Re: Schadenfreude, but in moderation

On Jul 29, 6:54 pm, billbrock <billbrock1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 29, 6:33 pm, "jeremy.p.spin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"



<jeremy.p.spin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 29, 6:13 pm, billbrock <billbrock1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ms. Polgar and Mr. Truong don't belong on the USCF Board: that much
has become clear. Like Mr. Sloan, they have no conception of what
fiduciary duty entails.

But perhaps they can cultivate their garden at Texas Tech? Unlike Mr.
Sloan, they do seem worth salvaging.

I would make a clear separation of Polgar and Truong on this issue.
Doou believe that Paul is guilty of the following practices?

Impersonating another party, and making rude email postings under this
identity

IMO, yes

Dr. Spinrad was being polite. The postings were libelous, not merely
rude.

Claiming to have a PhD when he had none

IMO, yes

It's the teaching version of the Nearly an IM title. Bill's down with
that.

Repeatedly lying about both of the above claims

not sure about "repeatedly", but essentially IMO yest



Misrepresenting himself when campaigning for the USCF board

emphatically yes

Emphatically no to all of this. I had such hope for you, Bill.

If he is guilty of all the above, a university really could not employ
him. A football coach with nothing against him at all except a bogus
claim for a second master's degree had his appontment terminated, so
that I think the second item alone would rule him out. Of course, if
you believe he is guilty of some subset of the claims above, you may
have a different opinion.

As for Susan, I see nothing that would rule her out of bounds. Even if
Paul is guilty of the above, she is guilty of at most some errors in
judgment in defending her husband too extremely, and I would see no
reason to rule her out.

Jerry Spinrad

And perhaps those currently have fiduciary duty can figure out how
best to put the pieces back together.

.

Relevant Pages