Chess politics - Don't bother pollling readers

Author

Don't bother pollling readers

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

A POLITICAL CREATURE

I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry Evans
was a true man of chess. Now he is changing his tune and
talks about eliminating writers from Chess Life who are
eligible for Social Security.
..
The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.

They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
would win hands down. Therefore, there will be no further
surveys by these honchos.

Randy Bauer figures, yes, Evans is very well liked and
popular as a columnist, and there must be no polling.

Joel Channing will tell us how how "excellent" Evans On Chess
is and how wonderful it all happens to be, and that will be that.
Dissent in Chess Life must be crushed.

My sources say that FIDE has complained about the
criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans.

WPraeder

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

parrthenon@cs.com wrote:

quote:

> A POLITICAL CREATURE
>
> I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry Evans
> was a true man of chess. Now he is changing his tune and
> talks about eliminating writers from Chess Life who are
> eligible for Social Security.
> .
> The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
> a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
> ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.
>
> They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
> would win hands down. Therefore, there will be no further
> surveys by these honchos.
>
> Randy Bauer figures, yes, Evans is very well liked and
> popular as a columnist, and there must be no polling.
>
> Joel Channing will tell us how how "excellent" Evans On Chess
> is and how wonderful it all happens to be, and that will be that.
> Dissent in Chess Life must be crushed.
>
> My sources say that FIDE has complained about the
> criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans.

Larry,

I think Randy Bauer and I may agree Chess Life needs to be refocused.
It's OK to have differing opinions on how that might be accomplished.
I would agree with you that we should ask the readers what they want to
see in Chess Life. I would, however, be surprised if Randy would not be
supportive of asking the readers what they prefer. In my view it is
unfortunate we must make unilateral decisions about our magazine before
polling the readership.

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

Paul Rubin

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

"WPraeder" <wpraeder@aol.com> writes:

quote:

> supportive of asking the readers what they prefer. In my view it is
> unfortunate we must make unilateral decisions about our magazine before
> polling the readership.

Before polling the readership about fine details like which columns
should be included or not included, how about polling about whether
they want to receive the magazine at all. Until you're willing to
call for that kind of poll, requesting polls about columnists comes
across as hypocritical.

Ray Gordon

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

> The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially

quote:

> a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
> ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.
>
> They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
> would win hands down.

Not with this reader.

WPraeder

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

Paul Rubin wrote:

quote:

> "WPraeder" <wpraeder@aol.com> writes:
>
> Before polling the readership about fine details like which columns
> should be included or not included, how about polling about whether
> they want to receive the magazine at all. Until you're willing to
> call for that kind of poll, requesting polls about columnists comes
> across as hypocritical.

Paul,

I'm already on record being in favor of making Chess Life optional if
that is what the membership prefers. Polling the readers need not have
preconditions in order to provide useful feedback.

Regards,
Wayne Praeder

joel@channingcorporation.com

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

See reply in USCF Forum "ChessLife Nattering Nabobs."

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:15 pm

GOICHBERG AT USCF FORUM

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 7:21 pm

The Executive Board is leaving it up to the Editor of Chess Life which
columns and features to use. Because college chess is so underdeveloped
I supported the exception of mandating a monthly college column, but
the Board reversed itself on this and after approving it 5-0, it was
defeated 3-2.

We understand that the Editor's strategy is more feature articles and
less columns, and we will give him a chance to show what he can do
before passing judgment. If it was up to me, though, I would have tried
hard to avoid eliminating the Evans and Rohde columns. My relations
with GM Evans through the years have not always been good, but he has
been an outspoken commentator on happenings in the chess world, often
providing a healthy dose of controversy to a magazine that would
otherwise have lacked it. I hope that he will continue to write for
USCF, either features in Chess Life or maybe by moving his column to
our website. I also respect the work of GM Rohde and have heard good
things about his column from members.

Bill Goichberg

Vince Hart

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Polling current members is probably not worth the bother for several
reasons:

(1) Does not provide any help in determining what might attract new
members;

(2) Does not provide any help in determining what might recapture
former members;

(3) Provides little help in determining what new features might
increase appeal of magazine to current members:

(4) May be biased towards a status quo that is not presently working
very well.

Louis Blair

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

How much does it cost to do such a poll?

marcus@stkittsnevischess.org

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Larry,

You write that "my sources say that FIDE has complained about the
criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans." The current state of
USCF-FIDE relations is at an all time low. Nobody on the USCF side
cares what FIDE says. In my opinion, Kirsan will probably prevail in
the FIDE Presidential election, and the USCF will be shut out of all
FIDE decisions. What Larry Evans has to say in Chess Life or anywhere
else about FIDE is meaningless. Right now, all FIDE cares about is the
Presidential Election and a few housekeeping chores (like admitting St
Kitts and Nevis.) FIDE has no influence in the USCF. The USCF has no
influence in FIDE. I probably have as much influence as the USCF in
FIDE, without a vote.

