| Larry Tapper 2004-12-27, 5:45 pm |
|
Petrel>On the other hand, some board members may simply
quote:
>have a radically downsized and lightweight USCF
>in mind, something which is not much more than an
>office to handle ratings calculation and TD
>certification, with most of the other functions
>abandoned or stripped off.
Tom Martinak> Yes, that is basically my view. The USCF should be the
chess "government" of the US: ratings, TD certification, US
representative to international chess "government", recognizer of state
chess "governments", organize championships (in the sense of choosing
the best bid) and Chess Life (but I view CL as largely a house organ to
maintain communication with the members containing enough interesting
material to get the members to pick it up and look at the ads). Other
aspects of chess development should be handled by independent (possibly
non-profit) organizers of events and activities which the USCF would
help by facilitating communication between its members and those
organizations. Functions beyond these tend to be very succeptible to
patronage and looting by the politically powerful much like in real
governement. So, basically you can take this as the libertarian view of
"USCF". The best government is that which governs least. The main
necessity is cutting the current high cost of membership.
I agree substantially with Tom Martinak and I wonder how many others
feel the same. Probably minimalists like us are under-represented in
rgcp because politicians like to have a lot to be political about.
Larry T.
|