"samsloan" <samhsloan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:023534e0-c93d-4e97-bbbc-1fa37dea1cd9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> However, most voters know little or nothing about this. Many voted
> just on the basis of campaign statements published in Chess Life. They
> would hardly be expected to know about the serious problems with
> everything involving Susan Polgar going back for the past 23 years.
Or... even your own problems, which go back even further?
> They would not know that the problems Polgar has been creating here
> are almost identical to the problems she created back in Hungary
> before she got here.
Pu****ng the limits of the game to involve more players, eliminating
gender-bias from the inside, by actually encouraging self esteem in young
women, as if they were people too?
Those sort of problems?
People are terrified that the precious balance of the status quo will be
upset, that new criteria will apply, and a necessary transparency in chess
governance will actually be carried out rather than suggested - that the
USCF will actually do something to justify its existence, rather than
continue to decline like a private member's club for the old boys.
Those factors are very serious problems only for those who like it the way
it is now. And those people talk about SPICE and KCF exploring their
individual paths forward as a 'rift', since it ain't a monolithic
approach,
which in their opinion should run everything [down].
Phil Innes
> Sam Sloan
|
