| Sam Sloan 2005-06-04, 8:31 pm |
| At 12:19 AM 6/3/2005 EDT, Recmate@aol.com wrote:
quote:
> Note that even though I endorse Greg Shahade (as well as Channing and Tanner), Greg is not part of a
> team. He has not endorsed anyone and will probably vote for Steve Shutt, who used to be his high
> school chess coach. I much prefer an independent candidate to your "slate" that falsely claims to
> have "made the tough decisions" and saved the Federation. The "tough decision" was the vote to
> lay off 17 employees in August 2003. It was the right decision, and how did your "success team" vote on it?
Frankly, I cannot understand why Bill refuses to endorse me because if
he endorsed me it is virtually guaranteed that I would be elected. I
was nearly elected the last times I ran even though Bill opposed me.
The people Bill supports instead cannot be considered reliable.
For example, Greg Shahade has not campaigned at all. He did not even
prepare his own nominating petitions. I gave him some of mine and told
him to white out my name and write in his instead, which he did.
Greg wrote something on rgcp a few weeks ago that I fell was a big
mistake. (I will not repeat what he wrote as I actually hope he is
elected.)
I am not against Greg. I think he will be a good board member if
elected, but I feel that he has no chance.
Tanner I find has a lot of enemies. I do not know the reason. This
does not concern me. What does concern me is his close friendship with
Beatriz Marinello. He says good things about Beatriz in his campaign
statements. Also, recall that Richard Peterson accused Tanner and
Beatriz of sleeping together in 1999. I do not feel that Tanner is
entirely trustworthy. At the same time, I would much prefer to see
Tanner elected than any of the so-called "success team".
I believe that Joel Channing will make an excellent board member if
elected. He has campaigned harder than anybody and deserves to be
elected. However, he was completely unknown prior to the start of the
election campaign and that could be a problem.
Regarding the other slate, I think Stan Booz is right. George John
will not be elected. Everybody can see right through him. He is just
saying goody-goody things to get elected.
Elizabeth Shaughnessy has turned out to be a terrible board member,
one of the worst ever. She is driven by her hatred of Bill Goichberg.
I do not know why she hates Bill Goichberg. Probably it is because she
is connected with Tom Dorsch and Jim Eade, who also hate Goichberg.
However, I believe that Shaughnessy will be defeated. She got elected
last time because of support from Northern California, where she
lives. However, several key chess personalities in Northern California
are completely against her now, and without their support she cannot
win.
Randy Bauer is the best of a bad lot. I believe that he will be
elected.
Steve Shutt has turned out to be a terrible board member. He does not
reads his e-mail or participate much. I do not know what has gone
wrong with him. I certainly hope that he is defeated, but I fear that
he might be elected because he has been around for so long and is so
well known.
This is the most important election in the history of the USCF. If the
bad guys win, the organization as we know it will die. The voters have
a simple choice. Life or Death? The problem is that neither slate is
very good. It seems that the best candidates have given up running in
these elections. In 1999, many good candidates ran and were defeated
and never ran again, so the voters are left with a very unsatisfactory
choice among the candidates this year.
Sam Sloan
|