|
| lblai@blackburn.edu (Louis Blair) wrote (to Nick):
Given that Louis Blair has made no comment on nearly all of my earlier post
to him, I hope (though I cannot be certain) that his silence may imply that
he thinks that he has understood what I have written there.
quote:
> I wrote:
>
> Nick wrote:
>
> It is natural for rec.games.chess participants to resist involvement in
> battle between individuals. This still applies, even if I am one of the
> individuals involved in the battle.
Then I hope that Louis Blair may understand why I have *not* been attentively
following the latest developments, if any, between Tim Hanke and himself.
quote:
> By the way, I think it is somewhat misleading to refer to
> "continuing battles between Louis Blair and Tim Hanke".
Then I regret it that any innocent readers here could have obtained the
'somewhat misleading' impression that there were *any* 'continuing battles
between Louis Blair and Tim Hanke'. (Would Tim Hanke like to confirm that?)
quote:
> A Google search failed to produce any references to Hanke in
> rec.games.chess.politics notes posted by me in the last thirty days.
So is 'thirty days' supposed to be the rec.games.chess.politics 'statute
of limitations' or the expected memory limit of a 'normal' RGCP reader? :-)
*If* Louis Blair would like to declare now that his battles against Tim Hanke
are *not* 'continuing' (as I had assumed) and have concluded, then I shall be
ready to accept his declaration.
--Nick
|
|