Kentucky Chess Association

                

                         USCF Affiliate

After doing a tiny bit of looking it seems that there is more than one person that has some questionable postings.

In the thread: http://www.kcachess.net/apps/forums/topics/show/13127392-king-zepper

Lutz has Returned posted in his signature the following: 

Don Lutz ( Soon to be Former member of the KCA - Never President of KCA )

After doing a tiny bit of looking it seems that there is more than one person that has some questionable postings. In the thread: http://www.kcachess.net/apps/forums/topics/show/13127392-king-zepper

Lutz has Returned posted this as a signature:

Don Lutz ( Soon to be Former member of the KCA - Never President of KCA ) 

Compare this with the most recent posting of signature: "Donald Lutz ( Berserker, Former President KCA, President Bluegrass Chess, Former Courier Journal Spelling Bee Runner-Up 6-8th Grade )."

Out of the mentioned people, Bush has the most coherent postings listed and he's supposedly the "attacker."

At this point I am going to assume that it's a culmination of comments from a group of unstable individuals. Really, it's bizarre.

It gets better. The most recent posting (corrected) is: 

Donald Lutz ( 105 Berserker, Former KCA President, Current President Bluegrass Chess, Former Courier Journal Spelling Bee Runner-up 6th-8th Grade, Former Officer Central KY Chess, Former USCF Delegate)

Calling you a "buffoon, a blowhard, or a garden variety idiot" would be a personal attack.

Expecting you to type English well enough so that it doesn't need to be translated from some kind of strange joke is not a personal attack. I can only imagine how difficult your life is if you feel so slighted from someone expecting you to act like you aren't any of the three previously mentioned attacks. Driving around Lexington with you must be a real experience.

It seems that you're bordering on brandishing weapons as well.

That is what you typed Eric.... How is that not a PERSONAL ATTACK??

Do you really believe that is not a damaging Statement?

 Are you refusing to Retract That Statement?  Kind of important...

As for your links??  Did you read what you linked?  I was accused falsely of being SpongeBob....  If you would like to try and find some DIRT on me, there is plenty out there... I may even help, but if posting a link of someone believing i am SpongeBob.... Pls try again

Everyone now can see exactly what type of person you are.. I will let yourrr comments and personal attacks speak for themselves...

Thanks again to the Parents and Kids of KCA... I am very sorry that any of you have to see this..

Donald Lutz ( 105 Berserker, Former KCA President, Current President Bluegrass Chess, Former Courier Journal Spelling Bee Runner-up 6th-8th Grade, Former Officer Central KY Chess, Former USCF Delegate, SK )

Are you drunk or is this kind of behavior typical for you? No one accused you of being Spongebob, infact, you called someone else Spongebob. I don't think anyone cares enough about you to find any "dirt" on you. I posted the link for a comparison between your two (among many) signatures. 

Eric,

Getting back to how this post started....

If a person wants to have a gun present at a chess tournament, do you believe it is correct to notify the authorities, fellow chess players, or both?

I chose to notify both.

As the KCA is the fastest way to disseminate information, and because there is no call or e-mail list (now there is), I posted to the message board.

Could you explain to me how this is unreasonable behavior or how keeping such a threat as an "internal matter" would be socially responsible?

--Ryan Velez

Ryan, 

All the bickering that led up to the point that someone felt the need to bring a weapon to a chess tournament is what should have been kept as an internal matter and (ultimately) stopped at it's infancy. Instead it was spread all over this board and the parties involved argued like petulant children throwing insults and taunts at each other. 

People seem to think Bush is the crazy one, yet I've seen juvenile comments from Lutz (in increasing fashion in the last few days) and Baker in the past. There are several parties at fault that show no signs of wanting any of the antics to stop; infact some seem to thrive on the antics. 

Having a gun present at a chess tournament is their right in this country. That was not the issue. The issue is the fact that the atmosphere has degenerated to such a degree that some believe they need to bring a weapon to a chess tournament. 

