If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Kampomanes lost to Illumzhinov (it was the only time Kasparov supported Kampomanes
It is hard to call it "lost". After resignation from the FIDE presidency, Campomanes became Honorary President (or similar title). I doubt that at that time Kasparov supported Campomanes as F.C. was not getting along with the PCA to unite titles.
Right now the ratio is 10 -0 =4 in favor of Kasparov. Sure, my post couldn't change it dramatically, but still I want to express my opinion.
While I greatly appreciate Kasparov as a chess player and respect him as a Russian anti-Putin politician, I absolutely don't want to see him as a future FIDE president. I'll try to explain the reasons.
1. In 1993 Garry completely demolished whole championship circle, playing match with Short out of FIDE-zone. He made a great damage to FIDE and for himself for relatively small amount of money.
2. In 1999-2000 in his own championship circle he ignored the rights of the legal contender (Shirov) and played match with Kramnik (who lost to Shirov) instead. You want this person, well-known for his voluntarism, to be a FIDE president?
3. Only after he retired, FIDE could gradually normalize the championship circle. Now we all know the name of World Champion and have pretty decent championship circle (sure, some improvement could be done).
4. Kasparov was a great winner over the board. Twice he beat very strong opponent in decisive last game of championship match. The same time Garry lost almost every possible fight in chess politics. Person who had his support lost FIDE election every time. Karpov lost it 4 years ago. Kampomanes lost to Illumzhinov (it was the only time Kasparov supported Kampomanes).
Now a few words about Illumzhinov. This person is really strange (aliens...). But he spend a lot, really a lot money on chess in last 20 years. It was his own money. And honestly, I don't care what was the source of his money. Like NBA doesn't care about Prokhorov (Brooklin Nets owner) money and English soccer league doesn't care about Abramovich (Chelsea's owner) money.
Few months ago I estimated Kasparov's chances to be elected as very, very low. Now, after Russian aggression in Ukraine and growing political and economical isolation, Garry has more chances. In my opinion, he is still an underdog (it's not the reason not to support him, of course).
Victor, thank you for your post, however I'd like to make 2 remarks.
1....for relatively small amount of money - the money was not an issue - he wanted to wrestle World Championship from Campomanes' FIDE and run it more professionally.
2.Kasparov was trying very hard to organize match with Shirov, and succeeded to find sponsors in California, but the Prize Fund was only $600,000.00 - with a scary score in Gary's favour that was the value of the match. Kasparov has offered a split $350,000.00 to the winner and the rest to the loser. Shirov was dreaming of millions of dollars and refused to play. Then how is it possible to imply it against Gary?
The Cooperative Chess Coalition (CCC) agrees totally with Sasha on the importance of "endorsement" over "vote". It has endorsed Garry Kasparov. It has already so notified the CFC Governors on the confidential CFC Governors' Discussion Board (I, as CFC Lameduck Governor, GTCL, agreed to post the CCC lobby there for them).
Now it is in the process of preparing a Press Release to this effect. We are an insignificant international chess organization - but we do have a "CCC Network" numbering over 3,000 chess players world-wide. They can lobby their national federations with our endorsement. That is the value of an endorsement - the influence it has on other federations. Canada has a good chess reputation. Other federations will be interested in Canada's position. They will not know it if Canada only "votes".
CCC will be lobbying the CFC Governors (it has numbers of Canadians in its Network) to take a stand early, so the Candidate can use it in their campaign. If you want somebody elected, you help them, no??
Bob Armstrong, CCC Coordinator.
Thank you, Bob, for coming out with your post, I have a feeling that people here are scared to voice their views against Kirsan!
Actually I'm curious who is in the position to decide the way Canada votes for the FIDE's President. If the Board of Governors is the highest decisionmaking body in the CFC, then why not to have a vote? If its a President's decision - then we are all wasting our time!
Last edited by Sasha Starr; Tuesday, 6th May, 2014, 10:41 PM.
