
Well. We all hope it will be a success, since its USCF's fling with its last
nickel. When this resource is spent then it will really be all over.
quote:
> Beatriz is the best USCF President I've known. She saw what needed to be
> done.
> She didn't duck the hard choices, made the hard calls, and endured all the
> political machinations in the, increasingly, desperate efforts to thwart
> her.
> In my opinion, she is an unqualified success and she has my gratitude. I
> congratulate the entire board, but she deserves special praise.
Its a risky business, seeing how someone will turn out. If, as you say, B
has stabilised all the necessary things that were truly wonky from the past,
perhaps we could all trun around now and look into the future, so that we
use this new foundation to grow something useful to chess in the country.
I think # vii is now obsolete. # iii is the BIG one. #vi invites a view of
where the org wants to be in five years time, a good device to plan with.
Take your pick!
i) How much work can be achieved by tele-commuting?
ii) What is the staffing need overall?
iii) What staff are identified to be absolutely necessary to USCF's office
/in situ/ and what work will they do?
iv) How much space needs be allocated to these staff? [Sam Sloan's question]
vi) In 5 years time, what are the identified spatial requirements for a USCF
office?
vii) What predicates metro versus rural location? [Larry Parr's question]
Phil Innes
quote:
> Now, will somebody please compare someone to Hitler in all those
> Crossville
> threads ... please?
>
> James Eade
> Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
| |
| Parrthenon 2004-10-22, 6:45 am |
| Jim Eade has written a civil letter. As one would expect, it is tough, but it
remains civil. No name-calling beyond the to be expected "oddball assortment of
dustup addicts."
Mr. Eade speaks about Bill Goichberg "crying" over personal attacks. I haven't
seen any of that. Nor do Bill Goichberg's messages appear to be emotional and
out of hand. In truth, many of them are almost ostentatiously deadpan. Nor have
I read hissy fits from Mr. Goichberg, though Mr. Eade tells us there have been.
One of the strawmen being tossed up is that there is an Old Guard movement to
deny Beatriz Marinello and Tim Hanke their just praise for going to New
Windsor, downing a bottle of rye whiskey, and firing 18 or so people and then
cutting expenses terrifically, under the day-to-day direction of Bill
Goichberg. I am on record as having written repeatedly that Miss Marinello is
the best USCF president since Gary Sperling.
The issue is why the USCF could not have waited for two weeks while a
reputable, chess-helping businessman such as Erik Anderson spoke with Mr. Gerry
about the opportunities to relocate to Liberty, New York. What harm was there
in extending the deadline for two more weeks to see if it was feasiable?
Certainly parlaying with a billionaire philanthropist and keeping most of the
staff in New York instead of ditching them was worth exploring a bit further.
Why such a bloody hurry?
Beatriz Marinello has offered the only half-sensible argument: one must make a
decision at some point, and that decision was finally made. That argument is
insufficient to the point, but it at least addresses the point.
The other arguments were contemptible, to be quite frank. Tim Hanke suggested
that if Liberty were such a hot deal, then either this impecunious writer or
the well-heeled Mr. Goichberg ought to take up a building that was never
offered to us. It is the kind of argument totally unworthy of Mr. Hanke, who
once assured us that Crossville was a dead deal. Now he has done an about face
and tells us he wouldn't take the Liberty property even if the USCF got it for
free!
Mr. Eade has asked for someone to bring Herr Hitler into the argument over
whether to relocate to Crossville or Liberty.
Eric Johnson has done so on the Fide Newsgroup, comparing Erik Anderson's offer
to speak with billionaire Gerry with Hitler's Anschluss offer in 1938. So, yes
indeed, Germany's former fuehrer has now joined us, though introduced into our
company by a supporter of the move to Crossville.
