Once More into the Breach . . .

I suppose that it is time for yet another update of the USCF litigation follies. There have been some . . . interesting developments, so let's get started.

After a flurry of repetitive, tiresome briefing, Judge Patel had a hearing on Polgar's motion to disqualify Kronenberger. As predicted, it was denied. Judge Patel, then, after chewing out both attorneys, sua sponte, ordered the matter transferred to Texas.

If I were Judge Cummings, in Texas, I'd be sorely tempted to send the case back to her with a box of chocolates; however, it is probably for the best that the matters be consolidated. The interaction of the discovery in the two actions was cumbersome and awkward at best. Both sides should be able to realize a substantial savings in attorney's fees.

Meanwhile, in Texas, in the course of some discovery fighting, Ms. Polgar's deposition entered the public domain. Despite a an amusing, but worthless snit by Whitney Leigh, it remains so. Despite several attempts, I have been unable to wade through the entire deposition, but I didn't see anything in it that has much effect on my opinion of the value, or lack thereof, of her claims. The deposition was also taken of a Mr. Williams who had written a letter implying that the publicity about the cases lead to the cancellation of a business venture with Polgar. At his deposition, Williams admitted, in essence, that his letter was complete bullshit. There was no prior agreement. There was no agreed upon renumeration. There was no company in business to pay the money, and Williams wasn't even really authorized to act for the company anyway. Other than that . . . it was a great letter.

Truong was also deposed, finally. No information about that deposition has made it into the public domain as yet.

The deadline for the disclosure of experts has come and gone. USCF designated Mottershead and Dr. Frederick Cohen. I discussed Cohen's findings in an earlier post.

Meanwhile, a cavalcade of summary judgment motions has begun. Jim Berry's was the first, followed quickly by several of the other defendants. Plaintiff has responded only to Berry's at this point, and I found the response to be shockingly lame.

Another Example of How to Promote Chess

The sound track speaks for itself. Too bad the still photographer stepped in front of the video camera.*

As for the general idea of recognizing top chess players, this is the kind of thing that ought to be done at universities throughout the country.

------

* Footnote: Susan should have had an assistant on the field to properly manage the still and video photography. Paul, where were you?

Mediation with a hint of Spice

One thing bothers me about this whole PT is to busy with the SPICE tournament to give a deposition in Lubbock discussion.

If he doesn't have time to give a deposition in Lubbock, how are we supposed to believe that he and his wife ever intended to, in the middle of the SPICE tournament, fly to California and participate in a mediation?

What is Forum Moderation Bias?

Bias is defined as a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question. Such bias can cause partiality (positive or negative) towards a particular person. Such a preference or an inclination can inhibit impartial judgment.

We see this displayed in forum moderation through the closing or pulling of threads for no stated or obvious reason. Posts can also be deleted for no stated or obvious reason. This can be against a person or an idea. In the worst case sanctions can be applied to certain individuals in an arbitrary or inconsistent manner. We rarely see traditional bias demonstrated against race, disability, or affiliation but it is often demonstrated through the provision of much greater scrutiny of the posts of those we dislike while allowing the benefit of the doubt for those in their own group or in positions of authority. This type of inconsistency is what we most often refer to as moderator bias.

When I was on the USCF FOC other than regulating SPAM, moderation bias was of great concern and in my opinion regularly permitted. I took great pains to not post on the forums while also on the FOC to preclude the appearance of bias in that I was debating issues with those I had the power to suggest sanctions against. In reviewing the forum archives one could see the generation of this bias from the earliest days of the forum where the team saw something they did not like an then parsed the AUG to try to find a reason to remove the post or sanction the involved individual. Sanctions were often stacked up or parts of the same posts were used as a justification to pile on certain individuals. Topics on the issue of moderation practices were particularly scrutinized as there appeared to be too much concern that members might defy the FOC’s authority (which the FOC considered disrespectful of themselves) rather than making efforts to improve respectful speech between individual members.

Below is a current example of an ongoing struggle against inconsistent USCF Forum moderation practices. I will leave it up to the readers to determine if any bias is involved with this endeavor.

please explain #2

Sent at: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:25 am
From: hmb
To: Ron Suarez WPraeder tsawmiller Brian Mottershead BrianLafferty rharing Moderator Committee

Tim - As you were kind enough to answer my previous question about Ron's offer, perhaps you could explain what was inappropriate about Ron's post, which follows. Suggested changes to bring it into conformance with the law of the AUG in your opinion would be appreciated, too.

Thank you.

----[Start Ron Suarez post]

First off, I need to remind the moderators that this forum is part of the USCF and its operation is certainly an USCF Issue.

Secondly, I need to remind the moderators that I am not writing anything in this post about any one particular person or groups of persons. Therefore, I am not attacking, disparaging, etc. anyone or any group of people.

Therefore you must allow this post and thread to remain, by the law of the AUG.

OK, so I am writing to all of the forum members that feel they have either personally been wronged or know of anyone that has been wronged by the system that administers and moderates this forum.

Please do not post your complaints of the system on the forum as you will then be exposed to the moderative wrath of this forum.

I repeat, do not post your complaints here.

What you need to do is send me a PM with your complaint and any and all details of the complaint you can provide.

I am now compiling a file that I will present to Bill Hall at a future time. My presentation will show problems and of course solutions to those problems. Understand that when I speak of problems I am talking of structural and strategic problems. By improving the structure of this forum operation, we can and will have a better discussion forum for the USCF and all its matters.

Thank you all.[End Ron Suarez post]
Hal Bognermailto:Bognerhal@chessmagnet.com
Please note: Although I am a partner in Chess Magnet School and perform consulting for USCF and others, nothing I post here represents the opinions of my clients or partners unless stated otherwise.

SPICE Craziness at USCF

Will somebody please explain to those poor opinionators at the USCF that more goes on behind the scenes at a FIDE tournament than just playing and directing? They're saying that since the tournament has started, Paul has nothing to do, since he's only the organizer so he should be working on the lawsuits instead.

What do organizers do behind the scenes (non-TD work) while an international chess tournament is in progress? Will someone help list some of these things to those folks at the USCF?

The Lord of the King

Rush to your nearest chess tournament and experience the adventure!

Spice Cup 2009

Just for perspective, note that the SPICE Cup Tournament is now in progress. Section A is FIDE Category 16, while Section B is FIDE Category 11.

(SPICE = Susan Polgar Institute for Chess Excellence.)

To compare, how many other international tournaments have been held in the USA in 2008 or 2009 and what was their FIDE strengths?

For more info:
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2009/09/spice-cup-b.html