1. Too many people on here are exaggerating the effect of the anti-Russian sanctions on the success of fund-raising for the World Championship, etc. Members of the Upper Duma in Russia actually passed a motion asking that they all, without exception, be sanctioned in the same way as the few (dozen then, some more now) citizens were sanctioned. They were literally laughing at countries like the US and Canada. So, while our governments might be applauding the Kievan junta, and goading it into violence against ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, etc., the effect of the Russophobic sanctions are exaggerated. The Russian regime has actually used the ocassion to punish companies like Visa, Mastercard, etc., for violating agreements,etc., as a result of which the Russians are creating their own payment system in that country. The BRICS group of countries are distancing themselves from trade using US currency, and the world of US dictat in the post-Soviet era seems to be coming to an end. Hence the vituperative, frothing venom directed towards the Russians, and the President in particular, that really exceeds almost anything since the worst of the Cold War with the old Soviet regimes. Putin is as conservative as the neo-conservatives who wish to make war with Russia - he's just a different sort of conservative (neo-liberal economic approach, Orthodox Russian church supporter, luke warm on GLBT Rights, willing to do the same things as the Canadian Conservatives with their Robo-calls fraud, etc..)
2. Chess just isn't as important in the political life of countries like Canada, or the USA, as it is in many other members of FIDE. And that's, ultimately, the fault of chess players and the kind of society that places more value on watching people beat each other up (on the ice in a hockey game or in the ring or the octagon), or just watch the idiot box generally, than promote chess and chess culture. The provincialization of education in Canada (a good thing in the era of an anti-intellectual federal conservative regime as today) breaks up educational initiatives and makes the establishment of, say, Canada-wide promotion of chess in schools, etc., difficult at best. But there is a lot more we, as chess players, could do in our country to make chess stronger here and thereby stronger in the world.
3. Both major candidates are bad, but Gary Kimovich (Kasparov) is worse. The duty of FIDE is not just to support chess in the Anglosphere (US, Canada, UK, etc) or even in the "West" (Europe and the Canada/US Bloc), but to support chess in the whole globe, including rich countries and poor countries alike. Chess in Africa, Asia and Latin America is important. The current leadership at least makes efforts in this regard. Given the attention Kasparov pays to Washington, I would not be surprised if (after winning the Presidency of FIDE) he tried to move the HQ of FIDE to that city and then arranged to have all his rivals banned from entering the USA.
4. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is a terrible example to mimic. When this horrific show comes to town, it becomes a little fiefdom with police-state attributes. Chess doesn't need that garbage in addition to its current problems. If they have to wait a while for the money to support a World Championship, what's the big deal? Chess is chess. The Olympiad will go on. Big events will take place. Crowning a World Champion is not the only thing that's important in the chess calendar. We're already had more than one ocassion in which the de facto chess champion wasn't crowned and the chess world did not end. It will go on, just fine.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
[Thank you, Bob, for coming out with your post, I have a feeling that people here are scared to voice their views against Kirsan!
?? There are very few posters here worried about space aliens that might be backing Kirsan Ilyumzhinov , etc.. Please note that Ilyumzhinov has not even a single vote on the poll on this thread. Some intimidation. lol.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
1. Too many people on here are exaggerating the effect of the anti-Russian sanctions on the success of fund-raising for the World Championship, etc. Members of the Upper Duma in Russia actually passed a motion asking that they all, without exception, be sanctioned in the same way as the few (dozen then, some more now) citizens were sanctioned. They were literally laughing at countries like the US and Canada. So, while our governments might be applauding the Kievan junta, and goading it into violence against ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, etc., the effect of the Russophobic sanctions are exaggerated. The Russian regime has actually used the ocassion to punish companies like Visa, Mastercard, etc., for violating agreements,etc., as a result of which the Russians are creating their own payment system in that country. The BRICS group of countries are distancing themselves from trade using US currency, and the world of US dictat in the post-Soviet era seems to be coming to an end. Hence the vituperative, frothing venom directed towards the Russians, and the President in particular, that really exceeds almost anything since the worst of the Cold War with the old Soviet regimes. Putin is as conservative as the neo-conservatives who wish to make war with Russia - he's just a different sort of conservative (neo-liberal economic approach, Orthodox Russian church supporter, luke warm on GLBT Rights, willing to do the same things as the Canadian Conservatives with their Robo-calls fraud, etc..)
2. Chess just isn't as important in the political life of countries like Canada, or the USA, as it is in many other members of FIDE. And that's, ultimately, the fault of chess players and the kind of society that places more value on watching people beat each other up (on the ice in a hockey game or in the ring or the octagon), or just watch the idiot box generally, than promote chess and chess culture. The provincialization of education in Canada (a good thing in the era of an anti-intellectual federal conservative regime as today) breaks up educational initiatives and makes the establishment of, say, Canada-wide promotion of chess in schools, etc., difficult at best. But there is a lot more we, as chess players, could do in our country to make chess stronger here and thereby stronger in the world.