Yours, Larry Parr
Subject: Kudos to the EB
From: mailto:jimeade@aol.comSheesh (JimEade)
Date: 10/21/2004 10:12 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <20041021131208.01883.00002140@mb-m14.aol.com>
I commend the USCF's EB for its progress in cleaning up the mess left by
others. Short term expense reductions were painful, but necessary. There were
also three difficult more long term goals that had to be met:
1. Sell the building
2. Outsource books and equipment
3. Relocate
The board has accomplished 1 and 2, and is in the process of meeting their
third objective. Meanwhile, the Old Guard is up in arms. That is a sure sign
that the USCF is heading in the right direction.
I would be remiss, if I did not express my gratitude to Bill Goichberg for his
help in a time of great need. I think Bill is an honest businessman, and
sincere in his business dealings. I believe vendors can once again deal with
the USCF in good faith.
It is also time, perhaps past time, for Bill to move on. This Liberty business
is merely the latest in a long line of dustups that get way, way out of
control. Bill has no emotional self-control in these situations, and has
demonstrated this for the kazillionth time.
His crying about personal attacks that somehow justify his misbehavior is also
so, so familiar. He will throw his hissy fits until he somehow gets his way,
and it often works. This time it didn't. It was awful to witness Bill in this
mode when he was a member of the EB, but as ED it is beyond the pale.
The arguments against Crossville are just plain silly. I would've also
supported the Kansas bid. Maybe Liberty could've somehow been turned into a
viable option by a combination of millionaire and billionaire friends of the
USCF and maybe not. It no longer matters. The oddball assortment of dustup
addicts, will try to keep this thread going, but there is no real point.
The decision has been made. The delegates have indicated their support. It's
on to Crossville, a move which, I predict, will solidify the USCF's future.
After years of operational overruns, denied and/or covered up by the Old
Guardists, fiscal responsibility has returned. Finally.
Beatriz is the best USCF President I've known. She saw what needed to be done.
She didn't duck the hard choices, made the hard calls, and endured all the
political machinations in the, increasingly, desperate efforts to thwart her.
In my opinion, she is an unqualified success and she has my gratitude. I
congratulate the entire board, but she deserves special praise.
Now, will somebody please compare someone to Hitler in all those Crossville
threads ... please?
James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
________________________________________________________________
"FIDE has made its decision. Players who refuse to be drug tested will not be
able to play chess." -- Dr. Press, co-founder of the FIDE Medical Commission.
| |
| Chess One 2004-10-22, 9:45 am |
|
quote:
> Mr. Eade has asked for someone to bring Herr Hitler into the argument over
> whether to relocate to Crossville or Liberty.
>
> Eric Johnson has done so on the Fide Newsgroup, comparing Erik Anderson's
> offer
> to speak with billionaire Gerry with Hitler's Anschluss offer in 1938. So,
> yes
> indeed, Germany's former fuehrer has now joined us, though introduced into
> our
> company by a supporter of the move to Crossville.
>
> Yours, Larry Parr
/That/ sort of cross? A hooked one! Probably a subliminal reference? 
To surmise:-
BRILLIANT MOVE or EPITAPH
With various board members and the ED understanding wildly different things
from the same set of data, a phone vote results in a split 4-3 decision, and
the 4 don't care to wait 2 weeks to respect the reservations of the 3.
No one to-date has referred to any planning documents in relation to the
move which estimate USCF's future office needs, based on its future
activities.
Instead of an independent assessment by Erik A. or anyone else come to that,
there is an immediate clamour to close the <surprise> issue without further
discussion, and by further I don't mean there was any before.
Bill Goichberg has started to receive public criticisms on a personal level
by B Marinello, T Hanke and J Eade, after a year's stabilising efforts,
[thanks Bill, and you're done] and all other 'Contras' are either 'Old
Guard' [a term for very bad people all of whom have secret personal reasons
for 'skewing' the decision and keeping USCF in the stone-age] or We, the
People.
We the People don't get a further say because both democracy and common
sense are long-winded processes, and by further I don't mean there was any
before.
Of course, this may be a brilliant decision or it may be USCFs epitaph. What
do you think, dear reader?