I say this to people who are actually interested in how the USCF makes
decisions within FIDE.

Marcus Roberts
Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE

Louis Blair

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Larry Parr wrote (9 Apr 2006 07:25:46 -0700):

quote:

> I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry
> Evans was a true man of chess.

_
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:27:53 GMT, Randy
Bauer wrote that GM Evans was "much closer
to a real man of chess" than Sam Sloan. This
was in response to a 24 Nov 2004 06:02:08 GMT
statement of Larry Parr that LP regarded Sam
Sloan "as a real man of chess, warts and all."

Chess Freak

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Yeah, because you are not a USCF member and have no
voice in this matter. Same with the rest of you who are not
USCF members.

"Ray Gordon" <Ray@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
news:lMmdnRQYAZVTv6TZRVn-jg@pghconnect.com...

quote:

>
> Not with this reader.
>
>
>
>

help bot

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Vince Hart wrote:

"Polling current members is probably not worth the bother for several
reasons:

(1) Does not provide any help in determining what might attract new
members;

(2) Does not provide any help in determining what might recapture
former members;

(3) Provides little help in determining what new features might
increase appeal of magazine to current members:

(4) May be biased towards a status quo that is not presently working
very well."

Good points -- I agree 100%.

One possible "measurement" of the success of the new format would be
to first give it a chance, and then see if you can determine any effect

(positive or negative) on membership numbers. Of course, this approach
may not be acceptable for a few who have a predetermined agenda, with
its top priority being say, to help Larry Evans -- not the USCF.

-- help bot

marcus@stkittsnevischess.org

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

> Yeah, because you are not a USCF member and have no

quote:

> voice in this matter. Same with the rest of you who are not
> USCF members.

So, Chess Freak, your solution is to make everyone on this newsgroup be
quiet and pay your US Chess Federation money to participate in a
newsgroup moderated by the Chess Nazi Mike Nolan?

I think you represent the world view of the American Cowboy: Bully
everyone into submission to the American way (we have no voice because
we do not pay your political leaders money), extort money in the form
of USCF dues for participating in a "moderated discussion", and
threaten to kill anyone who disagrees with the USCF?

Chess Freak, I would like to meet you. One day you might get to meet
somebody differet from you and learn something about this world in
which you live.

Marcus Roberts

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

THE OFFICIAL LINE

So, then, we now have the official line. There
MUST be no survey of the readership regarding the
contents of Chess Life.

A survey is just, don't you see, a "plebiscite."
Kind of like asking the Germans in the Ruhr whether
they want to be part of France or Germany.

TRANSLATION: There must not be a survey of the
readers about the popularity of Larry Evans. No, no,
no. That's because these politicians know that Evans
will score highly, and they want him gone.

Some of you wondered whether the political class
was against surveying the readers. You now have the answer.

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

GREG ALSO OPPOSES SURVEY

We get more crap from those few who hate and envy Larry
Evans and, in the case of Greg Kennedy, Bobby Fischer.

We must not have a survey of the readership to
find out what it wants. Instead, the idea is to have
a redesigned magazine based on ... well, based on what?

A survey of the membership and a marketing survey?

Nope. Certainly not.

The basis is simply to try something new, minus
a major dissenting voice.

Greg, Vinnie and the rest understand that Larry
Evans will score very high in any reader survey. They
hate that likelihood, and the actual customers of the
Federation must therefore NOT be surveyed.

More anon.

help bot

2006-08-02, 10:16 pm

Larry Parr wrote:

"A survey of the membership and a marketing survey?

Nope. Certainly not.

The basis is simply to try something new, minus
a major dissenting voice.

Greg, Vinnie and the rest understand that Larry
Evans will score very high in any reader survey. They
hate that likelihood, and the actual customers of the
Federation must therefore NOT be surveyed."

_

Personally, I expect that many readers who got fed up
with Evans and his agenda have likely already discontinued
their USCF memberships, and as a result are no longer
among those who would be surveyed. In view of this, it is
quite possible that Larry Parr's contention -- that Evans
would do very well in a new survey -- is on the money.

