DORIS BARRY RESPONDS TO BOGNER

 
Subj: Re: Open letter to USCF re: ICC
Date: 05/23/2001 3:08:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From:    pistola@worldnet.att.net (pistola)
To:    execdir@uschess.org (George De Feis), finance@uschess.org (Jeff Loomis), redman@utdallas.edu (Tim Redman), mccrary@axs2k.net (John McCrary), bobchess@aol.com (Bob Smith), APCT@aol.com (Helen Warren), ippy1@aol.com (Joe Ippolito), jpechac@aol.com (Jim Pechac), hmb@stratlabs.com (Hal Bogner)
CC:    sleator@chessclub.com (Danny Sleator), jfernandez@chessclub.com (John Fernandez), lateknight@chessclub.com (Marty Grund), potzy@chessclub.com (Eric Peterson), actionj@mindspring.com, mjames@worldclassgames.net (Mark James), recmate@aol.com (Chessnews.org), bradyfm@msn.com (Brady  Frank), FCamaratta@aol.com (Frank Camaratta), bdraney@esu3.esu3.k12.ne.us, Bob@solve.net (Holliman, Bob), george@neosoft.com (George C John), knudson1@home.com (De Knudson), stephenshutt@yahoo.com, ishipres@best.com


Dear Hal, I think the appropriate avenue to address this issue is with
George, the Executive Director. Discussions concerning the proposals were
held in closed session. Board members are bound by confidentiality not to
discuss these issues in a public forum. I can appreciate your disappointment
that the endorsement of the USCF, the official chess organization,can not be
used in efforts to raise additional venture capital for WCG, World Class
Games. I wish you success in your planned purchase of ICC as well as any of
your future business endeavors.  Regards, Doris

Editor's comment:  Hal Bogner has made public what he believes to be unwise and improper
conduct on the part of the USCF Executive Director and Executive Board majority.  Federation
Secretary Doris Barry, the most vehement Games Parlor supporter on the Board, responds
here to tell Bogner he should address his complaints privately to one of the people he is
complaining about!

The negotiation of business contracts is properly a confidential activity.  However, once a
contract has been signed, as the one in question has, there is no justification for keeping the
details secret from the Board of Delegates, which according to the USCF Bylaws "is
responsible for the management of the USCF."  How can the Delegates manage USCF if
they are not aware of information such as what percentage of any gain in USCF membership
income has been promised to Games Parlor under this contract?  That's ANY gain- not
just members who join because they like Games Parlor! 

Bogner has made some serious charges, and when the response from Doris Barry is that
"Board members are bound by confidentiality not to discuss these issues in a public forum,"
one can only wonder, what is she trying to hide?  What possible harm could result from details
of a signed contract being revealed?  The truth will surely come out at Framingham in August, if not before.      

ChessNews.org homepage