As a pattern, I note that it is of the same type as previous decisions which
have been disasters; seeming to spring out of the dark with an urgent need
to be resolved immediately. This pattern has actually been the cause of the
need to move.
When will we get to review what work a new HQ will accomplish in the future,
and therefore why a specific location and size of office are being chosen.?
Neue Besen kehren gut? Richt euch!!
Phil Innes
| |
| Tim Hanke 2004-10-22, 9:45 am |
| With all due respect to Larry Parr's rhetoric, which few of us can
match, he keeps ignoring all the solid reasons he has been offered why
the USCF leadership did not want to pursue Bill Goichberg's Liberty,
N.Y. bid.
Why Larry is doing this is anyone's guess. Personally I'm puzzled. If
the Federation had gotten itself entangled with the Liberty tar baby,
that would have been the kind of financial and political mess I'd
expect Larry to have shouted about from the rooftops.
Bill Goichberg and Larry make much about USCF "offending" Erik
Anderson and the local billionaire by not giving them two more weeks
to prop up Bill's bid. I like to think we saved everyone a lot of
trouble and embarrassment by cutting it short. The Board decided not
to pursue the highly complex tangle in Liberty, when we had other
options that were simple and good.
This is called "common sense." This is called "not wasting everybody's
time with further pointless discussions." Something that Larry Parr
and Bill Goichberg could learn from. :-)
Tim Hanke
parrthenon@cs.com (Parrthenon) wrote in message news:<20041022024714.13013.00001917@mb-m21.news.cs.com>...
quote:
> Jim Eade has written a civil letter. As one would expect, it is tough, but it
> remains civil. No name-calling beyond the to be expected "oddball assortment of
> dustup addicts."
>
> Mr. Eade speaks about Bill Goichberg "crying" over personal attacks. I haven't
> seen any of that. Nor do Bill Goichberg's messages appear to be emotional and
> out of hand. In truth, many of them are almost ostentatiously deadpan. Nor have
> I read hissy fits from Mr. Goichberg, though Mr. Eade tells us there have been.
>
> One of the strawmen being tossed up is that there is an Old Guard movement to
> deny Beatriz Marinello and Tim Hanke their just praise for going to New
> Windsor, downing a bottle of rye whiskey, and firing 18 or so people and then
> cutting expenses terrifically, under the day-to-day direction of Bill
> Goichberg. I am on record as having written repeatedly that Miss Marinello is
> the best USCF president since Gary Sperling.
>
> The issue is why the USCF could not have waited for two weeks while a
> reputable, chess-helping businessman such as Erik Anderson spoke with Mr. Gerry
> about the opportunities to relocate to Liberty, New York. What harm was there
> in extending the deadline for two more weeks to see if it was feasiable?
> Certainly parlaying with a billionaire philanthropist and keeping most of the
> staff in New York instead of ditching them was worth exploring a bit further.
>
> Why such a bloody hurry?
>
> Beatriz Marinello has offered the only half-sensible argument: one must make a
> decision at some point, and that decision was finally made. That argument is
> insufficient to the point, but it at least addresses the point.
>
> The other arguments were contemptible, to be quite frank. Tim Hanke suggested
> that if Liberty were such a hot deal, then either this impecunious writer or
> the well-heeled Mr. Goichberg ought to take up a building that was never
> offered to us. It is the kind of argument totally unworthy of Mr. Hanke, who
> once assured us that Crossville was a dead deal. Now he has done an about face
> and tells us he wouldn't take the Liberty property even if the USCF got it for
> free!
>
> Mr. Eade has asked for someone to bring Herr Hitler into the argument over
> whether to relocate to Crossville or Liberty.
>
> Eric Johnson has done so on the Fide Newsgroup, comparing Erik Anderson's offer
> to speak with billionaire Gerry with Hitler's Anschluss offer in 1938. So, yes
> indeed, Germany's former fuehrer has now joined us, though introduced into our
> company by a supporter of the move to Crossville.
