| |
Main
Date: 28 Oct 2007 08:37:43
From: samsloan
Subject: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
Ron Suarez has posted a very good discussion of what has been going on
over at the USCF Forums for the past few weeks. I am reposting it here
to preserve it, as it will likely be deleted from the Forums soon.
Gregory Alexander has already responded with the same sort of rants
and raves:
[quote="Ron Suarez"]I recently took a week plus off from this forum
because I was disappointed with a lot of the postings and situations.
I came back and got updated by reading the new posts and threads. I
have observed a few things that should be mentioned:
1. One of the more prevalent concepts that has been ongoing for quite
awhile and has manifested very recently is that of "sides" in this
forum and the USCF. Certain individuals insist on keeping this idea
alive. Yes, there are people that continue to dislike and disagree
with each other. I must call for an end to this type of Machiavellian
thinking. Enough is enough, we all need to play nice(r).
2. The issue of the Fake Sam Sloan poster has brought up a couple of
points:
a. The first issue to arise from this is that Brian Mottershead did a
bit of looking and found some evidence that apparently pointed to one
person as this unscrupulous poster. A number of folk have said, "How
dare he!!" One person doing this is going to get his own, personal
entry on this list, later. Others have assumed that he obviously has
done things wrong by simply having access to the information he had.
Well guys, the cat's out of the bag. Brian Mottershead has
consistently, from day one, given the same story and reasons for doing
what he did and even how. If Brian is wrong in his analysis of the
situation then he will need to be disciplined (taught) not to make
such public statements without solid proof. If Brian is correct, well
he will be correct and we should chill out. Right is right.
Also under this heading is the fact that I will elucidate further on
later that people should accept what Brian did as an administrator was
that and no more. There is no evidence, except by certain biased
people's interpretations, that Brian did anything like hacking into
another's account. This has nothing to do with his revelation
regarding the FSS. Please see my point # 1. above regarding sides.
It certainly applies with some people's behavior towards Brian.
b. The USCF has hired professional counsel regarding the FSS and the
evidence that Brian has submitted. The Truth will come forth,
hopefully in the near future. In the meantime, the individual and his
wife that are so accused are embroiled in controversy. Please note
that I am simply observing here and this controversy exists whether he
is innocent or guilty. Much as Sam Sloan was embroiled in controversy
last year, so is Paul Troung presently
Many have stated if Paul is guilty, then it would be best for him to
quietly admit so and resign from his prominent positions as Robert
Tanner did last year. I agree with this sentiment. Paul indeed knows
if he is guilty or not. If he is, the truth will be coming sooner or
later so he would be best off cutting his losses and getting on with
things in his life.
I personally feel that if Paul is innocent (and he certainly knows if
he is) he should make very public comments to that effect allowing
and encouraging all types of investigations to totally bring out, the
Truth.
By his silence, he is creating a present public image problem and
controversy. If this controversy continues to build, he may very well
need to resign and the like, no matter the state of his innocence or
guilt.
3. Gregory Alexander has recently shown himself to be acting like a
trouble maker. He consistently has accused others of wrong actions
and evil intentions no matter what evidence has been presented to
disprove such accusations. A few examples include his treatment of
the FOC while he was a Moderator and during his resignation of such.
Another is his constant attacks of certain individuals who were on the
FOC and working for the administration. I personally know of
communications that he received, by me and others, in the preceding
examples, informing him of the real facts and situations as they were
occurring that proved the reality of the situations and how people
were not really out to get him. If anyone would like the actual
details, I will be happy to either PM or email them these facts.
Most recently Gregory is involved with the hacking into of Bill
Goichberg's account, as a fake poster. Now I am not accusing Gregory
of anything specific. I am simply pointing out that a lot of recent
circumstances and Gregory's own refusal to answer specific questions
posed to him regarding this has shown that he has some involvement in
the issue. Even if he is playing mind games and trying to act like he
"could" or "could not" have done such a thing, this simply involves
him. It is my opinion that Gregory should come clean of any knowledge
he might have or not have regarding this situation.
While he is at it, he should also help to clarify the FSS situation by
sharing any and all knowledge he might have regarding this situation.
Instead, he keeps making false claims that Brian Mottershead hacked
into his account, when Brian obviously did not.
