SLOAN ACCUSES POLGAR OF COMPUTER THEFT

samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25469 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:49 am    Post subject: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P

On Frank Niro's new website which is the launching pad for his forthcoming book there is an interesting story at:

http://www.chesssafari.com/SusanPolgar.htm

He writes:

"Susan Polgar

"I donít know what to say about Susan Polgar beyond the fact that Iím proud to call her my friend. Susan and her manager/best friend Paul Truong intervened on my behalf when I left the Chess Federation after my heart attack in 2003. I wanted my laptop because it had a number of personal files on it that were important to me. It seemed like a simple enough request. Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it! Then they drove to New Windsor, picked up the computer, and transported it to me in Connecticut. I have many wonderful friends but I cannot think of any other who would have done that."

However, there is more to this story. That computer did not belong to the Frank Niro. It belonged to the USCF and the files on it belonged to the USCF.

More importantly, we now know something that we did not know at that time, which is that while he was Executive Director of the USCF, Frank Niro was also Director of the Susan Polgar Foundation. When he signed several contracts as Executive Director with the Susan Polgar Foundation, he was really signing a contract with himself. When he paid large checks to the Susan Polgar Foundation, he was paying large checks to himself.

None of this was known to the USCF Board or to John McCrary, the USCF President at the time.

This explains why Truong and Polgar would be so anxious to get the computer that Frank Niro had been using out of the USCF office. That computer no doubt contained incrimination evidence, evidence that they did not want the USCF to have. Frank Niro had abruptly disappeared and gone into hiding during the 2003 US Open in Los Angeles when simultaneously $300,000 had gone missing too. He was in no position to go to the USCF office and pick up the computer himself.

Do not expect the current USCF president, Bill Goichberg, to be investigating this. Goichberg has already specifically directed Joe Nanna, the new USCF CFO, not to investigate this.

It is important to note that Bill Goichberg specifically directed the new CFO, Joe Nanna, to stop investigating this matter. On November 30, 2006, in an email entitled "Re: The Golden Girls", Bill Goichberg wrote:

>I am not aware that any board members have asked that our CFO check the
>entire history of all payments to Polgar, and I suspect this would not be a
>productive use of his time.
>
>Bill Goichberg

However, the above statement was not true. Three board members had asked Joe Nanna to investigate this. There were Joel Channing, Beatriz Marinello and myself.

I have since realized that it was actually Bill Goichberg, while he was Executive Director, who paid the big checks totaling $13,538.36 to Miss Polgar. (Previously, I had mistakenly concluded that it was Grant Perks who made these payments.)

I find the story on the Frank Niro posting about the lengths that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar went to get the computer Frank Niro had been using from the USCF office after Niro has disappeared due to a claimed "heart attack" to be interesting. That computer no doubt contained correspondence between Niro and Truong and Polgar which would have provided incriminating evidence. This very likely explains why they would go to such lengths to get it away from the USCF. This was also theft. The computer belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25470 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope Bill Goichberg will comment on this. It certainly sounds like something that should have been investigated and should still be investigated.

Does Joe Nanna report to Bill Goichberg personally? Could the EB as a whole direct him to investigate this, or direct the ED to have it investigated?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25528 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another nasty, negative attack by Sam Sloan. But where is Sam on the issues? What spending cuts or revenue increases would he make to cover that $300,000?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
chessoffice 10088887



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 379

 
PostPost:25577 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:24 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

samsloan wrote:
The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P

On Frank Niro's new website which is the launching pad for his forthcoming book there is an interesting story at:

http://www.chesssafari.com/SusanPolgar.htm

He writes:

"Susan Polgar

"I donít know what to say about Susan Polgar beyond the fact that Iím proud to call her my friend. Susan and her manager/best friend Paul Truong intervened on my behalf when I left the Chess Federation after my heart attack in 2003. I wanted my laptop because it had a number of personal files on it that were important to me. It seemed like a simple enough request. Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it! Then they drove to New Windsor, picked up the computer, and transported it to me in Connecticut. I have many wonderful friends but I cannot think of any other who would have done that."

However, there is more to this story. That computer did not belong to the Frank Niro. It belonged to the USCF and the files on it belonged to the USCF.

More importantly, we now know something that we did not know at that time, which is that while he was Executive Director of the USCF, Frank Niro was also Director of the Susan Polgar Foundation. When he signed several contracts as Executive Director with the Susan Polgar Foundation, he was really signing a contract with himself. When he paid large checks to the Susan Polgar Foundation, he was paying large checks to himself.


You are assuming that Niro's position with SPF was a paid position. Perhaps so, but I don't believe that we know this.

 
Quote:
None of this was known to the USCF Board or to John McCrary, the USCF President at the time.


I think this is probably correct and even if he had an unpaid position with SPF, agree that he should have disclosed this to the Board.

 
Quote:
This explains why Truong and Polgar would be so anxious to get the computer that Frank Niro had been using out of the USCF office. That computer no doubt contained incrimination evidence, evidence that they did not want the USCF to have. Frank Niro had abruptly disappeared and gone into hiding during the 2003 US Open in Los Angeles when simultaneously $300,000 had gone missing too. He was in no position to go to the USCF office and pick up the computer himself.


It is outrageous to allege, without providing proof, that the computer "no doubt contained incrimination evidence."

 
Quote:
Do not expect the current USCF president, Bill Goichberg, to be investigating this. Goichberg has already specifically directed Joe Nanna, the new USCF CFO, not to investigate this.

It is important to note that Bill Goichberg specifically directed the new CFO, Joe Nanna, to stop investigating this matter. On November 30, 2006, in an email entitled "Re: The Golden Girls", Bill Goichberg wrote:

>I am not aware that any board members have asked that our CFO check the
>entire history of all payments to Polgar, and I suspect this would not be a
>productive use of his time.
>
>Bill Goichberg

However, the above statement was not true. Three board members had asked Joe Nanna to investigate this. There were Joel Channing, Beatriz Marinello and myself.


The statement you quote above was my opinion, that in the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing, we should not spend the time to investigate the entire history of all payments to Polgar. It was not a directive to Nanna, it was an opinion expressed to the Board.

No Board member but yourself disagreed with the opinion I expressed. Joel and Beatriz supported an investigation of the $13,500 plus that Sam suggested might be a double payment, but I supported this also. Joe Nanna looked into this and reported that it was not a double payment, instead the amount was recorded as a payable in October and was paid in December.

After Hall relayed Nanna's report to the Board, he complained to me that the investigation had taken up much of Nanna's time, and I agreed with him that we should not waste his further time investigating every Polgar payment.

 
Quote:
I have since realized that it was actually Bill Goichberg, while he was Executive Director, who paid the big checks totaling $13,538.36 to Miss Polgar. (Previously, I had mistakenly concluded that it was Grant Perks who made these payments.)


Actually, the payable was recorded in October by CFO Linda Legenos. In December, Linda started to write checks to pay it off. Grant Perks was in charge of the office in October and I was Office Manager in December. I had no reason to ask Linda to re-examine the payable, especially since I knew that the Board had obtained legal advice and was determined to pay no more than it had to.

 
Quote:
I find the story on the Frank Niro posting about the lengths that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar went to get the computer Frank Niro had been using from the USCF office after Niro has disappeared due to a claimed "heart attack" to be interesting. That computer no doubt contained correspondence between Niro and Truong and Polgar which would have provided incriminating evidence.


How can you say it "no doubt" would have provided incriminating evidence? What proof do you have? So far you have been unable to present any evidence to back up your various attacks on Polgar.

 
Quote:
This very likely explains why they would go to such lengths to get it away from the USCF. This was also theft. The computer belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro.

Sam Sloan


Sam, do you read your own posts? You just quoted Niro as saying:

"Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it!"

Does this sound like theft, or does it sound like the Board was approached with an offer to buy Niro's computer? Sure seems like the latter to me. If you offer to buy something and its owner accepts the offer, is that theft?

Bill Goichberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
chessoffice 10088887



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 379

 
PostPost:25580 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

artichoke wrote:
I hope Bill Goichberg will comment on this. It certainly sounds like something that should have been investigated and should still be investigated.


The $13,538.36 payment was investigated by Joe Nanna and found to be appropriate. It was not a double payment; the amount was first recorded as a payable and later paid.

 
Quote:
Does Joe Nanna report to Bill Goichberg personally?


Joe Nanna reports to Bill Hall. I have never had direct contact with Joe Nanna, other than speaking to him briefly during the last EB meeting.