Another reason is that Evans stands out from the ordinary
writers in Chess Life. You have Soltis, who writes about
chess; Key Crackers, again about (a weird form of) chess;
Benko, who writes about chess endgames; and so on. Then
you have this loner, this one writer who seems stuck in the
golden era, the era in which America's own Bobby Fischer
was the bright center of the universe.
Now suppose that many readers split their votes among the
"ordinary" chess writers, but those who actually prefer Evans
have to split nothing, for the simple reason that there is only
*one* Evans, one golden era writer? Evans gets all of their
votes.
One more thing, as has been shown here, is that a few
readers may have confused Larry D. Evans' work with that
of de real Larry Evans, in effect, voting for the wrong guy. I
doubt there is a huge number of such people, but they do
exist.

In any case, it has been made clear that the decision was
made to drop Evans, and this was not based upon any survey,
any more than any other decision was. Was there a survey
to decide whether the USCF should squander $25 large on a
redesign? No. Was there a survey as to whether the USCF
should hire Sam Sloan to edit the new Web site? No again.
Was there a survey when someone decided to allow ratings
to deflate again? Nope.

So you see, the issue of surveys seems to have been injected
into this issue as a means for a certain poster here to either
attempt to manipulate the USCF for his own agenda (i.e. save
Evans' "job"), or else as a handy tool for propaganda use. This
"resfusal" of the USCF to take a survey and possibly retain
Evans can be used against them, again and again -- for all
eternity. Zzzzzz.

The problem is that Larry Parr is simply not happy no matter
what the people at the USCF do. It wouldn't matter if they had
taken a survey, and decided to move Evans to the middle --
behind Soltis -- or just a few pages sideways; Larry Parr would
*still* be moaning and groaning about something. It is endemic
in him. I expect that even if the new format for Chess Life turns
out to be a smash hit, LP will be rehashing this "survey" thing
for many years to come.

My advice to Larry Evans is to "roll with the punches", to use
this as an opportunity to redirect his efforts in another direction.
Go and write a few chess books; find some co-authors who are
willing to do most of the work; whatever.

The alternative -- groaning about this for the next ten years or
so -- is quite simply an inferior variation, unworthy of him.

-- help bot

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

THE CORPORATE MENTALITY

<I'm restricting my dialogues to the USCF Forum. Mike Nolan
is a decent guy who has to err on the side of caution because,
as of this monent, we have not been able to find liability
insurance for a moderated forum (hard to believe, but the sponsors
of unmoderated forums have no liability), but at least he does
censor the nut cases who make this place so unpleasant.
You can contact me there and I'd be happy to tell you all I know
about what's happening.> -- Joel Channing

It makes no sense to say that one has to censor
the USCF forum for want of insurance but that the
internet also has such forums without insurance.

I am considering writing a real scorcher on the
history of the battle against Larry Evans -- the
hiring of the Pinkertons and the rest -- to observe
how it gets dropped in Nolanland.

Big heat is not for that forum.

<Polling current members is probably not worth the
bother for several reasons....> -- Vince Hart

Yet another member of the political class checks
in with opposition to holding a Chess Life survey.
Amazing, really.

Don' ask the readers what they like! Instead,
assume that you know what they like.

Don't ask the dues-paying peons whether they
enjoy this or that writer! Instead, assume that you
know what writers they don't like.

Vinnie Hart, Greg Kennedy and others of their ilk oppose a
survey because they know the history of these surveys.
They have repeatedly produced results ranking Soltis
and Evans at the top. The politicians cannot
handle such a result at this moment. Hence no survey.

Interestingly, the surveys have shown high reader
satisfaction with the magazine among the many
thousands who have responded -- a totally different
result from what is suggested by the opinions posted
by the relative few who post here.

Joel Channing compares a reader survey to a
"plebiscite," and our Vinnie offers a set of imbecilic
reasons for not surveying reader opinion which amount
to this: POLITICIANS WANT TO GET RID OF DISSENT AND
LIFE IN CHESS LIFE, AND I SUPPORT THAT DECISION NO
MATTER WHAT THE MEMBERSHIP WANTS.

The latest excuse for not having a Chess Life
survey to determine the popularity of writers is that
we must also ask whether the readers want Chess Life
at all. The idea here is that a product no longer
seeks to discover what those receiving it wish to have
included. Rather, the makers of the product conduct a
poll about whether Parkay Margarine or Camel
cigarettes should continue to be made.

Wayne Praeder and I disagree about someone
such as Randy Bauer. To my mind, he is a powermonger
who will always come up with a reason NOT to survey
the readership because the politicians want to
eliminate dissent in the magazine by discontinuing GM
Evans and, perhaps, other writers who prove even
mildly critical. Such is the corporate mentality.

So, one asks customers this question: "Do you
want our product?" and only then does one ask, "Which
flavour do you prefer?" or "Should it be smooth or crunchy?"