4. There is one other point I would like to discuss here. That is the
one where a number of people have talked about starting a different
national chess organization. This talk has occurred for quite awhile
now. I am really getting tired of it. This is the USCF Discussion
Forum, not the Those That Want To Start a Competing Chess Organization
Forum. If you guys, and you know who you are, really want to secede,
then do it and get on with it and good luck to you.
If you are just yapping, then cut it out and get on with making the
USCF a better place for us all. Threatening to leave does no one any
good. It takes attention and energy away from making things better.
So, if you want to leave please do it and be gone with you, so that
those of us that want to keep things going won't need to deal with
your nattering.
If the above sounds too tough, I am sorry that you are too sensitive.
These are the current topics I wanted to address. So at Theodulf has
said before, go ahead and rip me...[/quote]
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 05:36:05
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
On Oct 29, 6:35 am, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> I hope that everyone here realizes that "Chess One" Phil Innes is not
> a USCF member, has not been a USCF member for 12 years and even then
> was only a member briefly, and now says that he wants the USCF to go
> out of business so that he can start his own rival organization.
Why wait? Did Microsoft wait for Apple to go out of business? Innes is
all hat and no cattle.
> In short, when Phil Innes is advocating the case of Gregory Alexander
> here as well as Rob ("the Robber") Mitchell, Paul Truong and other
> ne'er-do-wells, he is not speaking for the best interests of the USCF
> and its members.
>
> Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 10:26:16
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 05:36:05 -0700, The Historian
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Oct 29, 6:35 am, samsloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I hope that everyone here realizes that "Chess One" Phil Innes is not
>> a USCF member, has not been a USCF member for 12 years and even then
>> was only a member briefly, and now says that he wants the USCF to go
>> out of business so that he can start his own rival organization.
>Why wait? Did Microsoft wait for Apple to go out of business? Innes is
>all hat and no cattle.
Any truth to the rumor that the hat is 4 and 7/8 ?
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 11:35:54
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
I hope that everyone here realizes that "Chess One" Phil Innes is not
a USCF member, has not been a USCF member for 12 years and even then
was only a member briefly, and now says that he wants the USCF to go
out of business so that he can start his own rival organization.
In short, when Phil Innes is advocating the case of Gregory Alexander
here as well as Rob ("the Robber") Mitchell, Paul Truong and other
ne'er-do-wells, he is not speaking for the best interests of the USCF
and its members.
Sam Sloan
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 21:12:01
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
Gregory Alexander writes:
"Would the lynch mob believe me?"
I think this illustrates a serious problem we have with this board.
Gregory Alexander is not a known chess player and joined the USCF for
the first time in his life just a few months ago and was almost
immediately given a bunch of high level, sensitive positions as FOC
Member, moderator and so on. This has resulted in all kinds of trouble.
**Sam Sloan is either the most inatentive reader of all time, or he missed
the fact that I already addressed this very subject - that the gent in
question organised a coast to coast league of college chess - much supported
by state of Oregon, BTW.
Now he characterizes everybody outside of a small group of
fellow-worshipers as a "Lynch Mob". Even such unlikely people as Randy
Bauer (not previously known to be a great democrat) has come out
against him.
**Mr. Sloan's idea of himself as being in any majority of anything is
peculiar indeed! What did Jan Newton say of him? How come Sam Sloan is shy
to quote her - especially since Sloan poses as such a pro-woman advocate?
Her eye-watering response is not admitted by Super-Sloan.
I do not agree that Gregory's statement "I never hacked into anyone's
account, period" was a denial that he was The Fake Bill Goichberg. I
do not think that there is any common agreement as to what a "hacker"
is.
*** O... zzzz
I should wonder why Sam Sloan couldn't admit that he had a felony offence to
the US board, [since he disagreed on its basis - said resolution was unfair]
should have any public business saying what commonly agreed-on terms should
mean.
Does Sam Sloan acknowledge that most people think he is a shit?
Phil Innes
Vermont
---
One definition is a Hacker is someone involved in computer
security/insecurity, specializing in the discovery of exploits in
systems (for exploitation or prevention), or in obtaining or
preventing unauthorized access to systems. If Gregory Alexander
obtained Goichberg's password simply by looking over Goichberg's
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 16:01:04
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
Have you noticed the following quote from Gregory Alexander. Think
about it for a moment:
by gregory on Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:24 pm #75581
unless I am trying to get someone to back off that broke into my own
systems first; I am not going to personally break into other peoples
accounts.