Also, the President cannot issue orders to the ED unless reflecting the will of the Board. I did not order either Bill Hall or Joe Nanna not to investigate the Polgar checks; what happened was that 1) Bill Hall complained to me that the investigating done so far was taking up too much of Joe Nanna's time, 2) I expressed the opinion to the Board that it would not be a good idea to investigate all the Polgar checks, 3) No one besides Sam disagreed with the opinion I expressed, 4) Therefore, Bill Hall has not asked Joe Nanna to investigate all Polgar checks.

 
Quote:
Could the EB as a whole direct him to investigate this, or direct the ED to have it investigated?


If you mean the $13,538.36, this has already been investigated. If you mean all Polgar checks, yes, the Board could direct the ED to investigate them. In the absence of evidence of impropriety, I would vote against this. However, if there is a specific check or checks that appears questionable, I am open to supporting an investigation of that check or checks.

Bill Goichberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
MstrHyde 12551774



Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 40

 
PostPost:25588 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:00 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

chessoffice wrote:


It is outrageous to allege, without providing proof, that the computer "no doubt contained incrimination evidence."

 


Regardless of the existence of such alleged evidence, please tell me that the USCF didn't just hand over a machine to an ex-employee without first wiping it of anything remotely resembling work product.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
mnibb 12818435



Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 716
Location: Illinois

 
PostPost:25590 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:11 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

MstrHyde wrote:
chessoffice wrote:


It is outrageous to allege, without providing proof, that the computer "no doubt contained incrimination evidence."

 


Regardless of the existence of such alleged evidence, please tell me that the USCF didn't just hand over a machine to an ex-employee without first wiping it of anything remotely resembling work product.


It would probably be appropriate for the USCF to establish some sort of "Records Retention Policy" if they do not have such a policy in place. Where I work, there is a specific definition of what constitutes a record, there is categorization of record types and established record retention periods for each category of record.

All employees sign off on the understanding that e-mail as records are not private property, but are the property of the organization, and it is policy that computers are wiped including the operating system before they are distributed to not for profit organizations or "refurbished" for resale.
_________________
12818435
Mark Nibbelin
Fellow Life Management Institute
Chartered Life Underwriter
Scholastic Chess Organizer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25591 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chessoffice wrote:
artichoke wrote:
Does Joe Nanna report to Bill Goichberg personally?


Joe Nanna reports to Bill Hall. I have never had direct contact with Joe Nanna, other than speaking to him briefly during the last EB meeting.

Also, the President cannot issue orders to the ED unless reflecting the will of the Board. I did not order either Bill Hall or Joe Nanna not to investigate the Polgar checks; what happened was that 1) Bill Hall complained to me that the investigating done so far was taking up too much of Joe Nanna's time, 2) I expressed the opinion to the Board that it would not be a good idea to investigate all the Polgar checks, 3) No one besides Sam disagreed with the opinion I expressed, 4) Therefore, Bill Hall has not asked Joe Nanna to investigate all Polgar checks.

 
Quote:
Could the EB as a whole direct him to investigate this, or direct the ED to have it investigated?


If you mean the $13,538.36, this has already been investigated. If you mean all Polgar checks, yes, the Board could direct the ED to investigate them. In the absence of evidence of impropriety, I would vote against this. However, if there is a specific check or checks that appears questionable, I am open to supporting an investigation of that check or checks.

Bill Goichberg
Thanks Bill, this is a complete answer to the question I asked. It appears that the matter of the $13,538.36 was handled responsibly. Actually I had forgotten that this was the same sum of money that was discussed before.

Sam, what say you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
joelchanning 12560070



Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 411

 
PostPost:25593 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:23 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

mnibb wrote:
MstrHyde wrote:
chessoffice wrote:


It is outrageous to allege, without providing proof, that the computer "no doubt contained incrimination evidence."

 


Regardless of the existence of such alleged evidence, please tell me that the USCF didn't just hand over a machine to an ex-employee without first wiping it of anything remotely resembling work product.


It would probably be appropriate for the USCF to establish some sort of "Records Retention Policy" if they do not have such a policy in place. Where I work, there is a specific definition of what constitutes a record, there is categorization of record types and established record retention periods for each category of record.

All employees sign off on the understanding that e-mail as records are not private property, but are the property of the organization, and it is policy that computers are wiped including the operating system before they are distributed to not for profit organizations or "refurbished" for resale.

Dear Mark,

We're working at it, but we've still got quite a way to go to get this thing running like any business you're familiar with. We'll keep working on it next year. Joe Nanna looks like he's going to work out well and Bill Hall is a good man and I believe he can be a great ED. Who knows, maybe even some airline will start direct flights to Crossville in 2007.

That's it for 2006. I'm going out for New Year's Eve now. I plan to see how many Manhattans I can drink and still fake being sober (my wife is driving).

Happy New Year,

Joel Channing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25596 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:43 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

chessoffice wrote:
samsloan wrote:
I find the story on the Frank Niro posting about the lengths that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar went to get the computer Frank Niro had been using from the USCF office after Niro has disappeared due to a claimed "heart attack" to be interesting. That computer no doubt contained correspondence between Niro and Truong and Polgar which would have provided incriminating evidence.


How can you say it "no doubt" would have provided incriminating evidence? What proof do you have? So far you have been unable to present any evidence to back up your various attacks on Polgar.

 
Quote:
This very likely explains why they would go to such lengths to get it away from the USCF. This was also theft. The computer belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro.

Sam Sloan


Sam, do you read your own posts? You just quoted Niro as saying:

"Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it!"

Does this sound like theft, or does it sound like the Board was approached with an offer to buy Niro's computer? Sure seems like the latter to me. If you offer to buy something and its owner accepts the offer, is that theft?

Bill Goichberg

I continue to be astounded by the lengths to which Bill Goichberg will go to defend the obviously improper activities of his political allies, Susan Polgar and Paul Truong.

The laptop computer in question obviously belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro. That is why Niro writes that Polgar and Truong ofered to pay the USCF for it.

I assume that this incident occurred in the few days immediately after Frank Niro disappeared and nobody knew where he was. Beatriz Marinello was elected USCF President on August 11, 2003 in Los Angeles. On August 20, 2003, Beatriz walked into the USCF Offices in New Windsor NY and immediately fired 17 staff members. I was severely critical of her at that time, but I did not know then a fact that I know now that I am on the board, which is that the USCF was overdrawn at the bank by $121,641.25. (This figure is found on page 37 of the CD that was prepared after I got on the board and demanding an accounting of the funds.)

I have a recollection of the incident involving the computer because at that time Paul Truong was often calling me and informing me of the latest goings on. (We were allies at that time, or at least I thought that we were.)

What needs to be done now and what I call upon Bill Goichberg to do is find out who has the computer now and take steps to get it back. The data on that computer clearly belongs to the USCF and would be helpful in finding out what happened to the two million dollars the USCF lost, most of which was lost when Frank Niro and his immediate predecessor George DeFeis were Executive Director.

We also need to know who on the board was "approached" (especially since the board was fractured at that point in time. Was this before or after McCrary and Camaratta resigned?), and who authorized Paul Truong and Susan Polgar to take that computer from the USCF's office, or did they just steal it.

Sam Sloan


Last edited by samsloan 11115292 on Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:29 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25606 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:23 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote

joelchanning wrote:
...That's it for 2006. I'm going out for New Year's Eve now. I plan to see how many Manhattans I can drink and still fake being sober (my wife is driving).

Happy New Year,

Joel Channing
I had martinis flavored with strawberry liqueur last night. Delightful. Let's see what I have tonight ...

Happy New Year, Joel and everyone! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
snits 12652674



Joined: 03 Mar 2004
Posts: 132
Location: Tempe, AZ

 
PostPost:25607 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam it sounds like from the post above that it was either given or sold to them, so what did Susan or Paul do wrong in this case? If Niro had any incriminating evidence as you say, it wouldn't have made any sense to put in on the USCF computer anyways. With all the money you think they have taken they should have had no problem securing a computer that had no connection to the USCF on which to store their devious plans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger  
 
 
chessoffice 10088887



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 379

 
PostPost:25609 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:25 pm    Post subject: Re: The Mystery of the USCF Computer Taken by Miss P Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

samsloan wrote:
chessoffice wrote:
samsloan wrote:
I find the story on the Frank Niro posting about the lengths that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar went to get the computer Frank Niro had been using from the USCF office after Niro has disappeared due to a claimed "heart attack" to be interesting. That computer no doubt contained correspondence between Niro and Truong and Polgar which would have provided incriminating evidence.