>
> Yours, Larry Parr
>
> Subject: Kudos to the EB
> From: mailto:jimeade@aol.comSheesh (JimEade)
> Date: 10/21/2004 10:12 AM Pacific Standard Time
> Message-id: <20041021131208.01883.00002140@mb-m14.aol.com>
>
> I commend the USCF's EB for its progress in cleaning up the mess left by
> others. Short term expense reductions were painful, but necessary. There were
> also three difficult more long term goals that had to be met:
>
> 1. Sell the building
>
> 2. Outsource books and equipment
>
> 3. Relocate
>
> The board has accomplished 1 and 2, and is in the process of meeting their
> third objective. Meanwhile, the Old Guard is up in arms. That is a sure sign
> that the USCF is heading in the right direction.
>
> I would be remiss, if I did not express my gratitude to Bill Goichberg for his
> help in a time of great need. I think Bill is an honest businessman, and
> sincere in his business dealings. I believe vendors can once again deal with
> the USCF in good faith.
>
> It is also time, perhaps past time, for Bill to move on. This Liberty business
> is merely the latest in a long line of dustups that get way, way out of
> control. Bill has no emotional self-control in these situations, and has
> demonstrated this for the kazillionth time.
>
> His crying about personal attacks that somehow justify his misbehavior is also
> so, so familiar. He will throw his hissy fits until he somehow gets his way,
> and it often works. This time it didn't. It was awful to witness Bill in this
> mode when he was a member of the EB, but as ED it is beyond the pale.
>
> The arguments against Crossville are just plain silly. I would've also
> supported the Kansas bid. Maybe Liberty could've somehow been turned into a
> viable option by a combination of millionaire and billionaire friends of the
> USCF and maybe not. It no longer matters. The oddball assortment of dustup
> addicts, will try to keep this thread going, but there is no real point.
>
> The decision has been made. The delegates have indicated their support. It's
> on to Crossville, a move which, I predict, will solidify the USCF's future.
> After years of operational overruns, denied and/or covered up by the Old
> Guardists, fiscal responsibility has returned. Finally.
>
> Beatriz is the best USCF President I've known. She saw what needed to be done.
> She didn't duck the hard choices, made the hard calls, and endured all the
> political machinations in the, increasingly, desperate efforts to thwart her.
> In my opinion, she is an unqualified success and she has my gratitude. I
> congratulate the entire board, but she deserves special praise.
>
> Now, will somebody please compare someone to Hitler in all those Crossville
> threads ... please?
>
> James Eade
> Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> "FIDE has made its decision. Players who refuse to be drug tested will not be
> able to play chess." -- Dr. Press, co-founder of the FIDE Medical Commission.
| |
| Jon Haskel 2004-10-22, 5:45 pm |
| Hi Larry,
I thought I had read that you are currently residing in Malaysia.
If so, wouldn't it be out of place for you to be commenting on where the
USCF has decided to locate its office?
Jon Haskel
"Parrthenon" <parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20041022024714.13013.00001917@mb-m21.news.cs.com...
quote:
> Jim Eade has written a civil letter. As one would expect, it is tough, but
it
quote:
> remains civil. No name-calling beyond the to be expected "oddball
assortment of
quote:
> dustup addicts."
>
> Mr. Eade speaks about Bill Goichberg "crying" over personal attacks. I
haven't
quote:
> seen any of that. Nor do Bill Goichberg's messages appear to be emotional
and
quote:
> out of hand. In truth, many of them are almost ostentatiously deadpan. Nor
have
quote:
> I read hissy fits from Mr. Goichberg, though Mr. Eade tells us there have
been.
quote:
>
> One of the strawmen being tossed up is that there is an Old Guard movement
to
quote:
> deny Beatriz Marinello and Tim Hanke their just praise for going to New
> Windsor, downing a bottle of rye whiskey, and firing 18 or so people and
then
quote:
> cutting expenses terrifically, under the day-to-day direction of Bill
> Goichberg. I am on record as having written repeatedly that Miss Marinello
is
quote:
> the best USCF president since Gary Sperling.