3. Both major candidates are bad, but Gary Kimovich (Kasparov) is worse. The duty of FIDE is not just to support chess in the Anglosphere (US, Canada, UK, etc) or even in the "West" (Europe and the Canada/US Bloc), but to support chess in the whole globe, including rich countries and poor countries alike. Chess in Africa, Asia and Latin America is important. The current leadership at least makes efforts in this regard. Given the attention Kasparov pays to Washington, I would not be surprised if (after winning the Presidency of FIDE) he tried to move the HQ of FIDE to that city and then arranged to have all his rivals banned from entering the USA.
4. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is a terrible example to mimic. When this horrific show comes to town, it becomes a little fiefdom with police-state attributes. Chess doesn't need that garbage in addition to its current problems. If they have to wait a while for the money to support a World Championship, what's the big deal? Chess is chess. The Olympiad will go on. Big events will take place. Crowning a World Champion is not the only thing that's important in the chess calendar. We're already had more than one ocassion in which the de facto chess champion wasn't crowned and the chess world did not end. It will go on, just fine.
Russian corporations owed to the Western Banks over $700B, and as a result of being downgrated by major rating agencies will have to refinance it at 3% or more higher then before. Its over $21B - they could keep laughing all day long! Putin claims that Internet is a creation of the CIA, and therfore ordered to create Russia's own Internet. Now all banks will stop funcioning because Microsoft, HP and many others will have to stop providing their support. There are virtually no modern products and services of the World quality Russia could provide. Are we still laughing?
?? There are very few posters here worried about space aliens that might be backing Kirsan Ilyumzhinov , etc.. Please note that Ilyumzhinov has not even a single vote on the poll on this thread. Some intimidation. lol.
It seems to me that the intimidation is all coming from one side of the argument. It appears at the moment that some individuals do not want to rely on their power of persuasion and argument and want to force through significant changes in the way the CFC operates simply to ensure that Canada's endorsement and not just a vote is delivered to their candidate. I do not want to believe that Garry Kasparov is behind this. If he is behind it, it is a grave mistake.
In every decision that I have been involved in at the CFC, I have always tried to do what is right and fair. I have also always tried to do what is best for chess and for chessplayers in Canada both young and old. I believe that this approach has paid dividends as we have received many compliments, the CFC is healthier than it has been in some time. We even managed to get an agreement on the contentious NFP Act file when many feared that we could never get the governors to agree on anything. I believe that the CFC has benefited from my approach and the approach of the executive on every question that has been put before it.
I hope Hal Bond won't be too upset with me if I relate our conversation around the possible scenario of an attempted coup d'etat which is not totally unexpected. I told him that the worst case scenario might be the best case scenario. We get turfed for doing our due diligence and we suddenly have several hours per day freed up that were previously occupied with unpaid work for the CFC. Like Obiwan Kenobi in episode IV of Star Wars if you strike me down I will become more powerful than you can imagine. I will have more time to spend with the Windsor kids who are reaching the level where they can give me a good game of chess without me having to travel. I will have time to redouble my efforts there and maybe I can turn some of my focus back to my career in IT consulting where despite my total lack of effort I still seem to find people who need help with their computers and networks.
I really don't want anything from the CFC for myself. Being president does not help me with a line on my resume. I expect to be self-employed for the rest of my days so no need to submit resumes to anyone. I am not on a power trip. I am more powerful outside of the CFC where I get to do what I want without having to explain myself to anybody. I want the CFC to conduct its affairs so that every decision is wise, fair, compassionate and spreads this game that we all love to everyone who will give it a chance. In addition to the benefits of playing there is the side effect of being able to learn more about oneself on this road to chess mastery. I oppose ego driven individuals who see in the CFC a way to dominate others and impose a never ending array of arbitrary rules on players. Let us keep the CFC from being a preventer of chess play as it has been at times in the past.
I think most of the governors are on board with what I have been doing and trying to do. The problem is that it does not take that many governors to create a problem. I think most of the chess public across Canada including Quebec are supportive of my approach. I certainly get some supportive emails.
I do not think that what amounts to a rushed constitutional amendment is required to ensure that a particular individual gets an endorsement from the CFC. In particular if that is the approach that certain individuals want to take then they should do it in public and not on the private governors board. I think all organizations including the CFC benefit from more open discussion without secret plots and agreements hatched behind closed doors.
