EDITORIAL

Arkansas Chess Association News – April 2005 pg 9

I applaud Frank Barry for taking the time to listen to my concerns expressed in my editorial and for taking the time to respond. Moreover, I offer my apologies for not getting the name of his organization right. I'm not for sure how I misconstrued the "F" in OCF with Federation as opposed to Foundation. I think my wife, Harriet of the Hills, distracted me with her incessant nagging while I was writing. Regardless of how it happened, I just goofed. It won't be the last time.

But Frank, much of your response, in my humble opinion, borders on sophistry. For example, you write that it was posted that an OCF membership was required. Well shucks, Frank, everyone says that, but then most organizations honor out-of-state memberships. For instance if you look on p. 78 of the April 2005 issue of Chess Life, you'll see the "Oklahoma State Quick Chess Championship" listed, and it states, "OCA req'd." However, I can present my ACA membership, and guess what ... they'll let me play without joining OCA. (Yes, Frank, I'm aware that it also states: "OSA for nonresidents" under the OCA listing and that your listing doesn't include this exception. Which makes my point: chess players have grown accustomed to a certain degree of neighborliness when they travel out of state. We don't want to have to buy a membership to every organization in order to play in one of their tournaments. I wanted people in Arkansas to know that they weren't going to get this neighborly consideration if they traveled to one of your tournaments.)

Second, I don't know what your affiliate status, or lack thereof, has to do with this. Your club could proclaim that it is going to honor out-of-state memberships in chess organizations, regardless of their affiliation. Your group, not being the state affiliate, has more freedom to do what you want. You can be neighborly or unneigborly. The last time I checked, it wasn't a violation of U.S. Constitutional Law to be neighborly.

Third, if the membership is to defray the costs for publishing the OCQ, give out-of-state players a choice. If they want it, charge them dues; if they don't, then allow them to get by with paying their entry fee. And good heavens, Frank, people are Internet savvy enough to find out when your tournaments are being held or they can look in Chess Life. They don't need the OCQ to find out about chess in Oklahoma. Harriet is already complaining that I have too many periodicals cluttering up the living room in our house, and then you force me to get one more.

Fourth, Frank, most Arkansas players really couldn't care less about a FIDE rating norm. We find USCF ratings sufficient.

Fifth, I can't prove it, but my gut tells me that you do indeed want to destroy the OCA. When you devise a Grand Prix system so that anyone who plays in OCA events can't participate in your Grand Prix, I think that says all that needs to be said. Next, you'll try and tell me that you've been encouraging participation in OCA events. Come on, Frank; come clean. Your own publication stated: "All OCF officers and staff hope you will make a conscious decision to attend only OCF events in 2005. . . . and thereby bring the farce of OSCO/OCA to an end. [OCQ, Oct 2004, 33]. "So yes, Frank, you're right: I overstated it when I wrote, "They now bring out the demands and the stick: support the OCF exclusively or risk being blackballed from future events." I should have written: "Support the OCF exclusively or risk being blackballed from our Grand Prix."

Sixth, Frank, you really don't help your cause when you write things like "after the handful of selfish individuals who criminally stole it away from us." In addition I'd suggest that you'd do yourselves a huge favor if you'd try to restrain the vitriolic tone present in the OCQ. Referring to others as "election-stealing weasels" probably isn't prudent. And always referring to yourselves as the "most competent and most qualified" to run tournaments might make some think that you guys have some serious issues to work through. If you have to tell people how competent you are, you're probably not as competent as you think.

And finally, Frank, I make no claim to being the most competent and qualified editorial journalist in the country. I suspect that your right in saying that what I write "is just poor editorial journalism." But let me let you in on a secret: I ain't no journalist. I'm just an ol’ slow talking hillbilly. I enjoyed the interaction; it was fun; let's do it again sometime.

Ozzie of the Ozarks