>
> The issue is why the USCF could not have waited for two weeks while a
> reputable, chess-helping businessman such as Erik Anderson spoke with Mr.
Gerry
quote:
> about the opportunities to relocate to Liberty, New York. What harm was
there
quote:
> in extending the deadline for two more weeks to see if it was feasiable?
> Certainly parlaying with a billionaire philanthropist and keeping most of
the
quote:
> staff in New York instead of ditching them was worth exploring a bit
further.
quote:
>
> Why such a bloody hurry?
>
> Beatriz Marinello has offered the only half-sensible argument: one must
make a
quote:
> decision at some point, and that decision was finally made. That argument
is
quote:
> insufficient to the point, but it at least addresses the point.
>
> The other arguments were contemptible, to be quite frank. Tim Hanke
suggested
quote:
> that if Liberty were such a hot deal, then either this impecunious writer
or
quote:
> the well-heeled Mr. Goichberg ought to take up a building that was never
> offered to us. It is the kind of argument totally unworthy of Mr. Hanke,
who
quote:
> once assured us that Crossville was a dead deal. Now he has done an about
face
quote:
> and tells us he wouldn't take the Liberty property even if the USCF got it
for
quote:
> free!
>
> Mr. Eade has asked for someone to bring Herr Hitler into the argument over
> whether to relocate to Crossville or Liberty.
>
> Eric Johnson has done so on the Fide Newsgroup, comparing Erik Anderson's
offer
quote:
> to speak with billionaire Gerry with Hitler's Anschluss offer in 1938. So,
yes
quote:
> indeed, Germany's former fuehrer has now joined us, though introduced into
our
quote:
> company by a supporter of the move to Crossville.
>
> Yours, Larry Parr
>
> Subject: Kudos to the EB
> From: mailto:jimeade@aol.comSheesh (JimEade)
> Date: 10/21/2004 10:12 AM Pacific Standard Time
> Message-id: <20041021131208.01883.00002140@mb-m14.aol.com>
>
> I commend the USCF's EB for its progress in cleaning up the mess left by
> others. Short term expense reductions were painful, but necessary. There
were
quote:
> also three difficult more long term goals that had to be met:
>
> 1. Sell the building
>
> 2. Outsource books and equipment
>
> 3. Relocate
>
> The board has accomplished 1 and 2, and is in the process of meeting their
> third objective. Meanwhile, the Old Guard is up in arms. That is a sure
sign
quote:
> that the USCF is heading in the right direction.
>
> I would be remiss, if I did not express my gratitude to Bill Goichberg for
his
quote:
> help in a time of great need. I think Bill is an honest businessman, and
> sincere in his business dealings. I believe vendors can once again deal
with
quote:
> the USCF in good faith.
>
> It is also time, perhaps past time, for Bill to move on. This Liberty
business
quote:
> is merely the latest in a long line of dustups that get way, way out of
> control. Bill has no emotional self-control in these situations, and has
> demonstrated this for the kazillionth time.
>
> His crying about personal attacks that somehow justify his misbehavior is
also
quote:
> so, so familiar. He will throw his hissy fits until he somehow gets his
way,
quote:
> and it often works. This time it didn't. It was awful to witness Bill in
this
quote:
> mode when he was a member of the EB, but as ED it is beyond the pale.
>
> The arguments against Crossville are just plain silly. I would've also
> supported the Kansas bid. Maybe Liberty could've somehow been turned into
a
quote:
> viable option by a combination of millionaire and billionaire friends of
the
quote:
> USCF and maybe not. It no longer matters. The oddball assortment of dustup
> addicts, will try to keep this thread going, but there is no real point.
>
> The decision has been made. The delegates have indicated their support.
It's
quote:
> on to Crossville, a move which, I predict, will solidify the USCF's
future.
quote:
> After years of operational overruns, denied and/or covered up by the Old
> Guardists, fiscal responsibility has returned. Finally.