1.Lets be realistic: nobody is perfect, and Gary is not an exception. What worries me is that you are implying certain things that Gary did or didn't do, in spite of the fact that his lawyers provided a "scripted reply".
Sorry if my having to do my due diligence as part of my job as the CFC President and member of the executive board offends you.
Obviously you are not satisfied and continue to dig into it further and further.
So now reading what you posted are digging into it further and further?
On the other hand you have no comments about obvious shortcomings of Kirsan, in the abcense of any letters from his lawyers, btw.
I have made many public comments over the alien abduction thing and the embracing of dictators. I see no sense in repeating what has already been said.
It creates an appearance that you are perhaps biased to deliver CFC's vote for Kirsan. Isn't it true?
Before the Kasparov supporters started their campaign I was leaning to Kasparov. If it seems that I am less sympathetic now it is probably in reaction to the excesses and attempts to subvert and overturn the CFC rules in order to ensure an endorsement. The prize of the endorsement is available but not if the tactics that I have seen so far are considered normal operating procedure. And I am not so naive that I expect fair play but don't come to me for sympathy when this behaviour and tactic boomerangs.
2.I have no demands whatsoever.
Good. Neither do I beyond the intention to vote in a manner that best reflects the best interest of Canadians and the CFC.
4.Canada's vote is not significant at all - only endorsement has a value. Other then that it will be just 1 of almost 200 votes.
I'll keep that in mind.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Wednesday, 7th May, 2014, 04:01 AM.
Thank you, Bob, for coming out with your post, I have a feeling that people here are scared to voice their views against Kirsan!
Actually I'm curious who is in the position to decide the way Canada votes for the FIDE's President.
Currently and in the past it was the FIDE rep and the rest of the board of directors also known as the executive that get to decide. There seems to be a move afoot to stage a coup d'etat in order to attempt to change the constitution despite the havoc this may cause and the possible problems that it may cause with the new not for profit act compliance. Some people are impatient and aren't that concerned if the CFC ceases to exist because they want to impose their will regardless of the consequences.
If the Board of Governors is the highest decisionmaking body in the CFC, then why not to have a vote? If its a President's decision - then we are all wasting our time!
The Cooperative Chess Coalition (CCC) agrees totally with Sasha on the importance of "endorsement" over "vote". It has endorsed Garry Kasparov. It has already so notified the CFC Governors on the confidential CFC Governors' Discussion Board (I, as CFC Lameduck Governor, GTCL, agreed to post the CCC lobby there for them).
What part of confidential is difficult to understand here? It also appears to me that you are in a conflict of interest position as you are proposing CFC rule changes and a possible constitutional amendment based on the position of four unelected members of Cooperative Chess Coalition some of whom are foreigners. You are demanding an endorsement from the CFC president, the FIDE representative and the executive (board of directors) regardless of our personal opinion on the matter and without regard to the due diligence which we are required by Canadian law to exercise on the matter.
Is that an accurate assessment of the situation? If not, what am I missing?
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Wednesday, 7th May, 2014, 04:06 AM.
Re: Endorsemeent over Vote: FIDE Election for President
1.I'm not aware of a coup d'etat - its all rather strange. And the reason for that is Canada's vote (and/or endorsement)?
2.Now you were writing in one of your posts that "Before the Kasparov supporters started their campaign I was leaning to Kasparov". So was a Board of Directors? And now because there is apparently overwhelmimg support for Gary you are "less sympathetic now it is probably in reaction to the excesses and attempts to subvert and overturn the CFC rules in order to ensure an endorsement". I'm not aware of the "excesses and attempts to subvert etc." - maybe we should know more about it. However is it fair to say that the Board of Directors now is also "less sympathetic"? Its important to understand because as you've written "Currently and in the past it was the FIDE rep and the rest of the board of directors also known as the executive that get to decide". Could you please refer me to the proper section of the Handbook?
3.Also you've written earlier that "The prize of the endorsement is available" - PLEASE EXPLAIN!
Last edited by Sasha Starr; Wednesday, 7th May, 2014, 12:50 PM.
What part of confidential is difficult to understand here? It also appears to me that you are in a conflict of interest position as you are proposing CFC rule changes and a possible constitutional amendment based on the position of four unelected members of Cooperative Chess Coalition some of whom are foreigners. You are demanding an endorsement from the CFC president, the FIDE representative and the executive (board of directors) regardless of our personal opinion on the matter and without regard to the due diligence which we are required by Canadian law to exercise on the matter.