The vital distinction is that USCF membership is
a package deal based on what is required to keep the
USCF in existence, which I favor doing even though I
will not pay membership dues because the Federation is
a de facto supporter of drug testing. The issue is not
whether the package membership should be discontinued,
which is to say, whether the USCF should be
discontinued, but how to make the package accord with
members' desires.

I have never heard of a magazine polling readers
about whether it should be discontinued. One hears
about reader surveys, though.

Still, one can certainly poll the readers about
whether they enjoy, reprehend or are lukewarm about
GM Evans and others. And, yes, if the only objection to
such a survey is that we must ask the ludicrous
question about whether the product should be
continued, then yes, let's ask that question, too.

Now, then, will Paul Rubin and others of his
kind now support a reader survey about what writers
they prefer?

Ah, somehow I think the answer will be no --
but this time, for other reasons.

Also see the never-before published transcript of THE GREAT
DEBATE between Larry Evans and Don Schultz in 1988 that explains much
of the hostility
of the political class for GM Evans' accurate reporting.

http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules...article&sid=674

Paul Rubin

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

"parrthenon@cs.com" <parrthenon@cs.com> writes:

quote:

> Interestingly, the surveys have shown high reader
> satisfaction with the magazine among the many
> thousands who have responded -- a totally different
> result from what is suggested by the opinions posted
> by the relative few who post here.

Duhhhhh, people who were unsatisfied with the magazine quit
subscribing and therefore weren't surveyed. Of course the remaining
subscribers will tend to be the ones who are satisfied.

quote:

> So, one asks customers this question: "Do you
> want our product?" and only then does one ask, "Which
> flavour do you prefer?" or "Should it be smooth or crunchy?"

You think the magazine is the product. That is wrong. The product is
membership. The magazine is a feature of the product, just like a
particular column is a feature of the magazine.

I'm not terribly interested in questions of whether to keep or get rid
of a columnist. I'm more interested in whether to keep or get rid of
the magazine. Why don't YOU want a survey about that?

quote:

> Now, then, will Paul Rubin and others of his kind now support
> a reader survey about what writers they prefer?

I'm persuaded by help bot's recent post that a survey is unwarranted
and would amount to micromanaging the editor. When new management is
brought into any organization, it's normal for them to want to make
changes. I've looked at past issues of Georgia Chess on the web, and
I think it's a good magazine and that Dan Lucas did a good job on it,
so I tend to think he should have a free hand with Chess Life, given
that the USCF (without doing a survey) has seen fit to keep publishing
Chess Life.

I do, however, believe that members who don't like Lucas's editorial
decisions (or any other aspect of the magazine) should be entitled to
quit subscribing, without the implicit sanction of being barred from
playing tournament chess in the US. This has been my main beef with
the USCF for many years.

quote:

> Also see the never-before published transcript of THE GREAT
> DEBATE between Larry Evans and Don Schultz in 1988 that explains
> much of the hostility of the political class for GM Evans' accurate
> reporting.

If there are so many readers eager to read Evans's writing, surely he
could start up his own publication and round up enough subscribers to
make a go of it. Heck, I'd toss a couple bucks towards that effort
myself.

Paul Rubin

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

"WPraeder" <wpraeder@aol.com> writes:

quote:

> I'm already on record being in favor of making Chess Life optional if
> that is what the membership prefers. Polling the readers need not have
> preconditions in order to provide useful feedback.

Cool. However I'm persuaded by help bot's post that micromanaging CL
isn't appropriate. I prefer David Kane's approach of separating CL
from the USCF.

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

NEW EXCUSES FOR NOT POLLING

<Personally, I expect that many readers who got fed
up with Evans and his agenda have likely already
discontinued their USCF memberships, and as a result are no
longer among those who would be surveyed. In view of this,
it is quite possible that Larry Parr's contention -- that
Evans would do very well in a new survey -- is on the money.>
-- Greg Kennedy (Help Bot)

Greg Kennedy has come up with new reasons --
admittedly, original -- about why Larry Evans would
perform well in a survey.

First, the members who dislike Evans have
already discontinued their memberships, leaving a
preselected pool to poll. Poor Mr. Kennedy. And as
for why Evans scored well in surveys dating back to
the 1980s into the 1990s -- well, the members had not
yet resigned or they had already resigned? Pitiful stuff.

Secondly, Larry Evans might score well because
some reader somewhere likes Larry D. Evans, the
international master. He then confuses Larry D. Evans
with Larry Evans, who writes the high-profile Question
and Answer column. And as for all of those years when
Evans scored well without Larry D. Evans around -- ah,
well, one is not responsible for the vagaries of taste, etc.