>
> Beatriz is the best USCF President I've known. She saw what needed to be
done.
quote:
> She didn't duck the hard choices, made the hard calls, and endured all the
> political machinations in the, increasingly, desperate efforts to thwart
her.
quote:
> In my opinion, she is an unqualified success and she has my gratitude. I
> congratulate the entire board, but she deserves special praise.
>
> Now, will somebody please compare someone to Hitler in all those
Crossville
quote:
> threads ... please?
>
> James Eade
> Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> "FIDE has made its decision. Players who refuse to be drug tested will not
be
quote:
> able to play chess." -- Dr. Press, co-founder of the FIDE Medical
Commission.
| |
| JimEade 2004-10-23, 12:45 am |
| Chess One writes:[vbcol=seagreen]
do it? This is more important than where you park the car.<<
If I were ED (god forbid) I would consider it my job to answer your questions.
The ED was asked to develop a strategic plan when I was on the EB. Quite
often. There was no consequence to not delivering it, however, and I never did
see one.
After the years of mismanagement and misgovernance, the strategic plan would've
needed serious adjustment in any event. I still would like the office to
develop one, submit it the EB and then to the delegates.
I think Wayne Praeder has written most on this topic. The USCF first has to
figure out where it is (I don't mean geographically) and then decide where it
wants to go.
It was my belief that the USCF needed, to 1) Sell the building 2) Outsource
books and equipment and 3) Relocate. It seems to me that they are finally
doing things the right way.
The key to fiscal responsibility is expense control. The USCF has become a
much leaner organization, and it is healthier for it. They are also exploiting
technology in promising ways, such as the MSA on the web site. For the first
time in a long time, I don't consider the organization doomed.
snip
I think # vii is now obsolete. # iii is the BIG one. #vi invites a view of
where the org wants to be in five years time, a good device to plan with.
Take your pick!
i) How much work can be achieved by tele-commuting?
ii) What is the staffing need overall?
iii) What staff are identified to be absolutely necessary to USCF's office
/in situ/ and what work will they do?
iv) How much space needs be allocated to these staff? [Sam Sloan's question]
vi) In 5 years time, what are the identified spatial requirements for a USCF
office?
vii) What predicates metro versus rural location? [Larry Parr's question]
Phil Innes<<
I don't think of these types of questions as "strategic." Number 2 and 3 come
close. The real strategic question is what should the work be?
What the work is now, and how many people are needed to perform it are
operational issues. It is the function of the office manager to know the
answer to these questions. The organization has changed considerably form the
one I knew firsthand.
What should we be doing that we aren't doing now? How can we exploit
technology to give the members what they want in a cost effective way?
I've been giving the following example since 1996. I think, on an opt in
basis, we should send an e-mail to members anytime a TLA is submitted in an
area they've selected. No more: "My tournament was ruined because Chess Life
came out late" horror stories.
But strategic planning needs a serious committment, and I am not willing to
make such a committment. Also, if this isn't the worst forum for strategic
planning, I don't want to know which one is. I have responded this much only
in order to demonstrate that I took your inquiries seriously.
James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
| |
| StanB 2004-10-23, 12:45 am |
| "Parrthenon" <parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20041022024714.13013.00001917@mb-m21.news.cs.com...
quote:
> One of the strawmen being tossed up is that there is an Old Guard movement
Gee whiz Larry, didn't you coin that phrase about those guys on this very
newsgroup?
quote:
> The issue is why the USCF could not have waited for two weeks while a
> reputable, chess-helping businessman such as Erik Anderson spoke with Mr.
> Gerry
> about the opportunities to relocate to Liberty, New York. What harm was
> there
> in extending the deadline for two more weeks to see if it was feasiable?
> Certainly parlaying with a billionaire philanthropist and keeping most of
> the
> staff in New York instead of ditching them was worth exploring a bit
> further.
Gee whiz Larry, don't you have even one iota of curiosity about this? Why
did the old guard approach him to underwrite some gothic mansion in the
boonies and not locations in small towns like Crossville and Lindsborg?
quote:
> Why such a bloody hurry?