Actually the atomsphere is quite pleasant. You should come on out to the Meijer event. Everyone is calm, cool, and collected. Tournaments are running smoothly and reported the same night people play. The Steve Dillard memorial fund helps pay for people's USCF memberships for those who cannot pay for it. In fact, about 40 people have declined their winnings so far asking me to "contribute it to the fund."

There has never been any safety concerns for anyone at the event until the gun comments. A gun is an intimidating presence at a chess tournament and this violates USCF rules in that it is an aid to the game. If someone genuinely feels unsafe at an event, the safest course of action is to not go to the event.

I noticed you did not answer my questions. I thought they were clear, respectably worded, and concise. That is ok. I will not post more on this thread as it has deviated a lot. But you are always welcome to our event. I'd like to put a face to the name!

:-)

Your friend,

Ryan

The atmosphere does not seem very pleasant to me given the fact that people are being banned as well as (supposedly) issuing threats. 

Your question was answered in a previous post when I stated "If there is a crazy one amongst the bunch (not that there are very many crazy chess players), then let the police do their job and stop antagonizing the situation." In addition I answered it in my comment as well. 

Thanks for the invite, but I think I'll stick to internet chess. The play is what counts, and it's considerably easier to just mute someone with unpleasant behavior rather than having to go through the ordeals described on this board. 

The answer you just gave is a Fallacy...

You play online.. as do we..

YOU mute someone... The SITE BANS a person from Talking..  They have a button you click.

That is a Pro-active approach .. sound business plan.

Live Chess you cannot GAG someone lol...

Oh- just call the police.. That is RE-ACTIVE...  

The Pro-Active approach is to ban... Does anyone like to do it? NO...

Ryan, how long have you been running chess events?

Ryan, how many chess players have you ever banned?

How many players did i ever ban?

How many players did Baker ever ban? 

The Combined number is a REALLY LOW number!  I am guessing less than 5

Eric, how many Chess Events have you ever ran?

Donald Lutz ( Former ICC TD(Flash)105 Berserker, Former KCA President, Current President Bluegrass Chess, Former Courier Journal Spelling Bee Runner-up 6th-8th Grade, Former Officer Central KY Chess, Former USCF Delegate, SK )

Did you just say, 'Having a gun present at a chess tournament is their right in this country.' -- WRONG!

Univ of Kentucky is a gun-free zone, as are most schools. Irrespective of actual laws, you have no inalienable right to play chess. Chess is a social event, run by volunteers that put forth far more than they receive. As one of these volunteers, I expect very little from chess players, but I do expect common respect and decency in relation to general social behavior.

You know what is NOT acceptable social behavior:

• threats of bringing weapons to chess tournaments
• threatening to sue fellow players
• attacking the jobs of anyone that disagrees with you

Perhaps you should step outside your bubble a little bit. No one (other than you) said anything about University of Kentucky. I didn't state any location of a chess tournament. Nor did I say that anyone had an "inalienable right to play chess."

I've seen several of these claims that Bush supposedly made said threats, yet I've personally seen no proof. What I *have* seen on this board is that if a person does not participate in said Bush v the World and take the side of "the World", they are the ones that are attacked. Take a look at some of the comments by Lutz alone and then consider the tone of your post. Remember, this stemmed from a claim made by Frank Niro that I was “chastising the vicitms.”

If Bush has made these threats and acted in the fashion claimed, several of the people involved are not presenting a very strong case for themselves. So save the strawmen, the ad hominems, and the glaring generalizations. If Bush’s intent is to destroy the image of the KCA and / or current or former members, the behavior on this board is doing nothing but furthering that cause.

You said you did not want us to air dirty laundry and now you call for proof?

Would you like me to post the 100+ emails from CB?

Would you like me to post just the ones that meet the requirements you are asking for?

I am more than open for you to try and help CB.

I tried that and got accused of harassment, civil rights violations, sexual harassment, and ethics violations at my place of employment. 