The political class and its epigones have always
hated Larry Evans and Bobby Fischer because they were
so eminently successful in making chess bigger in the
United States.

Among the political class, the opposition to
surveying the readership is virtually total. What the
readership wants is not what counts. What the
political class wants is what counts.

Greg's attempt to justify ignoring the
readership is to ask ludicrous questions about
surveying them about spending tens of thousands
of dollars on redesigning Chess Life. If you do not
survey about dues, then why survey about writers?

That is the nub of the man's argument.

The distinction is the following: dues are one
of the discrete business decisons about keeping a
business going; surveys about writers involve
soliciting expressions of reader taste and desires
rather than knowledge.

The distinction is elementary.

The politicians do not want to poll readers
because they already know that Larry Evans would
rank highly. They hate him and they hate that fact.

HENCE NO SURVEY.

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

THE USCF WAY -- HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

From: tomdor...@aol.com (TOMDORSCH)
Subject: OMOV survey
Date: 1996/05/22
newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics

The OMOV survey, commissioned in 5/95 to ascertain the wishes of the
membership regarding one-member-one-vote, has been cancelled. The $20K
allocated for the survey will not be spent.

It is now up to the Blue Ribbon Commission to engineer positive
changes in USCF governance.

Regards, Tom Dorsch

"Grand experiments at the memberships expense is the USCF way. Why use
scientific management methods to focus on success when our leaders can
play craps with our dues money? Let's spend $50,000 and see if our
adult members and associated revenue increase as a result. If it
doesn't work we can always look at doing a poll, but it will probably
cost too much and won't provide the answers we want to hear." -- Wayne
Praeder

Chess One

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1144676190.462299.322670@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> THE USCF WAY -- HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
>
> From: tomdor...@aol.com (TOMDORSCH)
> Subject: OMOV survey
> Date: 1996/05/22
> newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics
>
> The OMOV survey, commissioned in 5/95 to ascertain the wishes of the
> membership regarding one-member-one-vote, has been cancelled. The $20K
> allocated for the survey will not be spent.
>
> It is now up to the Blue Ribbon Commission to engineer positive
> changes in USCF governance.
>
> Regards, Tom Dorsch

I hear that 2 new columns have been announced!

They will be made of marble, and stand at the entrance of ChessHut.

Seriously, if chess fans were to be surveyed, [not just remaining USCF
members] 2 critical things are necessary to establish - one of which is
their rating. Which section of the market [by rating] is responding on what
they would like to read in terms of chess playing content?

The second thing is, for all other subjects, what topics people want.

And of these two, what proportion of what to what?

Should any editor be in possession of this information, he could then design
his columns based on them, and engage capable chess writers to actualy write
the columns.

The current 'method' is backwards - without knowing anything about the
market [s] (pls. note plural) even if some changes were thought necessary
(by whomever, we shall never know) columnists were fired.

Why not survey what columns were desirable, then ask current columnists to
adjust their format to incorporate the new.

Otherwise money spent on new columns would be as well spent holding up the
front portico. At least that keeps the rain off.

Phil Innes

quote:

> "Grand experiments at the memberships expense is the USCF way. Why use
> scientific management methods to focus on success when our leaders can
> play craps with our dues money? Let's spend $50,000 and see if our
> adult members and associated revenue increase as a result. If it
> doesn't work we can always look at doing a poll, but it will probably
> cost too much and won't provide the answers we want to hear." -- Wayne
> Praeder
>

Louis Blair

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

Larry Parr wrote (9 Apr 2006 21:37:24 -0700):

quote:

> We get more crap from those few who hate and
> envy Larry Evans and, in the case of Greg Kennedy,
> Bobby Fischer.

_
"I think Fischer is a louse." - Larry Parr
(12 Jun 2002 10:05:45 GMT)

Randy Bauer

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

Larry Evans was a great player and has written some excellent books as
well -- I own several of them. I have no problems with views that some
find controversial, and find myself more in support than disagreement
on, for example, FIDE and drug testing.

That said, as I have noted previously, I have not found his columns of
the past few years particularly interesting. If a new editor wishes to
freshen up the magazine, I'm all for it.

Randy Bauer

Randy Bauer

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

As Wayne most likely recalls, I have written on numerous occasions
about the need to do a better job of learning what members want in
service from the USCF. I spoke about it while a member of the
Executive Board at several Board meetings as well. I still believe
the financial investment to do focus groups and other survey methods
would be worthwhile.

That said, I think every editor should have some latitude to make
changes. Today's Chess Life isn't all that different from when I first
started receiving it 30-plus years ago. The chess world has changed a
lot since then, and maybe it's time for Chess Life to do so as well.

