| Spam Scone 2005-01-15, 12:46 am |
|
Chess One wrote:
quote:
>
> I do not talk about it all the time!
Others might think differently:
"Most of what you post here, Phil, is incomprehensible
except for the tired name dropping you do." - Steven Dowd
And scarcely write anything here that
quote:
> is not a relatively anodyne report.
>
> As for 'reputation';- I don't give a damn what people think.
Obviously not, since you've persisted in posting nonsense since the
1990s.
quote:
> But sometimes it is necessary to confront imaginary histories with a
fact or
quote:
> two - when the imaginative ramblings depart from any known reality,
By the second paragraph of an Innes post, in other words.
and this
quote:
> is not grandstanding, but a correction of such nonsense that would
otherwise
quote:
> inform chess organisation activities, by saying what is really
experienced
quote:
> by real and named people in the game.
I agree, which is why I provide quotations and specific references.
Meanwhile, we still wait for you to do so.
quote:
> Particulalry (sic) off-the-wall are writers who completely resent and
reject the
quote:
> chess scene as actually observed at first hand.
First-hand from a computer screen in Vermont.
quote:
> This level of informed opinion about what really happens in the world
of
quote:
> chess players is so conspicuously absent from the usual politiking as
to
quote:
> almost completely isolate chess politics from the players of the
game.
quote:
>
> And this is the root and cause of all our trouble, the
marginalistation of
quote:
> chess organisation to the extent that it has NO partners to its
endeavors,
quote:
> and the major contributing factor to all subsequent decay of chess in
our
quote:
> culture, over which it presides.
>
1904[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> You are most unreliable reporter of any subject on any newsgroup to
which
quote:
> you make contributions. You have messed with the context of people's
posts
quote:
> for so long and so consistently, and with such evident and obsessive
malice,
quote:
> that whatever you think is not worth further discussion.
"In short: I have not found a single first-hand refererence nor
artifact
which would verify that the event [Cambridge Springs 1904] ever took
place." - Phil Innes
|