Last edited by gregory on Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:23 pm, edited 2 times in
total.
Gregory Alexander
|
| |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 11:40:03
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
Gregory Alexander writes:
"Would the lynch mob believe me?"
I think this illustrates a serious problem we have with this board.
Gregory Alexander is not a known chess player and joined the USCF for
the first time in his life just a few months ago and was almost
immediately given a bunch of high level, sensitive positions as FOC
Member, moderator and so on. This has resulted in all kinds of
trouble.
Now he characterizes everybody outside of a small group of fellow-
worshipers as a "Lynch Mob". Even such unlikely people as Randy Bauer
(not previously known to be a great democrat) has come out against
him.
I do not agree that Gregory's statement "I never hacked into anyone's
account, period" was a denial that he was The Fake Bill Goichberg. I
do not think that there is any common agreement as to what a "hacker"
is. One definition is a Hacker is someone involved in computer
security/insecurity, specializing in the discovery of exploits in
systems (for exploitation or prevention), or in obtaining or
preventing unauthorized access to systems. If Gregory Alexander
obtained Goichberg's password simply by looking over Goichberg's
shoulder while he was logging in, he could justifiably say that he
never hacked into Goichberg's account.
The actual posting by the Fake Bill Goichberg does not bother me so
much as the fact that it is apparent that Gregory Alexander has had
Goichberg's password for a long time, at least a few weeks, and could
have been regularly going there to read Goichberg's emails and PMs.
Gregory Alexander is known to be closely affiliated with certain
persons, Sweetie Pie and First Husband, and could well have been
passing along top secret information to them. I am surprised that
Goichberg has so far not expressed any interest or concern about this
matter. During my entire one year on the board, Goichberg devoted
himself to attacking me, writing letters to lawyers asking how to get
rid of me, making repeated motions to censure or reprimand me, mailing
17,000 postcards to USCF members attacking me, telling the Chess Life
editor not to publish my name in the magazine and so on, all without
any reason or justification that I am aware of. Now, we find out that
some authorized person has had Goichberg's password and access to his
computer and Goichberg seems to be unconcerned about it.
What is going on here?
Sam Sloan
|
| | |
Date: 28 Oct 2007 21:21:30
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
Israel Silverman responds:
Quoted Material:
"By his silence, he is creating a present public image problem and
controversy. If this controversy continues to build, he may very well
need to resign and the like, no matter the state of his innocence or
guilt."
Response:
In this day and age, quite the contrary. Frequently, the guilty proclaim
their innocence far and wide (I am thinking of a certain runner) and the
innocent have brains and keep quiet as per advice of counsel. The truth
usually will come out in the end, and there's no good reason to make noises
until then. If innocent, people will understand why it was so
/PI
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 11:12:08
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Ron Suarez responds to Gregory Alexander's Rants and Raves
|
>> **Sam Sloan is either the most inattentive reader of all time, or he
>> missed the fact that I already addressed this very subject - that the
>> gent in question organized a coast to coast league of college chess -
>> much supported by state of Oregon, BTW.
>>
>
> Exactly -- small potatoes. And if the action was in Washington or
> Oregon...since they are fairly autonomous to USCF -- that's further
> evidence that his activity was outside of the present organization.
Here we have the great divide and evidence of USCF as a failed organization,
compared with others who actually promote chess. The Delegate says that
organising in 6 states, plus military collegiate involvement [with
WestPoint] which cost USCF not a penny, is 'outside the present
organization'.
But it is front and centre to USCF's mission.
Mr. Alexander is here rubbished by a USCF delegate /for/ promoting chess, in
an area which does not compete with USCF, yet who can still benefit by it -
and who is now singled out for political reasons because he tried to work
with USCF, but now works with others who /actually/ promote the game.
If Mr. Alexander's efforts are 'small potatoes' then USCF never achieved as
much in pioneering a college network, whether with 50 staff or the current
25, and therefore their own efforts would have to be called 'peanuts!'
Phil Innes
> ECJ
>
|
|
