In reply to Rick Wong's announcement that he is unwilling to have Reno
pay its share of NASPA's operating expenses, I'd like to correct him
on a few points of fact, then make a general reply to his tournament's
players.

> This mandate was not made with the consultation of the Reno
> tournament organizers (Jeff Widergren and I), nor were we even notified
> directly. Instead, we had to discover this information when it was
> uncovered by other tournament directors on a website set up by NASPA.

I can confirm that Jeff and Rick did not receive any special treatment
in this regard. The only people who were informed directly about the
planned timing and amount were people who were working on the appropriate
NASPA Committees, and Jeff and Rick chose from the beginning not to do so.

> In 2007, Chris Cree started a tournament called the Players Championship
> to be held during the summer on "off years" from the NSC. Many voices on
> cgp, Jeff, and I had asked that Reno be the venue for such a tournament,
> and Chris decided and announced here on cgp that he would run one in
> Dayton in 2007 and allow us to run one in Reno in 2009.

I do not believe that Chris promised you a Reno PC 2009.

> NASPA has now apparently decided to make that tournament the permanent
> NSC, not too surprisingly, as the Board of NASPA and much of its Steering
> Committee is comprised of Dayton tournament organizers.

That's true. Just like the NSA always organized the NSC, NASPA will
organize the NSC. As you are probably aware, holding the NSC requires
a license to do so from Hasbro, which Hasbro will only award to an
official organization.

The only reason that you are not yourself a Dayton tournament organizer
is that you have chosen not to be one. Many equally qualified tournament
directors have put the game first and volunteered their time at considerable
personal sacrifice to work at Dayton; you did not.

2000 134 nsc
2001 235
2002 136 nsc
2003 210
2004 120 nsc
2005 ? nsc
2006 96 nsc
2007 130
2008 98 nsc

> Furthermore, NASPA's decision to engage its new pricing to
> start with the Reno tournament just seem to be further efforts to drive
> down the attendance at Reno.

First, there are no such efforts. Second, a quick look at cross-tables.com
shows that NSC/USSO-year Reno attendance has been falling long before
NASPA:

2000 134
2002 136
2004 120
2006 96
2008 98

Third, as we have said from the start, NASPA exists (1) to preserve the
existing tournament scene (I suppose now, only where directors want this),
and (2) to expand the size of the tournament population in future years.

The reason we're collecting funds now is to help support future expansion,
so it's ironic that Rick is refusing to contribute to this greater effort.

> NASPA still has not specified how it will allocate spending of the
> funds it collects

We haven't decided yet how we will spend the funds, because again as you're
probably aware, it's a lot of work organizing an NSC while helping out
our 800+ members. Tournament directors are used to their players calling
them as their events approach to ask the oddest questions; bear in mind
the NSA/NASPA has this going on seven days a week, and not surprisingly,
relatively few people have stepped forward to volunteer to help out.

I can confirm that we have so far spent money only on necessary professional
fees and Internet services, and that no committee members have been paid for
their services. This situation will not continue forever, but when members
are paid, it will be in keeping with legal requirements for nonprofits, and
annual financial reporting will take place accordingly.

> nor does it have any intention of allowing the Scrabble
> players to elect its Board or Steering Committee members.

At present, NASPA members are welcome to join most boards and committees,
with a few exceptions. There is a fully democratic process in place for
replacing Canadian Committee members, because that is the only committee
that has had the time and energy to set up its succession process. (They
did so after determining qualification systems for the CNSC and the WSC,
and taking care of the rest of an agenda that I thought would keep them
busy until the end of the year, so kudos to them.)

If you want to bring more democracy to NASPA, you are welcome to join one
of its committees and start talking about how to replace its members, though
at this point the talk is going to fall on deaf ears because almost every
committee is severely understaffed and loath to lose even one of its members.

> After nearly two years, Jeff and I cannot continue to pretend to
> have faith that Chris Cree is working in the best interests of the
> Reno tournament.

True. Chris Cree is working in the best interest of the playing community
at large, which conflicts here with the specific interests of Reno, and he's
made the right choice.

So that's all for specific replies, here now are my general thoughts on
the matter by way of conclusion.

NASPA's immediate goal is to maintain the existing tournament
calendar with a minimum of disruption following the loss of all
external funding; its longer-term goal is to substantially grow
that community to improve playing conditions for everybody.

We recognize that with every change, be it of rules, lexicon, fee
structure or management, it is unavoidable that we will lose some
members of our community who cannot accept change. We are honored
by the trust that our 800 paid members have placed in us so far,
and will do our utmost to fulfill the hopes we all share for the
future of Scrabble.

Regarding the extremely short notice for our announcement that
the Reno tournament has failed to meet the conditions necessary
for it to be a NASPA-sanctioned event, we accept our share of
the responsibility for not having resolved this issue earlier.
If there are players who have as a result suffered financial
losses (e.g. airline ticket change or cancellation fees), we
invite them to submit documented claims to us, and we will see
what we can offer in the way of compensation.

We will not penalize NASPA players who play at the now unrated,
unsanctioned tournament in Reno; but do warn them that in the
event of any difficulty, they will not have recourse to NASPA
or its advisory board. The tournament will not officially be
held under NSA or NASPA rules, or use the NSA or NASPA lexicon,
and any decisions made by its organizers are final.

John