| Chess One 2006-02-26, 7:37 pm |
| Brennan 'weighs in' with the usual minimum [none] contribution to content
and maximum attempts at creating dissension as is his usual contribution to
chess, as with his recent opinion of what women should have written about
the game <ROFL>.
This idiot continues to lie his way through life, and has now moved on to my
'elimination of the touch move rule' ROFL!
Its necessary to discuss rules, and also implicated with any discussion is
the possibility of not agreeing with other people. What Brennan and those of
his ilk who write about such things as Kasparov's introduction to BCO <ROFL>
can't stand is that the truth will out, and this comes from a //process//,
of discussion, sometimes of disagreement.
Not to do so is predictive of a very sleepy future for chess.
Chess isn't well in this country, somewhat overburdened by all sorts of
factors which the general playing community both actively resent, and
passively avoid by not taking part.
If this lying nincompoop doesn't like discussing factors that hinder or aid
us toward the future, he should try his comments at ChessHut's site. They
don't like to discuss anything with the chess public either, and are,
furthermore, content with that.
zzzzzzzzzzzz
Phil Innes
"The Historian" <Spamscone@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140266678.397899.30600@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> David Richerby wrote:
>
> Another person discovers the 'joy of Innes'. Welcome, David Richerby!
>
> Almost needless to say, Innes' suggestion to eliminate the touch move
> rule and replace it with a 'write move rule' is bizarre, to put it
> kindly.
>
|