How can you say it "no doubt" would have provided incriminating evidence? What proof do you have? So far you have been unable to present any evidence to back up your various attacks on Polgar.

 
Quote:
This very likely explains why they would go to such lengths to get it away from the USCF. This was also theft. The computer belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro.

Sam Sloan


Sam, do you read your own posts? You just quoted Niro as saying:

"Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it!"

Does this sound like theft, or does it sound like the Board was approached with an offer to buy Niro's computer? Sure seems like the latter to me. If you offer to buy something and its owner accepts the offer, is that theft?

Bill Goichberg

I continue to be astounded by the lengths to which Bill Goichberg will go to defend the obviously improper activities of his political allies, Susan Polgar and Paul Truong.

The laptop computer in question obviously belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro. That is why Niro writes that Polgar and Truong ofered to pay the USCF for it.


Yes, it clearly belonged to USCF. Just as clearly, there is zero evidence that it was stolen from USCF. You should retract that outrageous charge immediately.

 
Quote:
I assume that this incident occurred in the few days immediately after Frank Niro disappeared and nobody knew where he was. Beatriz Marinello was elected USCF President on August 11, 2003 in Los Angeles. On August 20, 2003, Beatriz walked into the USCF Offices in New Windsor NY and immediately fired 17 staff members. I was severely critical of her at that time, but I did not know then a fact that I know now that I am on the board, which is that the USCF was overdrawn at the bank by $121,641.25. (This figure is found on page 37 of the CD that was prepared after I got on the board and demanding an accounting of the funds.)


It was worse than that, USCF also owed about $400,000 to creditors. But how does this justify your alleging that a computer was stolen, when there is no proof of this?

 
Quote:
I have a recollection of the incident involving the computer because at that time Paul Truong was often calling me and informing me of the latest goings on. (We were allies at that time, or at least I thought that we were.)

What needs to be done now and what I call upon Bill Goichberg to do is find out who has the computer now and take steps to get it back. The data on that computer clearly belongs to the USCF and would be helpful in finding out what happened to the two million dollars the USCF lost, most of which was lost when Frank Niro and his immediate predecessor George DeFeis were Executive Director.


I would assume that USCF sold the computer to Niro and that he either still owns it, or it has since been junked and important data copied to another computer. In either case, we would have no grounds for trying to compel Niro to return the computer or the data.

It seems very unlikely that the computer has data valuable to USCF. If it does, we can't force Niro to turn it over to us.

 
Quote:
We also need to know who on the board was "approached" (especially since the board was fractured at that point in time. Was this before or after McCrary and Camaratta resigned?), and who authorized Paul Truong and Susan Polgar to take that computer from the USCF's office, or did they just steal it.

Sam Sloan


You say above of the transfer of the computer, "This was also theft." It's outrageous to say this as you have no evidence, but now you have added, "did they just steal it."

Charging people with illegal activity with no evidence is despicible. These are smear attacks, using an old technique- say it enough times and some people will believe it.

You talk about USCF losing money, about your former dealings with Truong, and about how important recovery of this computer would be to USCF. None of this backs up your charges of theft or hiding incriminating data.

Obviously you have no evidence to support your claims, or we would have heard it by now. You should retract and apoloigize for your charges.

Bill Goichberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
JGoins 13492105



Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 24
Location: Tennessee

 
PostPost:25611 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr. Sloan,

You've been asked repeatedly to discuss some serious topics and answer to/defend yourself from some serious allegations. Instead of doing this it seems you're simply bouncing ideas for a trashy spy novel off the members of this forum.

I can see it now - Shocked - Ms. Polgar and Mr. Truong (or their actor stand-ins) in black catsuits, sneaking through USCF headquarters some moonless night, evading guard dogs, weaving through laser beam alarm systems, hacking into the mainframe to delete incriminating evidence then deposit a super-killer virus just for spite.

Exclamation Are you, Mr. Sloan, a convicted felon? Did you lie about your qualifications during the last election? Were you ever a Master - did you ever claim to be? Did you solicit under-age girls for sex?

Please, Mr. Sloan, before I bring my young nephews into the USCF, debunk some of these serious allegations or lose my vote.

Sincerely,

JGoins
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
irishspy 12422598



Joined: 13 Jun 2006
Posts: 63
Location: Los Angeles, 3rd door on the left

 
PostPost:25618 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JGoins wrote:
I can see it now - Shocked - Ms. Polgar and Mr. Truong (or their actor stand-ins) in black catsuits, sneaking through USCF headquarters some moonless night, evading guard dogs, weaving through laser beam alarm systems, hacking into the mainframe to delete incriminating evidence then deposit a super-killer virus just for spite.


Susan as Emma Peel in a catsuit and Paul as John Steed* wearing a bowler and carrying an umbrella? Now that's an election poster! Laughing

*(A "The Avengers" reference. One of my favorite old shows.)
_________________
*******************
--Anthony Ragan
"Stop it! You're driving me sane!!"
Back to top
SteveTN 12467003



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 639
Location: Nashville, TN

 
PostPost:25620 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam Sloan has posted complete untruths alleging criminal violations against at least two USCF members who are also candidates for the Executive Board in the upcoming elections.

I dare say there is no one here, not even the person who wrote the falsehoods in question, doubts that they were written for political purposes and to defame the targets of the falsehoods.

My question: When will the USCF put a stop to this behavior from this individual at least on these forums?

I recently wrote something far less objectionable (I referred to the person as a Sam Sloan supporter, a charge that has more evidence than does many of the charges that Sam Sloan posts) just to see what would happen. The posts and the post with which the person responded were deleted.

How is it that my unlikely but far more debatable attribution (which was also harmless) is deleted without notice or discussion while Sam Sloan is able to make completely false charges of criminal behavior and those prevarications remain on the server for all to see?

Question
_________________
Steve in Tennessee

http://sdo1.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
tanstaafl 11246770



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 1854

 
PostPost:25622 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steve, that entire thread was deleted because Sam Sloan had made use of a private e-mail from Ben Finegold (which wasn't written to Sam Sloan, so I wonder how he got it) without the author's permission. Normally, we wouldn't necessarily see an entire thread deleted because of one problem posting, but since the entire tread was ABOUT the Finegold e-mail...
_________________
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
---
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
SteveTN 12467003



Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 639
Location: Nashville, TN

 
PostPost:25624 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, darn. The best laid plans of mice and men...
_________________
Steve in Tennessee

http://sdo1.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
nolan 10339324



Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5065

 
PostPost:25625 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that thread got deleted because the Moderator who did it didn't know how to just move a thread to the hidden areas. (I was on the road returning from PA at the time.)

Unfortunately, once a thread is deleted in phpBB, it is gone forever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25629 Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tanstaafl wrote:
Steve, that entire thread was deleted because Sam Sloan had made use of a private e-mail from Ben Finegold (which wasn't written to Sam Sloan, so I wonder how he got it) without the author's permission. Normally, we wouldn't necessarily see an entire thread deleted because of one problem posting, but since the entire tread was ABOUT the Finegold e-mail...

Ben Finegold's letter was in response to a letter from John Donaldson that went not only to Finegold but to the entire board and to all of the top rated players who might be playing in the US Championship. It also went into the BINFOS.

When Finegold replied, for some reason he failed to realize that all these people that received the original letter would also receive his reply.

That is how I got it. I think that the moderator should not have deleted the entire thread, which included many interesting observations from many people.

Sam sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
tanstaafl 11246770



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 1854

 
PostPost:25633 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:
...When Finegold replied, for some reason he failed to realize that all these people that received the original letter would also receive his reply.

That is how I got it. I think that the moderator should not have deleted the entire thread, which included many interesting observations from many people.

Sam sloan
It's not Finegold's fault that the letter got posted here. That was Mr. Sloan's misdeed. A private e-mail is just that, private. No matter how many people it was addressed to, it's not proper to post on a public forum. For that matter it's not legal. Mr. Finegold owned the rights to what he had written, not Sam Sloan. Of course, this is hardly the first time Sam Sloan has played fast and loose with somebody else's intellectual property. I don't think Mr. Sloan INTENDED to do anything wrong -- my guess is that he just doesn't understand netiquette or intellectual property rights. (I suppose by sending the e-mail to so many people, the letter could be considered "published" -- but then it would still be copyrighted by the author, wouldn't it?)
_________________
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
---
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25636 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

All of this Polgar/Finegold stuff is well and good but a chess politician has to be about more than nasty, negative attacks. Where does Sam Sloan stand on the issues?

My quest continues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25637 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tanstaafl wrote:
samsloan wrote:
...When Finegold replied, for some reason he failed to realize that all these people that received the original letter would also receive his reply.

