10-27-09 NCCA Officers and Advisors Ignore the Issues; Embarrass Themselves with Insulting & Irrelevant Remarks!? (Note: Regardless of my current level of skill, I earned a Certificate which proves that I achieved the Title of National Master in November of 1985; and in the chess world, I would appreciate the common courtesy of being properly addressed as such). If you have not read the latest posting by the NCCA's "Legal Advisor," the only thing you are missing is an insulting and irrelevant ten paragraph diatribe specifically designed to personally attack and berate NM Leland Fuerstman. (Don't worry, by now, I've sorta' gotten used to it...but, I certainly don't appreciate it) Conversely, each of my rivals seem incapable of enduring the opinions and criticism of concerned members who question their policies and tactics? When someone is elected as an officer of a non-profit organization, he must be prepared to address the concerns of his critics. This crew is apparently not capable of doing that. Their belated claim of a so called "virtual meeting" does not explain why past President Beaman said that he "was not present at that meeting" and therefore certainly "did not preside over it" Nor does it explain why he said, Quote "Well, they will probably just lie about it" End of Quote. -- I am a journalist... that is what was reported to me. I leave it up to the reader to decide who is telling the truth... And, if they had, in fact, conducted a "virtual meeting," such a novelty would surely have been celebrated in the President's "Chess Chatter" column which he promised would be updated every 2 weeks but has neglected!? (it would also be helpful if they would produce records of E-mails prior to 9-26-09 advising all of the officers of this "virtual meeting" in order to verify their claim). It is also strange that my last message had already been posted for a week on the CCC Message Board before any of them said a word? Also curious is the fact that though they stated that the "minutes" of that meeting would be posted for 30 days, they were instantly removed one week early, immediately after I posted my message?! The recently orchestrated blather posted by these   NCCA Officers and Advisors clearly violates the common rules of decency as well as the NCCA Discussion Forum Rules & Guidelines, ie. usage agreement Paragraph 6E, "NO PERSONAL ARGUMENTS, this is a Chess Discussion Forum, not a forum for PERSONAL ATTACKS!!!" The rules also indicate that "users can be banned" for, "A. abusive language B. Disrespect of others C. Causing a disturbance D. Purposely annoying others." Their reckless postings violate each of these rules. So, what gives them the right? The trend has been that they just arbitrarily do whatever they wish regardless of whether it violates any rules... I make no secret about the fact that I strongly disagree with many of the current policies of the NCCA. Every American citizen has the right to his "constitutionally protected viewpoint" and I am no exception. As a journalist and Editor of the CCC Website, I have gone out of my way to avoid any characterizations or personal attacks. However, the same has not been afforded to me. I have asked important questions about many critical issues which affect all North Carolina chessplayers. And in return, instead of being provided with legitimate and truthful answers, I have been required to endure unwarranted personal attacks. Instead of attempting to shoot the messenger, why can't they just address the issues and answer the questions at hand? Over the past year, as Editor of the CCC Website, I have attempted to communicate with the NCCA officers by first, sending private E-mails and making phone calls, and finally, because of the lack of a response, by posting messages on the CCC Message Board. All of those messages were properly written and presented in a respectful and informative manner. In each case, I went out of my way to make sure that all of the information which I presented had been verified as accurate. In addition, though some of the facts which were presented may have embarrassed certain individuals, each was given a fair chance to respond; and their answers were promptly posted. That is, until certain aspects of the finances of the NC Scholastics had been exposed  whereby instead of providing legitimate explanations, a huge cover-up resulted in a significant amount of confusion and finger pointing. After many months of delay, a self-appointed committee of the same people involved voted to exonerate themselves and the promoter!? Furthermore, neither I, nor the Asheboro promoter were given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings nor provide important information nor take advantage of the counsel of the NCCA Legal Advisor. Nor were we allowed to view the books in order to substantiate our claims. In fact, in the 3-4 month delay whereby each person involved honored a "gag order," I was never contacted one time by the NCCA Legal Advisor?! Such a kangaroo court was hardly a good example of a fair and unbiased forum for democratic justice. And, I reiterate that though I prematurely did, after reading more carefully, I absolutely do not agree with their findings and resolutions. That having been said, there are a few issues which every member would like them to address and elaborate upon:   (1) the "Recent Results" column no longer exists (2) the upcoming events or "Tournaments" list contains mostly scholastic events; and there is no clearinghouse to protect promoters (3) illegally elected VP (there was another candidate who told me that he was promised the job but didn't show at the meeting) (4) their persistence to allow an out-of-state promoter to run the NC Championship; their neglect to allow NC promoters to bid (5) their neglect to properly promote the upcoming NC Championship (6) their persistence to prevent being audited or the books to be observed (I don't agree with spending $5,000 for an accountants fee, either! However, allowing a particular concerned member to observe the books won't cost a cent...) (7) the "grand prix" system (an issue they have just begun to discuss; in fact, I understand they may have some sponsorship for that next year!) If folks really want me to cease chiding the NCCA officers for their negligence and incompetence, ask  them to tell the truth, do their jobs properly and address the problems listed above. Then, I will be happy to call off the dogs. Though some of my messages may seem to have been somewhat controversial and thought provoking, they were all composed with the intention of improving the state of affairs of organized chess in North Carolina. I hope that it does not become necessary for me to address these issues again. There is an old adage. "Win an argument;  lose a friend." That would be my only regret. I remain, NM Leland Fuerstman Ps. The CCC still meets on Wednesdays at Skyland