Randy Bauer

Paul Rubin

2006-08-02, 10:17 pm

"Randy Bauer" <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> writes:

quote:

> That said, I think every editor should have some latitude to make
> changes. Today's Chess Life isn't all that different from when I first
> started receiving it 30-plus years ago. The chess world has changed a
> lot since then, and maybe it's time for Chess Life to do so as well.

I'm now of the opinion that the USCF should have simply shut down
Chess Life in the 1990's. It should have made a deal with ICE where
USCF life members would get Inside Chess subscriptions instead of CL,
paid by the USCF. USCF Operations dept got around $16/year per life
member for CL, so ICE would have had to get offered around the same
amount, which I think would have been workable. ICE had around 5000
subscribers paying around $40 a year for 25(?) issues, so they'd have
had to put together a 12-issue-per-year version of IC for this
purpose. There are around 10,000 life members and I think ICE could
easily have worked out a deal for 10,000 12-issue subscriptions at $16
a pop. Plus, regular USCF members would also be offered a similar
subscription through the USCF, if they wanted to pay for it, the same
way that my portable audio player came with a coupon for a discount
for a Rolling Stone magazine subscription. And part of the USCF-ICE
deal for such a program could have been that USCF got a page or two in
each issue for USCF-specific news.

The reason Inside Chess folded was because while there might be a
reasonable number of players who wanted to subscribe to a chess mag,
only the hardest core players wanted to subscribe to TWO mags, and CL
was sucking the air out of the room. With CL gone and with the LM
subscriber base, IC could have survived.

Duncan Oxley

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

I have always enjoyed Larry Evans' column in CL.

I asked a few friends today "just to see". I was surprised that
they all wanted it to stay.

I was surprised because I know it can be a bit repetitive and hokey
at times but every single person I asked said that it was the first
thing they read and wanted it kept.

Of course these people are not political in the slightest... I purposefully
asked only those I knew did not read here and were not involved
in USCF politics. Now if I were to poll another group consisting only
of these types I suspect the results would be quite different.

Duncan

<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1144592746.671456.319970@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

quote:

>A POLITICAL CREATURE
>
> I seem to recall Randy Bauer saying that Larry Evans
> was a true man of chess. Now he is changing his tune and
> talks about eliminating writers from Chess Life who are
> eligible for Social Security.
> .
> The last thing in the world that the politicians and especially
> a political creature such as Randy Bauer wants is to
> ASK THE MEMBERS WHAT THEY WANT IN CHESS LIFE.
>
> They know GM Evans, GM Soltis and a couple of others
> would win hands down. Therefore, there will be no further
> surveys by these honchos.
>
> Randy Bauer figures, yes, Evans is very well liked and
> popular as a columnist, and there must be no polling.
>
> Joel Channing will tell us how how "excellent" Evans On Chess
> is and how wonderful it all happens to be, and that will be that.
> Dissent in Chess Life must be crushed.
>
> My sources say that FIDE has complained about the
> criticism of its corruption by Larry Evans.
>

Mike Murray

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:06:57 -0700, "Duncan Oxley" <No@Thanks> wrote:

quote:

>I have always enjoyed Larry Evans' column in CL.
>
>I asked a few friends today "just to see". I was surprised that
>they all wanted it to stay.
>
>I was surprised because I know it can be a bit repetitive and hokey
>at times but every single person I asked said that it was the first
>thing they read and wanted it kept.
>
>Of course these people are not political in the slightest... I purposefully
>asked only those I knew did not read here and were not involved
>in USCF politics. Now if I were to poll another group consisting only
>of these types I suspect the results would be quite different.
>
>Duncan

Years ago, a poll of the membership revealed opposition to switching
from Descriptive to Algebraic notation. Didn't stop the bureaucrats
from doing what they thought was good for us.

Vince Hart

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

Duncan Oxley wrote:

quote:

> I have always enjoyed Larry Evans' column in CL.
>
> I asked a few friends today "just to see". I was surprised that
> they all wanted it to stay.
>
> I was surprised because I know it can be a bit repetitive and hokey
> at times but every single person I asked said that it was the first
> thing they read and wanted it kept.
>
> Of course these people are not political in the slightest... I purposefully
> asked only those I knew did not read here and were not involved
> in USCF politics. Now if I were to poll another group consisting only
> of these types I suspect the results would be quite different.
>
> Duncan

I will admit that Evans column is one of the few things that I read
every month although that may reflect the quality of the rest of the
magazine more than the quality of the column. It may also reflect the
fact that I enjoy the question and answer format. Nevertheless, I
think I would enjoy it even more if the columnist was someone with a
closer connection to the current tournament scene.

