| Mike Nolan 2004-12-31, 5:45 pm |
| "Tom Martinak" <martinak_tom_m@hotmail.com> writes:
quote:
>precedence for this in other nonprofits. I hope the delegates will
>reconsider this resolution.
quote:
>It does strike me as a mistake. The key though maybe the phrase "would
>have to be approved by legal council" which may render the motion moot.
>entirely sure even about that) be reasonable is if it is known that the
>candidate is or will be serving time in jail during the period they
>would be on the EB.
Why is that any different from a candidate who might be unavailable for
some other reason, such as being on active duty in the armed forces or
perhaps on the International Space Station? If the election was tomorrow
and Martha Stewart was a candidate, is her being in jail today really
relevant?
There are a couple of issues here.
One is the USCF's responsibility as a publisher not to publish known
factual errors or libelous or defamatory statements. There have been
threats by some individuals to sue over statements made by candidates
in previous elections. Whether these threads can be overcome with a
disclaimer is unclear.
The USCF has the right to edit or refuse any advertisement, whether
that same right extends to the statements of candidates is not as clear.
Suppose I create a new chess computer and want to take out an ad claiming
it beat the world champion. If that's not a verifiable fact, the USCF
certainly has the right to refuse to run such an ad or to edit it.
Now suppose I'm a candidate and I claim that I beat the world champion.
Does the USCF have the right to edit that claim out of my candidate
statement?
The second has to do with the suitability of someone as a candidate.
Unlike some organizations, we have no nominations committee to screen
candidates, nor do I think we want or need one.
This smacks of being a form of campaigning by the Executive Board, and that
is something that DOES NOT belong in Chess Life, regardless of who the
candidates might be.
Personally, I'm not so convinced that this is aimed at just one
individual.
--
Mike Nolan
|