That is how I got it. I think that the moderator should not have deleted the entire thread, which included many interesting observations from many people.

Sam sloan
It's not Finegold's fault that the letter got posted here. That was Mr. Sloan's misdeed. A private e-mail is just that, private. No matter how many people it was addressed to, it's not proper to post on a public forum. For that matter it's not legal. Mr. Finegold owned the rights to what he had written, not Sam Sloan. Of course, this is hardly the first time Sam Sloan has played fast and loose with somebody else's intellectual property. I don't think Mr. Sloan INTENDED to do anything wrong -- my guess is that he just doesn't understand netiquette or intellectual property rights. (I suppose by sending the e-mail to so many people, the letter could be considered "published" -- but then it would still be copyrighted by the author, wouldn't it?)

However, you, Tanstaafl, did exactly what you accuse me of doing. You took Ben Finegold's disclaimer letter that he posted here and reposted it to Susan Polgar's Blog. It was also posted by the Fake Sam Sloan (who might be you) to rec.games.chess.politics

I have never posted to Susan Polgar's Blog and therefore Finegold obviously would not wanted his reply posted there.

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13118012&postID=116749656428735079

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25645 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is interesting and illuminating to read the posts by Paul Truong in August, 2003 under the heading "Niro's Back". This is one of the many posts where Truong claims that he and Susan are not paid anything and are doing all this for the good of chess. Now, we find that the USCF paid $13,538.36 for one of these "free" appearances.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/69b7fc7bb10ebe42?

> > As long as we are beating dead horses, we were led to believe
> > that Niro was working for nothing when he was interim ED. Was he in
> > fact not paid for his time as interim ED?

> Famous saying--You think it's expensive now, wait till it's free.

> Now only the board and committee folks are working for free. Oops, I forgot
> Paul Proung. He's working for free. If you don't believe me ask him how much
> the USCF has paid him or owes him for expenses and appearances for him and
> Susan Polgar (his client) and any other entities that he(she) are involved
> with. In fact ask him what we paid the GM volunteer of the year for her
> volunteer work.

> StanB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25646 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is another Truong quote. From reading this, one would assume that Polgar works entirely for free and is never paid. However, we now know that Bill Goichberg, as Executive Director, paid Polgar $13,538.36 in December 2003 for these "free" appearances. He did this without informing the board or the president. At the Executive Board meeting on November 17, 2006, Beatriz Marinello, who was USCF President in 2003 at the time of the events in question, said that had have never known that this money was paid until I discovered this payment on the CD and made an issue over it.

This proves that Bill Goichberg was paying large amounts of money to his political allies without informing the board.

Sam Sloan


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/69b7fc7bb10ebe42?


"Dear Stan:

"Thank you for bringing up this point. USCF does not pay me any cash
for my appearances. US Chess Trust also does not pay me any cash for
my appearances to help do fundraising for them. In fact, I have
fronted a lot of my own money for a number USCF activities including
the Women's Olympiad Program. Since January 2003, I have spent about
$100,000 of my own time and money for various activities to help US
Chess. I have also donated a lot of work for USCF for Chess Life
without charge. In some events, USCF paid for my airfare and hotel
and in some other events, I paid myself."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25650 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry, but I disagree. It was not "his" computer. Bill Goichberg agrees that the computer belonged to the USCF, not to Frank Niro. Niro claimed that he wanted the computer because it contained personal information. However, that is not a good thing either. Why was he using the USCF's computer for his personal business? I admit that everybody does it, but that does not make it right.

I do not think you were around then and I do not believe that you are familiar with this history. Frank Niro had reported that the USCF was very profitable and that he was on his was to the meetings in Los Angeles to present the financial report.

On August 1, 2003, Frank Niro wrote a check to himself for $2618.85. Check number 60170. You will find it on page 29 of the CD. It is right below his check for $1500.00 to John Hillary.

This was the final blow-out check. Usually, Frank Niro wrote checks to himself for about $1100, perhaps to avoid a two-signature requirement. This last time he went way over his normal limit.

Frank Niro was supposed to be flying directly from New Windsor to Los Angeles. However, he never showed up in Los Angeles. He simply disappeared. I do not know whether he ever submitted an official letter of resignation or not.

However, the financial report did arrive in Los Angeles, directly from the auditors. Rather than show a profit as Niro had said it would show, it showed a loss of over $300,000.

This threw the USCF into a crisis. Nobody knew who was in charge. USCF President John McCrary, who had been expecting to be re-elected, resigned instead. Everyone was shocked when Beatriz Marinello, who had been elected to the board primarily because it had been said that she was a nice young girl who would not cause any trouble, suddenly emerged as USCF President.

All #### broke loose. It was probably at about this time that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar simply walked into the USCF offices in New Windsor and took the computer. Nobody was in charge and therefore there was nobody to tell them "no".

Unless Paul Truong and Susan Polgar can produce some documents authorizing them to take the USCF's computer, I would say that they stole it.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25653 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:

It was probably at about this time that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar simply walked into the USCF offices in New Windsor and took the computer. Nobody was in charge and therefore there was nobody to tell them "no".

Unless Paul Truong and Susan Polgar can produce some documents authorizing them to take the USCF's computer, I would say that they stole it.

Sam Sloan


Everyone knows you are guilty until proven innocent. At least in Sloanland. Fortunately, the rest of us live in the United States of America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25655 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Sam Sloan,

Again with the nasty, negative attacks.

BTW auditing standards have become pretty stringent in recent years. This is particularly true in the area of fraud detection. If all this stolen computer stuff had any validity at all, it should have been addressed in the audit package the auditors presented to the Board. In addition to the audit report on the financial statements, the Board should have gotten a report in Internal Controls, as well as a Management Letter. This is why audits now cost so much money - all the additional work auditors must do and all the additional liabilities they must assume.

And don't forget: the auditing standards require auditors to be hired and fired by the BOARD, not the management of the company and to be responsible to the BOARD not to management. So don't go off on another round of personal attacks. If the auditors are not answering to the BOARD or and AUDIT COMMITTEE of the Board, then that's an audit deficiency right there Sam and that responsibility is one YOU share. Furthermore, those same standards now require that the AUDIT COMMITTEE consist of majority outside directors. And THAT means that BOARD members who are also in management can have only a minority on that committee.

Why doesn't Sam Sloan reference any of that? Probably because we had professional, independent CPA's look into all of this and they found NOTHING, that's why.

So, here's what, Sam. Show us the auditor's report on any of this. Put up or shut up.

Better yet, get back to the issues, Sam. Where's the Sam Sloan program better manage the Board's audit responsibilities?

Jack

My quest continues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25657 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry. I made a mistake. I have found a subsequent check that Frank Niro paid to himself.

This is check number 48907 dated 8/7/03 for $1150.00. Note the difference in check number. This was from a different checkbook, a checkbook that was not often used. This may explain why I missed it previously.

I am fairly certain that Niro was no longer in the office by August 7. He was supposed to have been in Los Angeles to attend the USCF delegates meeting by that time. This tends to show that Frank Niro was not ill as he claims to have been.

On August 11, four days later, Beatriz Marinello was elected USCF President. On August 20, 2003, Beatriz Marinello walked into the USCF offices and fired 17 staff members. I believe that by then the computer had already been taken. I am absolutely certain that Beatriz Marinello, who was in charge by then, would never have allowed Polgar to remove that computer from the USCF office.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
jonnybear 10098068



Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 304
Location: Brooklyn, N.Y.

 
PostPost:25658 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jack, I'm not sure all (or even any) of those standards you just quoted apply to non-profits. I guess I'm supposed to know this, since I have a CFA charter, but frankly I'm not sure.

Some of the items you mentioned (such as an auditor's report having to include a section on Internal Controls) were added in the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation -- which would not yet have been in force for financial reports for the year 2003.

However, that law covers only for-profit, publicly held or "reporting" companies (a privately held company can be "reporting" if, for instance, its debt securities are publicly traded).

Since I don't follow the non-profit sector, I don't know whether any legislation or rulemakings similar to Sarbanes-Oxley may have been enacted for organizations like USCF, and when or if such rules would have gone into effect. What you said sounds correct for public, for-profit companies, for financial reports prepared after Sarbanes-Oxley went into effect. Even then, there are deferrals for "non-accelerated filers" (smaller public companies); some of the internal-control audit requirements still haven't gone into effect for such companies.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
chessoffice 10088887



Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 379

 
PostPost:25660 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

samsloan wrote:
Here is another Truong quote. From reading this, one would assume that Polgar works entirely for free and is never paid. However, we now know that Bill Goichberg, as Executive Director, paid Polgar $13,538.36 in December 2003 for these "free" appearances. He did this without informing the board or the president. At the Executive Board meeting on November 17, 2006, Beatriz Marinello, who was USCF President in 2003 at the time of the events in question, said that had have never known that this money was paid until I discovered this payment on the CD and made an issue over it.

