USCF ETHICS COMMITTEE
Bob Smith, FL, Acting Chair
P.O. Box 5772
Lighthouse Point, FL 33074
Nay 30, 1999
|
|
Re: Complaint: Bill Goichberg, NY
against Tom Dorsch, N.CA
The USCF Ethics Committee, by majority vote, hereby reprimands Tom Dorsch for conduct in violation of the USCF Code of Ethics.
This matter came before the Committee on the complaint of Mr. Goichberg. In this very lengthy document, he detailed and produced copies of numerous allegations posted against him on the Internet by Mr. Dorsch. He also included copies of his own Internet responses to Mr. Dorsch.
Mr. Dorsch answered the complaint and both parties filed rebuttals. The Ethics Committee reviewed the entire record and deliberated by e-mail, with one member in touch by regular mail and telephone. Our members share a common disappointment that this controversy involves two of our most dynamic and talented leaders who have so much to offer chess.
The committee considered most of the postings by Mr. Dorsch to fall under the general category of criticism, which is acceptable and outside the jurisdiction of the Ethics committee. However, Mr. Dorsch declared on the Internet, a public forum, that Mr. Goichberg "had his hand in the till" and is a "white collar criminal". In making these charges, using his title as "USCF Treasurer" to lend authority and credence to his largely unsupported allegations, he goes too far.
Ethics equate to morals. Public statements should be issued in an objective and truthful manner. Conduct should be honorable, responsible, ethical and lawful, so as to enhance the honor, reputation and usefulness of any field of endeavor. In reviewing the documentation in this case, the Committee finds that Mr. Dorsch failed to meet these standards. In fact, little can be found in this entire record that would enhance the stature of chess.
Respectfully submitted,
USCF ETHICS COMMITTEE
Bob Smith, Acting Chair
For the Committee
However, in just the past three days, there have been more than 60 postings on the Internet about this letter. This letter is obviously generating more interest than I had imagined it would, and therefore I am sending it to my general list.
NOTE: The letter is actually dated "Nay 30, 1999". Because that date does not exist and May 30 has not arrived yet, I changed it to May 10, 1999. However, I understand that the correct date was April 30, 1999 and it was prepared to be ready in time for the May 1-2, 1999 USCF Policy Board meeting.
Sam Sloan