Two years it has been dragging on. Wasn't it time ignore any further stall
tactics. The board is to be commended for finally grabbing the bull by the
horns.
| |
| JimEade 2004-10-23, 12:45 am |
| snip
quote:
>
>As a pattern, I note that it is of the same type as previous decisions which
>have been disasters; seeming to spring out of the dark with an urgent need
>to be resolved immediately. This pattern has actually been the cause of the
>need to move.
>
snip
Phil, as you know, I don't read anything written by Parr unless it's quoted by
someone else, you in this case. I don't think we can transfer Hitler
references between forums. Rats.
I don't think you are portraying events with a high degree of accuracy. In the
above snippet, for instance, "springing out of the dark"? My goodness!
I can't tell you what went down at the delegates meeting in Miami, but anyone
attending the previous meeting in LA got a nice briefing about Crossville.
Prior to that, I thought the office would move to reside next to the World
Chess Hall of Fame in Miami.
Talk about partners! Shane Samole is a real businessman, if anyone has made
more money from chess then Shane, I couldn't tell you who it is. He's also a
real chess patron. The point is that we've been discussing possibilities for
years.
You were not excluded from the discussion. As I have pointed out many times,
you can call or write to the EB members. You can call or write to your
delegate.
Complaining on this or any other forum about being kept in the dark, when you
don't take any initiative is not only unproductive, but self serving.
Of course, some people have no sense of decency and spam daily. It is
important to be able to filter those types out. But, most reasonable requests
would be responded to, at least now that the finacial cover-ups and snow jobs
are (hopefully) behind us. ;-)
James Eade
Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
| |
| Mike Nolan 2004-10-23, 12:45 am |
| jimeade@aol.comSheesh (JimEade) writes:
quote:
>I've been giving the following example since 1996. I think, on an opt in
>basis, we should send an e-mail to members anytime a TLA is submitted in an
>area they've selected. No more: "My tournament was ruined because Chess Life
>came out late" horror stories.
The first step in doing this is collecting e-mail addresses for members.
That's already being done, we started collecting e-mail addresses when
we switched over to the new membership system in March. They're also
being collected for memberships entered through the TD/Affiliate area.
We have e-mail addresses for around 6% of current USCF members.
Members can register their e-mail address from the Members Only area.
The second step in doing this is having an accurate, up-to-date and fairly
complete file of TLAs, including events that aren't in Chess Life. The
best way to do this is to give affiliates the ability to enter own TLA's
online.
That's being worked on and was demo'd in Florida.
We would still need a separate 'opt-in' flag for this, and possibly a few
other security measures.
I've already added the opt-in field to the database, I will try to add
it to the membership screens (including TD/A) and to the e-mail address
update form this weekend.
I'm not sure what to do about event selectivity. Suggestions?
Geographic (states or zip code radius) and prize fund cutoffs come to mind.
Overall, I don't see any reason this couldn't be operational shortly
after the online TLA feature is rolled out. We ran into some administrative
issues on that, so I'm a bit behind the schedule I gave in the Delegates
Call, but I'm still hoping to have online TLA's going before Christmas.
--
Mike Nolan
| |
| Chess One 2004-10-23, 9:45 am |
| Jim, thanks for your responses below. I think this is an important issue,
and hope that what you have outlined below will cause others to think of
what foundation for the future best serves chess in the USA, and
consequently, what needs to be constructed on that foundation.
This puts any move into a context which is cohesive, constructive, and also
involves past and current USCF governance, and will very largely effect
future boards and what they are enabled to perform.
Cordially, Phil Innes
"JimEade" <jimeade@aol.comSheesh> wrote in message
news:20041022180332.13199.00002435@mb-m28.aol.com...
quote:
> Chess One writes:
> do it? This is more important than where you park the car.<<
>
> If I were ED (god forbid) I would consider it my job to answer your
> questions.
> The ED was asked to develop a strategic plan when I was on the EB. Quite
> often. There was no consequence to not delivering it, however, and I
> never did
> see one.