Frank Niro tried to help and got accused of racketeering and organized crime.

I'm going to pass along some wisdom that my pappy taught me - "don't feed the troll".

Again, you're attempting to mischaracterize what I stated and attempting to put words into my mouth. I never said I wanted proof, and honestly I could not care less about who files suit. Refer to my original comment that can be summed up by saying "People need to grow up and stop all this arguing."

Players who have no idea of the issues with the KCA or any legal proceedings read these pages. What they see (and I am speaking as one of said players) is a group of people that cannot seem to put personal differences aside in order to promote chess. This has been made even more apparent now that people are being banned, lawsuits are being filed, and threats supposedly made. 

Proof of whether any of the threats happened or not is irrelevant. That is for the police and the attorneys to work out; however, the continual antagonizing of the situation is apparent. I just re-read some of the comments regarding the issue and am still amazed that this ridiculousness (and that's exactly what it is) even tainted Steve's funeral. Given that Steve is one of the nicest people I've ever met in Kentucky chess (and chess anywhere for that matter), and the terrible thing that was done to him, the fact that this foolishness is even mentioned in the same breath is sickening. It does not paint members involved in a good light.

@Mike Thomas Obviously you are free to your opinon and free to post messages on this board that are within the rules, but I fail to see how your comment was the least bit constructive. 

Eric Funkhouser at August 7, 2015 at 4:19 PM

@Mike Thomas Obviously you are free to your opinon and free to post messages on this board that are within the rules, but I fail to see how your comment was the least bit constructive. 

It's quite possible that I wasn't directing my comment to you. I'd ask you what you thought, but to be quite honest I don't really care.

At any rate, I've been around Kentucky chess for over 40 years, before the founding of the KCA. There have been nasty disputes before and I am sure there will be more after the current tempest in a teapot blows over. Chess will survive.

If you want to come back to play, then I'll look forward to beating your sorry butt over the board some day. If not, then have a nice life.

@Mike Thomas Regardless of who your comment was directed towards (I didn't ask), the constructive qualities, rather the lack of, is what was questioned.

Is telling someone that you don't care what they think and then referring to them with comments such as "beating your sorry butt" characteristic of the "pleasant environment" that Ryan Velez spoke of? Am I too to be banned because I had the "nerve" to say something contrary to what some others have to say? Reading back through some of the posts Ryan Velez started mentioning banning Bush back in January of 2015. Were threats of weapons made then? An additional question, who was it that made this post:

“Sorry to hear this. Another sad day for KY chess.

.

I do not know all the details yet, but it is sad that a bunch of so-called adults continue to portray the exact behavior that we want our children to avoid. I believe the KCA is a blight on chess, continues to harm chess, and we would be better off if it died.

.

I am glad I have never served in an official capacity for KCA, as I would be embarassed. Though, I am more embarassed and ashamed of all the ignorant people outside of KCA that continue to attack these volunteers. Pathetic that you call yourselves educated adults.

.

The parents and kids deserve better. Larry Bell was better. I am proud to say neither of my children play chess and I am thankful they will never be a part of this mess."

The amount of toxicity coming from some supposed stewards and ambassadors of Kentucky chess is amazing.

What happened? I thought we were having a civilized conversation where some members fling whatever they care to at me, and then justify said comments with what they believe they've done for Kentucky chess.

Again, is this where I get accused of using a monkier a la Tom White (or whatever his name was)?

It’s difficult going through over three years of commentary on this board to try to find all the inside jokes to make sense of the shenanigans, so you’ll have to forgive me (or not, I don’t care) if I miss something.

Some people had so many important things to say that degenerated into insults. I would have assumed (now that’s an inside joke) that they might have regrouped and tried again.

I mean, that *is* what this board is about, right? Insulting the next person to your best possible ability. Nothing to do with promoting chess for chess’ sake.

All apologies due. *moniker ... I'd hate for someone to "AtTTackk" me for a spelling error.