This proves that Bill Goichberg was paying large amounts of money to his political allies without informing the board.

Sam Sloan


After I took over as Office Manager in November 2003, payables previously listed by our CFO as due to Susan Polgar were paid as expected. These were, as previously agreed, for appearances at the National Scholastics and US Open and for her Chess Life column.

Susan has continued to make national tournament appearances and write her Chess Life column ever since, and was paid as agreed while I was Executive Director in 2004, while Beatriz Marinello was in charge of the office during the first five months of 2005, and while Bill Hall was ED since then.

During all this time, the Executive Board has been well aware that Susan was making these appearances and writing these columns, there has never been a motion calling upon these USCF commitments and payments to stop, and a motion to stop paying for her Chess Life column would have violated a contract. A motion to stop hiring her to appear at national tournaments would have been in order but was never made.

The idea that the Executive Director or CEO is obligated to renege on a promised payment, and that failure to renege is "political," is truly bizarre, but also the type of thing we have become used to hearing from Sam Sloan.

Bill Goichberg

 
Quote:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/69b7fc7bb10ebe42?


"Dear Stan:

"Thank you for bringing up this point. USCF does not pay me any cash
for my appearances. US Chess Trust also does not pay me any cash for
my appearances to help do fundraising for them. In fact, I have
fronted a lot of my own money for a number USCF activities including
the Women's Olympiad Program. Since January 2003, I have spent about
$100,000 of my own time and money for various activities to help US
Chess. I have also donated a lot of work for USCF for Chess Life
without charge. In some events, USCF paid for my airfare and hotel
and in some other events, I paid myself."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
hmb 10062225



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 229
Location: Half Moon Bay, California

 
PostPost:25662 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mulfish wrote:
samsloan wrote:

It was probably at about this time that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar simply walked into the USCF offices in New Windsor and took the computer. Nobody was in charge and therefore there was nobody to tell them "no".

Unless Paul Truong and Susan Polgar can produce some documents authorizing them to take the USCF's computer, I would say that they stole it.

Sam Sloan


Everyone knows you are guilty until proven innocent. At least in Sloanland. Fortunately, the rest of us live in the United States of America.


Mulfish, et al,

I believe that we ought to be able to discuss things with much less emotionalism here in this USCF Issues forum. This is not a court of law, and no one is facing criminal charges here. Mr. Sloan has certainly raised an issue and supported it with evidence, and using the word "stole" may make this emotionally charged to you, but to me, it bears scrutiny and the evidence suggests that it may be a valid word to use. I will attempt to explain:

Please consider these definitions from Wiktionary, a sister site to Wikipedia:

 
Quote:
From http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/steal

to steal (third-person singular simple present steals, present participle stealing, simple past stole, past participle stolen)

1. (transitive) To illegally, or without the owner's permission, take possession of something by surreptitiously taking or carrying it away.

The government agents stole my money.
Three irreplaceable paintings were stolen from the gallery.

2. (transitive) To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully.
3. (transitive) To draw attention unexpectedly in (an entertainment), especially by being the outstanding performer.
4. (intransitive) To be involved in illegally taking possession of by surreptitiously taking or carrying away; to commit theft.
5. (intransitive) To move silently or secretly.

He stole across the room, trying not to wake her.

6. (transitive) (baseball): To advance safely to (another base) during the delivery of a pitch, without the aid of a hit, walk, passed ball, wild pitch, or defensive indifference.


Definitions 1, 2, or 5 may be applicable here.

Here is the description from Frank Niro's own web site (see http://www.chesssafari.com/SusanPolgar.htm) which is his version of what happened:

 
Quote:
I donít know what to say about Susan Polgar beyond the fact that Iím proud to call her my friend. Susan and her manager/best friend Paul Truong intervened on my behalf when I left the Chess Federation after my heart attack in 2003. I wanted my laptop because it had a number of personal files on it that were important to me. It seemed like a simple enough request. Not only did Susan and Paul approach the Board of Directors on my behalf, they offered to pay for it! Then they drove to New Windsor, picked up the computer, and transported it to me in Connecticut. I have many wonderful friends but I cannot think of any other who would have done that.


Susan Polgar Foundation's federal form 990 filing for 2003 shows that Mr. Niro was a Trustee at the time (which is also confirmed by Mr. Niro, quoted again from his same web page, below). We have seen acknowledgement here that Mr. Niro's role in SPF while serving as USCF Executive Director was not disclosed to the USCF board at that time, though of course documents may eventually come to light showing that disclosure was made. Here is the Form 990 link for anyone who is interested, followed by Mr. Niro's confirmation that he held a position at SPF prior to resigning from his USCF job:

http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=371444375&yr=200312&rt=990EZ&t9=A

 
Quote:
After retiring from the USCF, I resigned from all of the non-profit boards and volunteer activities in which I was involved.... Of these, only one resignation was refused: my membership on the Board of Directors of The Susan Polgar Foundation. ďI need you and you need the Susan Polgar FoundationĒ, she said. ďWeíve got work to do!Ē That gesture gave me the connectedness and sense of being appreciated that I needed to accelerate my recovery.


Considering that Ms. Polgar later began to refer to a series of agreements between her and Mr. Niro that were not known to the USCF board at the time, nor were present in USCF files (it seems), it is quite possible that emails or other information on the USCF-owned laptop computer that Mr. Niro used would have been helpful in USCF's subsequent efforts to understand the validity and extent of such agreements. The scope and impact of such agreements are being discussed in other threads, so I won't remind anyone here of their breadth or importance.
_________________
Hal Bogner
hal@chessmagnet.com
http://www.ChessMagnetSchool.com


Last edited by hmb 10062225 on Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:16 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25663 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnnybear, I'm referring to SAS's not Sarbanes-Oxley. The subjects discussed herein should have been caught by the auditors. Indeed, all of these accusations of financial misconduct could have and should have been referred to the auditors. If SS was being responsible, then that's what he should have done.

If the Board blocked him from making enquiries of the auditors, then I think he would have a legitimate beef - but even then that would pertain to legitimate areas of concern. The problem is that he's dishing out blanket accusations with the worst possible interpertation placed on people's acts. So the Board's refusal to grant SS individual access to the auditors would be a defensible position.

My point with all of this is that the public should disregard ALL of Sam Sloan's allegations without support of the auditors.

--------
As for the technicalities, please refer to SAS 60 issued April 1988 titled "Communication of Internal Control Matters Noted in an Audit". This supersceded SAS 20 and does apply to non-profits. Especially note the standard's definition of reportable conditions.

I could go into other applicable standards but you get the idea. I don't want to get pendantic on you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25664 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
All of this Polgar/Finegold stuff is well and good but a chess politician has to be about more than nasty, negative attacks. Where does Sam Sloan stand on the issues?

My quest continues.
OK enough Mr. Lemoine. Sam Sloan raised the issue and proposed a way to save about $70,000. Nobody else has proposed a way to save any money. What issues are you talking about?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25665 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
Dear Sam Sloan,

Again with the nasty, negative attacks.

BTW auditing standards have become pretty stringent in recent years. This is particularly true in the area of fraud detection. If all this stolen computer stuff had any validity at all, it should have been addressed in the audit package the auditors presented to the Board.

...


Why doesn't Sam Sloan reference any of that? Probably because we had professional, independent CPA's look into all of this and they found NOTHING, that's why.

So, here's what, Sam. Show us the auditor's report on any of this. Put up or shut up.

Better yet, get back to the issues, Sam. Where's the Sam Sloan program better manage the Board's audit responsibilities?

Jack

My quest continues.
Mr. Lemoine, as a CPA, do you believe that the primary oversight responsibility rests with the EB or the external auditors?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
Sevan Muradian 12596003



Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 176

 
PostPost:25666 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As an Internal Auditor myself I'll tell you that primary oversight rests with the Board of Directors who in turn creates an auditee committee that reports to them and is outside of the power circle of the President/CEO.

The external auditors are nothing more than a tool of the Board.

To me it seems if a competent and strong enough Audit Committee existed within the USCF to carry out internal investigations then a number of issues could be assuaged.

However when the Audit Committee is potentially investigating Board members that's when this gets complicated.