>
> After the years of mismanagement and misgovernance, the strategic plan
> would've
> needed serious adjustment in any event. I still would like the office to
> develop one, submit it the EB and then to the delegates.
>
> I think Wayne Praeder has written most on this topic. The USCF first has
> to
> figure out where it is (I don't mean geographically) and then decide where
> it
> wants to go.
>
> It was my belief that the USCF needed, to 1) Sell the building 2)
> Outsource
> books and equipment and 3) Relocate. It seems to me that they are finally
> doing things the right way.
>
> The key to fiscal responsibility is expense control. The USCF has become
> a
> much leaner organization, and it is healthier for it. They are also
> exploiting
> technology in promising ways, such as the MSA on the web site. For the
> first
> time in a long time, I don't consider the organization doomed.
>
> snip
>
>
> I think # vii is now obsolete. # iii is the BIG one. #vi invites a view of
> where the org wants to be in five years time, a good device to plan with.
>
> Take your pick!
>
> i) How much work can be achieved by tele-commuting?
> ii) What is the staffing need overall?
> iii) What staff are identified to be absolutely necessary to USCF's office
> /in situ/ and what work will they do?
> iv) How much space needs be allocated to these staff? [Sam Sloan's
> question]
> vi) In 5 years time, what are the identified spatial requirements for a
> USCF
> office?
> vii) What predicates metro versus rural location? [Larry Parr's question]
>
> Phil Innes<<
>
> I don't think of these types of questions as "strategic." Number 2 and 3
> come
> close. The real strategic question is what should the work be?
>
> What the work is now, and how many people are needed to perform it are
> operational issues. It is the function of the office manager to know the
> answer to these questions. The organization has changed considerably form
> the
> one I knew firsthand.
>
> What should we be doing that we aren't doing now? How can we exploit
> technology to give the members what they want in a cost effective way?
>
> I've been giving the following example since 1996. I think, on an opt in
> basis, we should send an e-mail to members anytime a TLA is submitted in
> an
> area they've selected. No more: "My tournament was ruined because Chess
> Life
> came out late" horror stories.
>
> But strategic planning needs a serious committment, and I am not willing
> to
> make such a committment. Also, if this isn't the worst forum for
> strategic
> planning, I don't want to know which one is. I have responded this much
> only
> in order to demonstrate that I took your inquiries seriously.
>
>
>
>
>
> James Eade
> Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
| |
| Chess One 2004-10-23, 9:45 am |
|
"JimEade" <jimeade@aol.comSheesh> wrote in message
news:20041022181945.13199.00002436@mb-m28.aol.com...
quote:
> snip
<>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You were not excluded from the discussion. As I have pointed out many
> times,
> you can call or write to the EB members. You can call or write to your
> delegate.
>
> Complaining on this or any other forum about being kept in the dark, when
> you
> don't take any initiative is not only unproductive, but self serving.
At the moment Joel Lautier is talking with 3 partners on reforming Fide. Don
Shultz in respect of the USCF motion to reform, Kaarlo Shepel on the basis
of World Governance for the same reform. And me - but Joel and I are writing
about something different, not about governance, but about what governance
will do.
To contrast this activity with what Don rightly addresses, which is clearly
'management', I call it chess 'development'.
Not only J. Lautier, but a goodly number of players have no confidence that
chess managers even understand these issues, nevermind an ability to
intelligently discuss, represent and deploy them.
You will excuse me, therefore, for saying that submitting these
'development' ideas to 'managers' is not any course that the first tier of
players around the world finds attractive - or has the slightest confidence
therein.
I would even say that that is a considerable understatement.
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> Of course, some people have no sense of decency and spam daily. It is
> important to be able to filter those types out. But, most reasonable
> requests
> would be responded to, at least now that the finacial cover-ups and snow
> jobs
> are (hopefully) behind us. ;-)
>
> James Eade
> Remove the Sheesh to respond. Don't worry. Talk happy.
|
| |
|
|