Is that an accurate assessment of the situation? If not, what am I missing?
Hi Vlad:
1. A Governor can post publicly, HIS posts on the confidential CFC Governors' Discussion Board, without breaching confidentiality. What he cannot do is disclose the comments of the other Governors, which I have not done.
2. It is true that the Cooperative Chess Coalition (CCC) is an international organization. And so it may be arguable, that it ought not to insert itself into national chess debate, even if its two goals are world-wide chess promotion and world-wide chess improvement/reform. How many here are of this view, that international chess organizations have no role to play re matters within national federations?
3. CCC is in a unique position on this, since two of its "Members" are Canadian, and have taken a stand personally, as well as having a hand in directing CCC's position with respect to the FIDE Presidential election. In addition, CCC has 15 formal "Supporters" who are Canadian, and who publicly stand by the decisions of the CCC. In addition, there are many Canadians among the over 3,000 members of CCC's Facebook chess discussion group, Chess Posts of Interest - we do not claim to speak for them, but they have an interest in CCC decisions. So CCC sees itself, though international, as in a unique position that obliges it to get involved in Canadian chess issues where this is the will of its members/supporters. This is exactly within the mandate of CCC.
4. Ever since I became a governor in 2009, and thoroughly read and examined the whole CFC Handbook, it has been my published view that any good legal review of the Handbook will result in a legal opinion that the appearance that the 7 Board of Directors runs the CFC is a "sham". It will be obvious that the main locus of authority in the CFC is the 61 CFC Governors. As such, it is my view that in the case of a lawsuit against the CFC, it is likely that all governors (that includes the executive) will be joined as defendants. The CFC would be obliged to hire counsel to defend them. In the case of an award of damages, since there is no CFC Liability Insurance, the governors personal assets would be at risk to pay the damages award. I have accepted this in my 5 years volunteering time to CFC as CFC Governor and CFC Public Relations Coordinator. I would be interested to hear legal opinions from other lawyer chess players on this. I am not sure of the CFC pro-bono lawyer (Les Bunning) position on this. It would be interesting for CFC to have a legal opinion on this, to assist in the CFC governance debate. I have published an article to this effect for years in the now-defunct Scarborough Community of Toronto Chess News & Views (official newsletter of the Scarborough CC). I also used to regularly then post the article here on Chesstalk. It never generated rabid opposition, in fact almost none. I will find the article (I don't think I've yet published it in Toronto Chess News [TCN - my own chess e-newsletter]). I will do any updating needed and publish it in the next TCN. Then I will publish it here.
5. I am not demanding that the CFC Executive make an endorsement which you are against or that you don't do due diligence. The executive role is to educate the CFC Governors for their decision-making and to make recommendations to them on such decisions. I am arguing that it is not your decision. It is the CFC Governors decision. That decision will be by majority vote, like in all issues. Once the vote is decided, it is the decision of the CFC, regardless of the fact that some CFC Governors may have voted against the decision.
6. I am arguing that an endorsement is preferable to Canada remaining mute, and just voting privately in August at the Congress, with no one knowing the CFC vote in advance. If CFC is voting for a candidate, support their election by giving an endorsement useful in their campaign.
7. If the vote is the prerogative of the CFC Governors, then should it be done by mail vote immediately, so that the earliest endorsement possible can be published? Or must it await the July CFC AGM? If the AGM, should the vote be by the "outgoing governor AGM" or the "incoming Governor AGM"? What are the factors that should determine this - those who have had a full year of experience governing the CFC?
Bob Armstrong, CCC Coordinator, CFC Governor, Canadian CFC Member
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Wednesday, 7th May, 2014, 10:22 AM.
Your language is getting a little inflammatory, Vlad. I am not sure that is helpful in this discussion.
I am at this point very annoyed. I am more annoyed than I have been at any time that I have been CFC president. I am probably not going to comment further on this until late this evening as I will be occupied with work and with chess lessons followed by a Skype meeting with the USCF president. It seems to me that my only option will be to put the whole process of talking to the Garry Kasparov campaign on hold until we deal with the issues that are being raised in this challenge in a very public manner. Cooler heads will hopefully prevail but I have no intention of playing nice while our constitution is twisted in a knot. My best weapon is to open the windows and doors let the light in and let everyone see what is going on.
Tweet
Comment