It is the responsibility of every employee to abide by the Code of Ethics within an organization and the responsibility of the President/CEO and the Board to ensure that proper internal controls exist within the organization.

2007 and 2008 are going to bring a number of new internal control responsibilities to not-for-profit organizations. As best practices though I do not see why the USCF would not being to address internal control weaknesses. A number of for-profit organizations that are not bound and will not be bound by SOX proactively are doing SOX compliance as it positive for their customer base. The same thing goes when firms proactively seek SAS-70 compliance. It's a show of positive strength.

I would urge the USCF to look into their internal control weaknesses and addressing them. This would help rid us of a great deal of issues and non-sense that continues on today.

--Sevan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25667 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmb wrote:


Mulfish, et al,

I believe that we ought to be able to discuss things with much less emotionalism here in this USCF Issues forum. This is not a court of law, and no one is facing criminal charges here. Mr. Sloan has certainly raised an issue and supported it with evidence, and using the word "stole" may make this emotionally charged to you, but to me, it bears scrutiny and the evidence suggests that it may be a valid word to use. I will attempt to explain:

Please consider these definitions from Wiktionary, a sister site to Wikipedia:

 
Quote:
From http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/steal

to steal (third-person singular simple present steals, present participle stealing, simple past stole, past participle stolen)

1. (transitive) To illegally, or without the owner's permission, take possession of something by surreptitiously taking or carrying it away.

The government agents stole my money.
Three irreplaceable paintings were stolen from the gallery.

2. (transitive) To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully.
3. (transitive) To draw attention unexpectedly in (an entertainment), especially by being the outstanding performer.
4. (intransitive) To be involved in illegally taking possession of by surreptitiously taking or carrying away; to commit theft.
5. (intransitive) To move silently or secretly.

He stole across the room, trying not to wake her.

6. (transitive) (baseball): To advance safely to (another base) during the delivery of a pitch, without the aid of a hit, walk, passed ball, wild pitch, or defensive indifference.


Definitions 1, 2, or 5 may be applicable here.
 


Hal, I have never suggested that this topic isn't worthy of investigation. Court of law or not, it is reckless for anyone, let alone a Board member, to call people thieves without proof. Did Polgar and Truong just walk in, grab the computer, and walk out? More likely, someone allowed it to happen. Who? Let's get the facts before throwing out harsh accusations with no proof.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25671 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FYI Susan has posted her explanation of all of this on her blog. I suggest you look it up. (1st post of the new year.)

Now as for the main point: the proper way to handle all of this avalance of accusations is for responsible USCF leaders to refer to the auditors and ask them what they found. Stuff of this magnitude should have been addressed in some report even if only in a management letter.

Absent that, this whole thread and threads similar to this one are just so much nonsense. Let's get back to the issues, people.

Like that $70,000 Artichoke just referred to above. Sam Sloan did not propose $70,000 of spending reductions; he just gave us $70,000 worth of accusations. Even if he was right and $70,000 was misspent last year, then what spending reductions does he propose, to make up for that this year?

My quest continues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
irishspy 12422598



Joined: 13 Jun 2006
Posts: 63
Location: Los Angeles, 3rd door on the left

 
PostPost:25672 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
FYI Susan has posted her explanation of all of this on her blog. I suggest you look it up. (1st post of the new year.)


Just to clarify, her response is in the comments section of the 1st post of the new year, which interested parties can find here: http://tinyurl.com/wxb9x .

(Edit: Has the URL function for this software been disabled? It won't work for me.)
_________________
*******************
--Anthony Ragan
"Stop it! You're driving me sane!!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25673 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
... Now as for the main point: the proper way to handle all of this avalance of accusations is for responsible USCF leaders to refer to the auditors and ask them what they found. Stuff of this magnitude should have been addressed in some report even if only in a management letter.

Absent that, this whole thread and threads similar to this one are just so much nonsense. Let's get back to the issues, people.

Like that $70,000 Artichoke just referred to above. Sam Sloan did not propose $70,000 of spending reductions; he just gave us $70,000 worth of accusations. Even if he was right and $70,000 was misspent last year, then what spending reductions does he propose, to make up for that this year?

My quest continues.

The main point is that the Board has the primary responsibility to investigate these things. If the auditors didn't even find anything, that doesn't mean that the Board has any less responsibility to address the issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
hmb 10062225



Joined: 29 Jun 2006
Posts: 229
Location: Half Moon Bay, California

 
PostPost:25674 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mulfish wrote:


Hal, I have never suggested that this topic isn't worthy of investigation. Court of law or not, it is reckless for anyone, let alone a Board member, to call people thieves without proof. Did Polgar and Truong just walk in, grab the computer, and walk out? More likely, someone allowed it to happen. Who? Let's get the facts before throwing out harsh accusations with no proof.


Yes, I agree - let's get the facts. And I agree that harsh allegations are not pleasant, and I don't advocate them in the absence of evidence. Mr. Sloan is facing a recall effort for such behaviors, led by Donna Alarie of the Finance Committee, for his tendency to cross the line with respect to the tenor and breadth of his accusations.

I have taken up matters here based on facts and on plausible questions. It was I who undertook to discuss the matter of Robert Tanner's MSA records from 1992-93, perhaps preventing the matter from being swept under the rug.

What was done to Anna Hahn is another matter that is now coming back up for discussion, and although I see various rationalizations being offered to reassure members who read this USCF Issues forum, I do not yet see source material that could well have gone missing by the removal of this laptop - and which very well may never come to light at this late date.

The documents and quote that I provided - sadly - support the scenario being constructed by Mr. Sloan. I was present at the US Open in Los Angeles in August, 2003, when Mr. Niro "went missing" - his staff and his board members where asking "where is he?" at midweek. Then, word spread that Mr. Niro had resigned "for health reasons," and soon after, work spread that the finances were much worse than Mr. Niro had led everyone to expect as they prepared for the Annual Meeting. Senior staff and the entire board (except for Mr. Brady, who did not come to LA, apparently for unrelated personal reasons that I have never heard questioned) were present in LA and quite occupied with events there, so it is quite plausible to imagine that Mr. Sloan's scenario is accurate.

People who have worked in corporate environments, and who are familiar with the procedures normally followed with respect to company property and access to one's former office upon termination or resignation, can confirm that it is normal for an employer such as USCF to retain the information on Mr. Niro's company-provided laptop, and Mr. Niro's own words tell us that this was circumvented. Frankly, the behavior described seems suspicious to me - and in light of subsequent claims of agreements, and the documentation of Mr. Niro's simultaneous loyaties to both USCF and SPF, very troubling.

On another thread started on this first day of the new year 2007, we see Mr. Suarez posting that he has changed his position regarding Mr. Sloan's membership on the USCF executive board from negative to neutral. Clearly, there are issues - and not just one or two - that need to be exposed and subjected to scrutiny by the members here in this forum.

I call on everyone here, including gentlemen such as Mr. LeMoine, Mr. Goins, and Mr. Owens, to join people like myself, Donna Alarie and Tansataffl (just to name a few who come immediately to mind) in striving to "separate the message from the messenger," as one poster put it back on the Tanner threads a while ago. It is appropriate to continue to address Mr. Sloan's ongoing behavior, and to hold him (and each of us) to proper standards of conduct. It is also appropriate to openly debate the issues of the day, to investigate and to hypothesize, and to agree to disagree where necessary in the course of doing so, too.
_________________
Hal Bogner
hal@chessmagnet.com
http://www.ChessMagnetSchool.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25675 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, artichoke, you're right as far as you go but - what should the EB do?

If they can't rely upon the auditors they have now, then they should get new ones. If they are dissatisfied with the audit procedures the auditors follow, they should direct additional steps the auditors should take and specific areas they want the auditors to look into.

But perhaps you can see the drawback this would have to Sam Sloan's position. He would have to move past attacks and address issues.

My quest continues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25677 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
Yes, artichoke, you're right as far as you go but - what should the EB do?

If they can't rely upon the auditors they have now, then they should get new ones. If they are dissatisfied with the audit procedures the auditors follow, they should direct additional steps the auditors should take and specific areas they want the auditors to look into.

But perhaps you can see the drawback this would have to Sam Sloan's position. He would have to move past attacks and address issues.

My quest continues.
The EB should be informed of what goes on in the USCF and investigate where it's appropriate. It doesn't have to delegate the job to the external auditors in any way, shape or form!

This is true even though I guess Sarbanes Oxley doesn't apply to USCF. Why do you keep mentioning external auditors?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25681 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is the response Susan Polgar posted this morning on her Blog:

Monday, January 01, 2007 12:31:56 PM
SusanPolgar
SusanPolgar said...

