kill all local clubs immediately

Not really but you fell for it.

moved over from USCF issues, Because I think some local club issues can be discussed.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10816

"Don’s statement is more historically accurate. Context IS important.

It’s interesting to note (as predicted by many, I might add) that as soon as we took steps that were seen to decrease the power of state affiliates, grass roots organizing in USCF struggled more, and chess overall seemed to suffer.

Perhaps that’s just a “wishful interpretation” on my part. But certainly there were many that expected this type of result.
ImageCaveman c"

This was in reply to Brian M’s statement, over there. Disregarding history, Brian statement was about the current USCF situation is correct.

I think a State vs Local Club conflict is natural and certainly true at times of my state. I think the real issue is how the State organization (and local club)want to do about it.

So what does your local club or State Organization do about conflict?

We had a standing committee (Board of Affiliates) but I suspect that will be defunct shortly. Our State affiliate provides services such as limited web site and mail outs for local clubs.
But apparently that support is extremely limited at times. Or based on “I like you but don’t like you”, to put it bluntly.

What does your local club do about conflict with the State Organization? Some local clubs are actually not affiliated with the State affiliate. Why is not always stated or not stated in a rational manner.
My given local club supports the State Affiliate but is so divided by internal conflict that it is incapable of accomplishing much. Some local clubs appear to support the State organization or at least ignore it.

Also note that there is shift. The local club is actually not necessary. A Chess Player can used the Internet and either USCF TLA or State web site/Magazine to play chess.
Or CCA/Cajun Chess tournaments.

So any insights by you?

Keep your club out of chess politics on the state and national levels. It is divisive and a waste of players’ time. Don’t spread the negativity that is all too pervasive on the USCF Issues Forum. Too many posters like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Letting that spill over into your club setting is a potential death sentence for your club.

I am part of a club that reorganized in October of 2008. We moved over to a Borders Books from a school. As a result we had to switch from a purely scholastic organization to an open club. We started with only about a dozen members. Now the club has 56 and is continuing to grow. We don’t have a stratified organizational structure.

We set some goals for ourselves:

  1. The club must focus on social interaction
  2. Chess has to be fun for the kids and the adults
  3. Club membership is free; money will come from donations and any money we make from sales and tournaments. We have a plastic donations container for members and others who lik what we are doing. It has worked quite well.
  4. Get as many people as possible to help out.
  5. Tournament play is offered for those who want it every 4-6 weeks. But no pressure on the members. We have held several unrated and rated events.
  6. No chess politics.
  7. Lots of joking around and light teasing.
  8. Be good to our host, Borders Books. Clean up; no running around; keep the noise to a dull roar.
  9. Sponsor a team in the Pittsburgh Chess League so that new players can learn how to play tournament chess and let them see the game in a positive setting.

So far, we are doing well. Many members, both kids and adults, help out in setting up and closing. I have acted as a “benevolent dictator”, but I would be very willing to act as General Cincinnatus of ancient Rome did and hand over the reins to others. Chess is fun in our club, and we are vigilant to keep it that way.

We have a good relationship with our state federation. Maybe that is problem in other states, with people fighting over positions and little pots of money. Many players just want to be left alone to play their game in peace. But there are also very combative types that want to impose their will and ideas on others. Where they see a power vacuum, they try to fill it. My take on the arguments on governance in the USCF is that it is not the structure per se that is the problem. The problem lies in the type and quality of the people who are running it. My professors of political science pressed that executive policy and legislation are messy; it is implementation that is important. For that you need good dedicated people.

we seem to have enough local club politics. So much so that it exhausts any interest in State level politics

Local clubs are important.

Many local clubs are filled with people who are there to play chess and to “hang” with other chessplayers – the socialization factor just isn’t the same online. Many of the members of local clbus may be interested in playing weekend tournaments – but they play at their clubs on weeknights. Both rated and unrated chess can be found at many local clubs.

I don’t think internet chess and a list of weekend TLA’s are going to replace the local chess club anytime soon.

– Randy Shane