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

*I have always enjoyed Larry Evans' column in CL. I asked a few friends
today "just to see". I was surprised that they all wanted it to stay.
Of course these people are not political in the slightest.*
(Duncan)

My chess friends all feel the same way, that he is still at the top
of his form. We all read his little gems posted each Monday at
worldchessnetwork.com.

To a person, the people at my club believe that political pressure
was exerted on the new editor to remove the most famous living American
player from Chess Life (except, of course, for Bobby Fischer).

Most of us think it was the best thing in Chess Life, and we all
enjoy the lively controversy found there that's missing from the rest
of that house organ.

As Parr would say, "And so it goes."

Louis Blair

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

jr (posting-host=207.200.116.66):
wrote (10 Apr 2006 16:43:43 -0700):

quote:

> My chess friends all feel the same way, ...
> We all read ...
>_
> To a person, the people at my club believe ...
>_
> Most of us think ...
> we all enjoy ...

_
"so far as anonymice are concerned, I discount
their words unless they provide airtight evidence
on a disputed point." - Larry Parr (26 Dec 2004
12:01:42 GMT)

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:18 pm

THE FIRST THING THEY READ

<I have always enjoyed Larry Evans' column in CL.
I asked a few friends today "just to see". I was surprised
that they all wanted it to stay.

I was surprised because I know it can be a bit repetitive and hokey
at times but every single person I asked said that it was the first
thing they read and wanted it kept.

Of course these people are not political in the slightest... I
purposefully
asked only those I knew did not read here and were not involved
in USCF politics. Now if I were to poll another group consisting only
of these types I suspect the results would be quite different.> --
Duncan Oxley

Right. I remember the old Chess Life surveys and the
hosannahs from the sticks for Soltis and Evans. That
is why the politicians call the survey a plebiscite. Those
rats want to make sure that this time around,they can
get rid of GM Larry Evans once and for all. He has been
a thorn in their side for lo these many years.

The new editor is just a pawn in this game.

ABOVE ALL ELSE, NO SURVEY!

Chess Freak

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

<marcus@stkittsnevischess.org> wrote in message
news:1144642275.870926.139990@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

>
> So, Chess Freak, your solution is to make everyone on this newsgroup be
> quiet and pay your US Chess Federation money to participate in a
> newsgroup moderated by the Chess Nazi Mike Nolan?

What in the world are you talking about? All I'm saying is that if you are
not a member of the USCF you have no right participating in a poll of
the readers of Chess Life to see what columns are to be featured. This
has nothing to do with nationalism, you moron.

quote:

>
> I think you represent the world view of the American Cowboy: Bully
> everyone into submission to the American way (we have no voice because
> we do not pay your political leaders money), extort money in the form
> of USCF dues for participating in a "moderated discussion", and
> threaten to kill anyone who disagrees with the USCF?
>

Huh? Do you realize how stupid you sound?

quote:

> Chess Freak, I would like to meet you. One day you might get to meet
> somebody differet from you and learn something about this world in
> which you live.

I've already met you. I'm a former Texas State amateur chess champion
back when you lived in Texas. I thought you were an idiot back then too.

quote:

>
> Marcus Roberts
>

Duncan Oxley

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote

quote:

> Right. I remember the old Chess Life surveys and the
> hosannahs from the sticks for Soltis and Evans. That
> is why the politicians call the survey a plebiscite. Those
> rats want to make sure that this time around,they can
> get rid of GM Larry Evans once and for all. He has been
> a thorn in their side for lo these many years.
>
> The new editor is just a pawn in this game.
>
> ABOVE ALL ELSE, NO SURVEY!
>

I think if Chess Life wants to drop Evans then the ICC should pick him up.

I bet that would generate a lot of traffic to the ICC homepage.

Duncan

Sam Sloan

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

What would generate traffic to ICC is naked columns by Shahade,
Manakova and Kosteniuk. No one cares about a naked column by Evans.

Sam Sloan

David Kane

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

"Duncan Oxley" <No@Thanks> wrote in message
news:123nlgrsb83ip32@corp.supernews.com...

quote:

>
> <parrthenon@cs.com> wrote
>
>
> I think if Chess Life wants to drop Evans then the ICC should pick him up.
>
> I bet that would generate a lot of traffic to the ICC homepage.
>
> Duncan
>

Evans' work already appears at WCN. Looking
at what has happened there would be a more
reliable gauge of his value than a USCF
survey.