Jack,

I will not bother to respond to liars and demented people. The laptop belong to Mr. Niro, not the USCF. He began his tenure of ED as a volunteer. As part of the agreement with that board, he received a laptop but no pay. He later became a paid ED but the laptop was already his.

When the new board took over in August 2003, they were not aware of the situation. I even offered to pay for it if they refused to honor the agreement of the previous board with Mr. Niro. However, that was not needed as they agreed to give him back his laptop.

I took the laptop to Mr. Niro who was recovering from a heart attack in Connecticut. It was the right thing to do.

In regards to personal info on the laptop, Mr. Niro had pictures of his children in it as well as the book that he is writing to his son.

It does not matter how many times I answer, more lies will surface.

Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
www.PolgarChess.com

Monday, January 01, 2007 12:40:18 PM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25689 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have made a few calls around the country this morning to people who were involved in the events in question in August, 2003. I have determined the following facts:

1. The newly elected Executive Board took office at the conclusion of the delegate's meeting on Sunday August 10, 2003 and on August 11 the newly elected officers took office, with Beatriz Marinello as President, Tim Hanke as VP of Finance and Don Schultz as Secretary.

2. Paul Truong was made Director of Marketing. As Director of Marketing, he could probably have just walked in to the USCF's office in New Windsor and taken the computer with no questions asked.

3. Mike Nolan was made Executive Director. However, Mike Nolan only held that position for about a week until his house burned down and he had to return to Nebraska.

4. The newly elected officers, Beatriz Marinello, Tim Hanke and Don Schultz, arived in the New Windsor offices on Wednesday, August 20. The first thing they did was look for that computer. It was already missing.

5. None of the newly elected board members have any recollection of being asked by Susan Polgar or Paul Truong for permission to take that computer. Also, they would not have given that permission, if asked.

6. As to the claim that Frank Niro was given that computer by the previous board as employee compensation, nobody has been able to confirm this. If true, why was it in the USCF office rather than in Frank Niro's home?

7. As to the claim that Frank Niro was in a hospital in Connecticut, nobody has been able to confirm this either, as Frank Niro never contacted the board to inform them of his whereabouts.

8. Susan Polgar, in her posting to her Blog, has failed to provide the name of any board member who was contacted with a request for the computer. None of the board members can recall being contacted. Until she comes up with the name of a person, her claim lacks credulity and does not even make sense.

9. Since it was Mike Nolan who was most likely in charge of the office when the computer went missing, he should be contacted and asked what he remembers about this incident.

Moderator intervention please?

Sam Sloan
nolan 10339324



Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5065

 
PostPost:25706 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam, Please revise your post to reflect the following corrections to easily verifiable facts:

1. I was named Chief Operating Office, not Executive Director.

2. My house did not burn down, though it did sustain quite a bit of damage to electrical systems when it was struck by lightning.

I don't recall anything involving Susan or Paul and Niro's computer while I was in New Windsor, and I think it was still sitting on the table in the ED's office when I left to return to Nebraska. Susan and Paul were just arriving at the USCF office for the first time since the US Open as I was leaving for the airport that day. (Had such a request been made to me, I would not have turned it over without at least making a copy of all files on it first.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25707 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One does wonder how the independent, outside auditors addressed the whole issue in the part of their audit of the fixed assets. The risk of missing laptops has been a big risk factor in audits for many years now.

I note that you inquired (how thoroughly, we wonder) but you STILL didn't reference the audit findings. Is that because the audit did not support your conclusions?

But enough of the nasty, negative attacks. Back to the issues.

In the area of fixed assets, what new policy would you propose to safeguard laptops in the future?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25710 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been in corporate accounting for 30 years and thus have been involved in many audits. I've never seen the independent auditors go so deep as to do a fixed asset inventory at the level of material a laptop represents. The auditors I've dealt with are familiar with the principle of materiality, and there were definitely bigger fish to fry at the time. I don't think the absence of comment from the auditors means anything at all.

Susan's response was helpful, but it would be more helpful if she specifically identified who authorized removal of the computer. If not on the forums, at least to the EB privately.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
nolan 10339324



Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5065

 
PostPost:25719 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suspec they'd be willing to do it if PAID to do it, Mike, but the audit fee is already rather substantial.

As to 'safeguarding laptops', I doubt there's much on any USCF staffer's laptop that would cause a huge problem if it got into the wrong hands, since the member addresses, birthdates, credit card numbers, etc. are on the database server. (Those are the types of things that cause problems when corporate laptops go missing.)

I doubt Bill Hall has anything more interesting on his laptop than some confidential email and maybe some financial reports.


Last edited by nolan 10339324 on Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email  
 
 
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25721 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I think the EB and ED are also familiar, if not with the principle of materiality, at least with common sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
snits 12652674



Joined: 03 Mar 2004
Posts: 132
Location: Tempe, AZ

 
PostPost:25726 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:
I have made a few calls around the country this morning to people who were involved in the events in question in August, 2003. I have determined the following facts:

1. The newly elected Executive Board took office at the conclusion of the delegate's meeting on Sunday August 10, 2003 and on August 11 the newly elected officers took office, with Beatriz Marinello as President, Tim Hanke as VP of Finance and Don Schultz as Secretary.

2. Paul Truong was made Director of Marketing. As Director of Marketing, he could probably have just walked in to the USCF's office in New Windsor and taken the computer with no questions asked.

3. Mike Nolan was made Executive Director. However, Mike Nolan only held that position for about a week until his house burned down and he had to return to Nebraska.

4. The newly elected officers, Beatriz Marinello, Tim Hanke and Don Schultz, arived in the New Windsor offices on Wednesday, August 20. The first thing they did was look for that computer. It was already missing.

5. None of the newly elected board members have any recollection of being asked by Susan Polgar or Paul Truong for permission to take that computer. Also, they would not have given that permission, if asked.

6. As to the claim that Frank Niro was given that computer by the previous board as employee compensation, nobody has been able to confirm this. If true, why was it in the USCF office rather than in Frank Niro's home?

7. As to the claim that Frank Niro was in a hospital in Connecticut, nobody has been able to confirm this either, as Frank Niro never contacted the board to inform them of his whereabouts.

8. Susan Polgar, in her posting to her Blog, has failed to provide the name of any board member who was contacted with a request for the computer. None of the board members can recall being contacted. Until she comes up with the name of a person, her claim lacks credulity and does not even make sense.

9. Since it was Mike Nolan who was most likely in charge of the office when the computer went missing, he should be contacted and asked what he remembers about this incident.

Moderator intervention please?

Sam Sloan


and will you name those you contacted to receive the above information Sam?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25733 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike, I respect your 30 years in corporate accounting and will certify from personal acquaintance that you definetly know more than I do. However, you are looking at the facts in your world; we are looking at facts in Sloan World.

Here, the facts are: (1) $3 million is missing; (2) the ED disappeared; and (3) his laptop's gone, too. These are the facts in Sloan World.

Now, if the $3 million is missing and the auditor failed to discover it, then the USCF has a cause for action right there. Faced with the other facts, how could any auditor not address them in the audit?

Materiality does not count in this case. The auditor would be required to look into this matter.

Now back to Mulfish and the real world.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25748 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think we're misunderstanding each other, Jack. My point is that with the large gaps on the books, the laptop wouldn't have hit their radar screen. Challenging the quality of the audit on the big picture is rational. I was interpreting some of your comments to apply it to the laptop question as well, and that makes less sense. If you weren't intending that, I apologize.

As to the suggestion to change auditors, I'm not so sure we didn't do just that already. Perhaps someone with better information and confirm or contradict that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
nolan 10339324



Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5065

 
PostPost:25779 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We've had at least 5 different sets of auditors since 1987, including one 'Big 8' firm. The most recent change was the result of moving USCF headquarters from NY to TN in 2005.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email  
 
 
samsloan 11115292



Joined: 08 Mar 2004
Posts: 1445
Location: Bronx, New York

 
PostPost:25789 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike Nolan wrote the following today.

"I don't recall anything involving Susan or Paul and Niro's computer while I was in New Windsor, and I think it was still sitting on the table in the ED's office when I left to return to Nebraska. Susan and Paul were just arriving at the USCF office for the first time since the US Open as I was leaving for the airport that day. (Had such a request been made to me, I would not have turned it over without at least making a copy of all files on it first.)"

This occurred on August 20, 2003. Later that same day, the three newly elected members of the board arrived. They report that when they got there, the laptop was already missing.