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

OFFERS

<I think if Chess Life wants to drop Evans then the ICC should pick him
up.
I bet that would generate a lot of traffic to the ICC homepage.> --
Duncan Oxley

My understanding is that GM Evans has several offers pending to
pick up his Q&A column from prestigious European magazines. I'm
not sure what he wants to do, but I was told he delivered a blistering
lecture about USCF mismanagement at the recent Far West Open in Reno.
Wish I had been a fly on the wall there!

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

EVANS AT WCN

<Evans' work already appears at WCN. Looking
at what has happened there would be a more
reliable gauge of his value than a USCF survey.> -- David Kane

WCN (worldchessnetwork.com) must be extremely happy
because his column is widely read and gets more hits than
anything else appearing there on chess. His work began for
WCN began in 2002 and is still going strong. Check it out
for yourself.

This board is more interested in CONTROL than reader
satisfaction. The new Chess Life editor, as I said before, is
just a pawn in the game.

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

David Kane

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1144779445.238240.121220@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> EVANS AT WCN
>
> <Evans' work already appears at WCN. Looking
> at what has happened there would be a more
> reliable gauge of his value than a USCF survey.> -- David Kane
>
> WCN (worldchessnetwork.com) must be extremely happy
> because his column is widely read and gets more hits than
> anything else appearing there on chess. His work began for
> WCN began in 2002 and is still going strong. Check it out
> for yourself.

The relevant question is what has Evans' work done
for WCN? Was there a huge jump in membership or
an increase in traffic when he joined? That's the
sort of evidence needed, not the "some members
like him" nonsense that can be used to justify
anything. Evans' column can be read on WCN without
a membership, suggesting a lack of potential to
directly attract paying membership.

Paul Rubin

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

> This board is more interested in CONTROL than reader

quote:

> satisfaction. The new Chess Life editor, as I said before, is
> just a pawn in the game.

Didn't you just say

I was told he delivered a blistering lecture about USCF mismanagement
at the recent Far West Open in Reno

but you want him to keep his column? If Wolf Blitzer goes to Reno and
gives a blistering lecture about CNN mismanagement, do you think CNN
should keep him on the air?

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

SHOOTING THE MESSENGER

<If Wolf Blitzer goes to Reno and gives a blistering lecture about CNN
mismanagement, do you think CNN should keep him on the air?> -- Paul
Rubin

This happened AFTER the termination of Evans On Chess in Chess Life.

Didn't Bernie Goldfarb, AFTER he was fired by CBS, write a
best-selling book with a blistering account of what took place behind
closed doors at CBS news?

If people in the know say things about mismanagement that have
validity, shouldn't the problems be corrected instead of shooting the
messenger?

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

*If Wolf Blitzer goes to Reno and gives a blistering lecture about CNN
mismanagement, do you think CNN should keep him on the air?* (Rubin)

Excuse me?

Surely you can't be seriously suggesting that all whistleblowers
should be fired.

Taylor Kingston

2006-08-02, 10:19 pm

jr wrote:

quote:

> Surely you can't be seriously suggesting that all whistleblowers
> should be fired.

Surely you can't be suggesting that a known perjurer, such as
yourself, should be taken at all seriously? Or perhaps you'd care to
explain how in January 2006 you knew all about something, then in April
2006 said it was "all new" to you?

parrthenon@cs.com

2006-08-02, 10:20 pm

POT CALLS KETTLE BLACK

<Surely you can't be suggesting that a known perjurer, such as
yourself, should be taken at all seriously?> -- Taylor Kingston to jr

Looks like known perjurer Mr. 2300+ Elo has added another
person to his enemy list -- without addressing the topic at hand.

David Kane

2006-08-02, 10:20 pm

<parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
news:1144778206.758756.117120@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...

quote:

>
> My understanding is that GM Evans has several offers pending to
> pick up his Q&A column from prestigious European magazines.

If that happens, we will have a good way to
quantify the value of Evans' column. Parr can
feel vindicated if Evans' new magazine gains,
say, 10,000 subscribers and USCF loses 10,000
members.

But whatever the effect on subscriptions, I'd expect that
Evans' columns will improve in quality. This
is because working for a private magazine dependent
on subscribers is going to be more demanding than
his semi-patronage position at the USCF. So the
chess world wins in any event.

Ray Gordon

2006-08-02, 10:27 pm

Another way of saying it is that they're preaching to the choir.

How long before ICC starts its own OTB events?

"Vince Hart" <VinnyJH@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144620393.940888.87000@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

quote:

> Polling current members is probably not worth the bother for several
> reasons:
>
> (1) Does not provide any help in determining what might attract new
> members;
>
> (2) Does not provide any help in determining what might recapture
> former members;
>
> (3) Provides little help in determining what new features might
> increase appeal of magazine to current members:
>
> (4) May be biased towards a status quo that is not presently working
> very well.
>