So, it seems that it was during that short period of time of not more than a few hours after Mike Nolan left and before the new board arrived, that Susan Polgar and Paul Truong grabbed the laptop off the ED's desk and made off with it.

Sam Sloan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger  
 
 
jacklemoine 10509327



Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 460
Location: Atlanta, GA

 
PostPost:25792 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Still with the laptop, Sam? What new rules would you institute for laptops in the future?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
rfeditor 10010250



Joined: 14 Apr 2004
Posts: 1657

 
PostPost:25793 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:


This occurred on August 20, 2003. Later that same day, the three newly elected members of the board arrived. They report that when they got there, the laptop was already missing.


Sam Sloan


Really? Does this include Tim Hanke, who has been completely out of communication with USCF for more than a year? All three of them (including the missing Hanke, who you previously claimed had been sent to Iraq) are willing to swear under oath that a particular laptop was not in the office on a specific day three and a half years ago? Or are you simply hallucinating again, Sam?
_________________
John Hillery
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send email Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger  
 
 
mnibb 12818435



Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 716
Location: Illinois

 
PostPost:25795 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:
Mike Nolan wrote the following today.

"I don't recall anything involving Susan or Paul and Niro's computer while I was in New Windsor, and I think it was still sitting on the table in the ED's office when I left to return to Nebraska. Susan and Paul were just arriving at the USCF office for the first time since the US Open as I was leaving for the airport that day. (Had such a request been made to me, I would not have turned it over without at least making a copy of all files on it first.)"

This occurred on August 20, 2003. Later that same day, the three newly elected members of the board arrived. They report that when they got there, the laptop was already missing.

So, it seems that it was during that short period of time of not more than a few hours after Mike Nolan left and before the new board arrived, that Susan Polgar and Paul Truong grabbed the laptop off the ED's desk and made off with it.

Sam Sloan


Sam, thanks for not accusing Susan and Paul of taking the laptop. You did say "it seems". I'm sure you wouldn't have wanted to make it sound like they took it unless you had proof, especially in a public forum. This kind of accusation would not be tolerated in most businesses, in fact those making them would probably be fired on the spot where I work. Image is everything.

Now it is a good thing to finger someone when you have proof. That shows the organizatin you have integrity. But unless you have proof, you might risk losing your job.
_________________
12818435
Mark Nibbelin
Fellow Life Management Institute
Chartered Life Underwriter
Scholastic Chess Organizer.


Last edited by mnibb 12818435 on Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25796 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jacklemoine wrote:
Still with the laptop, Sam? What new rules would you institute for laptops in the future?
I see you're repeating your comment from the other thread, where I already shot down this comment with the observation that what we need generally isn't more policies (e.g. for laptops).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
nolan 10339324



Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5065

 
PostPost:25797 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a complete fabrication of what happened, Sam.

Don, Beatriz, Tim and I were there on Monday, August 18th. Beatriz and Tim had already been there a few days by then, Don arrived on Monday. We all went out to dinner at a local Italian restaurant. (Al Lawrence was at that dinner, too.)

Paul and Susan didn't get there until some time around noon on Tuesday.


Last edited by nolan 10339324 on Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Mulfish 10510376



Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 492
Location: Atlanta GA

 
PostPost:25798 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

artichoke wrote:
jacklemoine wrote:
Still with the laptop, Sam? What new rules would you institute for laptops in the future?
I see you're repeating your comment from the other thread, where I already shot down this comment with the observation that what we need generally isn't more policies (e.g. for laptops).


"Shot down", David? Disagreed with, yes. But if in fact USCF laptops contain important business information on them, it seems imperative to have clear policies to control their issuance and recovery. My company certainly has them. I'm with Jack on this one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
tanstaafl 11246770



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 1854

 
PostPost:25800 Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:
However, you, Tanstaafl, did exactly what you accuse me of doing. You took Ben Finegold's disclaimer letter that he posted here and reposted it to Susan Polgar's Blog. It was also posted by the Fake Sam Sloan (who might be you) to rec.games.chess.politics

I have never posted to Susan Polgar's Blog and therefore Finegold obviously would not wanted his reply posted there.

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13118012&postID=116749656428735079

Sam Sloan
No, I didn't. I've noticed somebody else taking what I write on this forum and reposting it elsewhere. I generally don't do this myself. And I'd never re-post somebody else's stuff without their permission. As usual, Mr. Sloan is throwing around baseless accusations without checking his facts.

 
samsloan wrote:
Here is another Truong quote. From reading this, one would assume that Polgar works entirely for free and is never paid. However, we now know that Bill Goichberg, as Executive Director, paid Polgar $13,538.36 in December 2003 for these "free" appearances. He did this without informing the board or the president. At the Executive Board meeting on November 17, 2006, Beatriz Marinello, who was USCF President in 2003 at the time of the events in question, said that had have never known that this money was paid until I discovered this payment on the CD and made an issue over it.

This proves that Bill Goichberg was paying large amounts of money to his political allies without informing the board.

Sam Sloan


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/69b7fc7bb10ebe42?


"Dear Stan:

"Thank you for bringing up this point. USCF does not pay me any cash
for my appearances. US Chess Trust also does not pay me any cash for
my appearances to help do fundraising for them. In fact, I have
fronted a lot of my own money for a number USCF activities including
the Women's Olympiad Program. Since January 2003, I have spent about
$100,000 of my own time and money for various activities to help US
Chess. I have also donated a lot of work for USCF for Chess Life
without charge. In some events, USCF paid for my airfare and hotel
and in some other events, I paid myself."
If this is a Truong quote, as Mr. Sloan says, then what does this have to do with SUSAN POLGAR getting paid. In spite of Mr. Sloan's frequent confusion of the two (claiming that Truong wrote things that Polgar said she had written herself), they are two separate people.
_________________
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
---
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25803 Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul has been VP of the SPF (don't know for sure if he is now because I haven't seen a current 990) and they maintain a close association. I believe that Susan has called Paul her business manager. Paul co-writes her CL column Paul is a member of Susan's slate of announced EB candidates. It's not as if they have nothing to do with each other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
lblair 12454599



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 1034

 
PostPost:25804 Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

___"... will you name those you contacted to receive the above
___information Sam?" - Jerry Snitselaar (Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:46 pm)

It is worth remembering that we are still waiting for an answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
tanstaafl 11246770



Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Posts: 1854

 
PostPost:25807 Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

artichoke wrote:
Paul has been VP of the SPF (don't know for sure if he is now because I haven't seen a current 990) and they maintain a close association. I believe that Susan has called Paul her business manager. Paul co-writes her CL column Paul is a member of Susan's slate of announced EB candidates. It's not as if they have nothing to do with each other.
Sorry artichoke, but your comment just doesn't make any sense. If Truong said that he was working for free (and I only have Mr. Sloan's word on that) how can that possibly be stretched to imply that POLGAR is working for free? However close they may work with each other, one person saying that he donates his time DOES NOT, IN ANY WAY, imply that the other person does.

From what Mr. Sloan has said (that's right -- HIS claims) Truong has claimed to have no need of pay from the USCF. We all know that Susan Polgar is paid to write columns for Chess Life and to appear at scholastic tournaments.

What's Mr. Sloan's issue here? One person is paid to do certain work for the USCF and the other person donates his time. How can this possibly be an issue?
_________________
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
---
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 
irishspy 12422598



Joined: 13 Jun 2006
Posts: 63
Location: Los Angeles, 3rd door on the left

 
PostPost:25814 Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 2:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

samsloan wrote:
I have made a few calls around the country this morning to people who were involved in the events in question in August, 2003. I have determined the following facts:...


Anonymous sources are wonderful things, since they can say whatever you need them to say without being held accountable. Who are your sources, Sam? If you're unwilling to identify them, then your "facts" lack credibility.
_________________
*******************
--Anthony Ragan
"Stop it! You're driving me sane!!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
 
artichoke 10167825



Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1159
Location: Connecticut

 
PostPost:25861 Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nolan wrote:
That's a complete fabrication of what happened, Sam.

Don, Beatriz, Tim and I were there on Monday, August 18th. Beatriz and Tim had already been there a few days by then, Don arrived on Monday. We all went out to dinner at a local Italian restaurant. (Al Lawrence was at that dinner, too.)

Paul and Susan didn't get there until some time around noon on Tuesday.
So we should ask Don, Beatriz and Tim. Could we ask Al too?

Actually it would be easier, and far more candidate-like, for Susan and/or Paul just to tell us right here on this board.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
 
 

Chessnews.org (USCF governance 2000-2003)

Checkmate.us (USCF governance 2003-2013)