Chess politics - Answering Parr's questions

Author

Answering Parr's questions

Mark Houlsby

2005-05-28, 8:31 pm

Taylor Kingston wrote:

quote:

> I expect that Mr. Parr will likely continue in that vein, perhaps

providing unintended amusement for newsgroup readers.

I have to tell you, Taylor, I'm certainly amused.

Parr is an irredeemable moron, it seems to me.

I've been having some fun with him, as you may know....

Regards,
Mark

Taylor Kingston

2005-05-28, 8:31 pm

In another thread, Larry Parr, with his typical politeness, wrote:

"MORE KINGSTON HOGWASH
"I shall deal with Taylor Kingston's latest gibberish shortly.
"Meanwhile, despite his promise to do so (too busy, blah, blah,
blah) he has still not answered my three simple questions:"

Despite Mr. Parr's continued rudeness, I will now do him the
courtesy of answering those three questions.

Parr: 1. How many letters did Taylor Kingston have printed in Evans On
Chess?

Without going through my full Chess Life collection, I recall only
one, in the October 1997 issue, page 32. Perhaps there were others. If
Mr. Parr will cite specific CL issues, I will check.

Parr: 2. Why did Taylor Kingston go to such lengths to try and persuade
playwright Richard Laurie to retract an item unfavorable to Kingston
and Edward Winter that was printed in Chess Life?

To put it most simply, because Mr. Laurie said untrue things. To give
the most clear-cut example, I refer to "Evans On Chess" in the
March 2002 Chess Life, page 14, where Laurie wrote:

"Finally, I don't know who Taylor Kingston is and I don't
recall much about his Chess Life article [in May 1998] except he
denigrated your ability to analyze five Keres-Botvinnik games to show
that Keres was coerced."

This is quite false. I did *not* denigrate GM Evans' analysis, nor
his analytical ability, in my 5/1998 CL article (nor anywhere else
before or since). I demonstrated this to Mr. Laurie, sending him a copy
of my article, which by his own admission he did not remember well.
Despite a complete lack of evidence to support it, Mr. Laurie persisted
in his false claim. Therefore I discontinued our correspondence.

Parr: 3. Why did Taylor Kingston tell Richard Laurie to keep their
correspondence confidential?

The reason should be obvious to anyone familiar with Mr. Parr's
newsgroup tactics, with which by then I was thoroughly familiar. I knew
that if Laurie told Evans, Evans would tell Parr, and Parr would mount
a smear campaign, misrepresenting my correspondence with Mr. Laurie.
Guess what? That's exactly what happened.
I expect that Mr. Parr will likely continue in that vein, perhaps
providing unintended amusement for newsgroup readers.

Taylor Kingston

2005-05-29, 3:30 am

Mark Houlsby wrote:

quote:

> Taylor Kingston wrote:
> providing unintended amusement for newsgroup readers.
>
> I have to tell you, Taylor, I'm certainly amused.
>
> Parr is an irredeemable moron, it seems to me.

I would use such words as "scoundrel," "reprobate," "prevaricator,"
"fabricator" etc., rather than "moron," but "irredeemable" is certainly
correct.

quote:

> I've been having some fun with him, as you may know....

Yes, I have noticed. Stick around, we'll see where he goes with the
Laurie business. Last time he trotted out a pack of lies with no
supporting documentation, but that is Parr for the course.

Sam Sloan

2005-05-29, 6:31 am

On 25 May 2005 12:02:34 -0700, "Taylor Kingston"
<tkingston@chittenden.com> wrote:

quote:

>
>Sam Sloan wrote:
>
> No.

Thank you. Now, from reading the posting by Louis Blair, I understand
the situation. Tim Hanke accused Taylor Kingston of being Rev. Qusz.
Taylor Kingston resented the accusation.

On this point, I agree with Taylor Kingston. I find it extremely
unlikely that Taylor Kingston was Rev. Qusz. It is much more likely
that Tim Hanke was Rev. Qusz.

It is a fact as the posting by Louis Blair points out that the people
who hate gays the most often have gay tendencies. For example, I do
not hate gays at all. I want more gays. This is because the more gays
there are, the more girls I can get.

As the posting by Marcus Roberts points out, there has recently been a
high incidence of gays among the USCF leadership. Since Tim Hanke
seems clearly not to be gay, I wonder how he reconciles his
involvemenmt until recently with this leadership (although he has
dropped out recently.)

Sam Sloan

parrthenon@cs.com

2005-05-29, 6:31 am

THE WORM OF ENVY

In his response Taylor Kingston, as usual, snipped most of my posting.
And, as usual, he then changed the subject.

"THANKS, MR. KINGSTON.
...
....for making my prediction come true so soon!

I can also predict with utter confidence that Taylor Kingston, still
nursing a bruised ego, will continue his never-ending quest to find
something -- anything -- anyone -- to use against GM Larry Evans...His
books and columns are read far more widely throughout the world than
anything Taylor Kingston churns out....

In a posting about zombies, Mr. Kingston made my prediction come
true sooner than even I expected. Out of the blue, he could not resist
taking another potshot against someone with whom he is not even in the
same league when it comes either to writing or pushing pawns."

After quite a bit of snipping, Mr. Kingston writes: Absolutely true
on all counts, Larry. No argument whatsoever."

What is absolutely true on all counts? My entire post or just the
part cited by Mr. Kingston?

<Next to Forster's book, Larry Evans' historical writing looks more
like Goran Tomic's.> Taylor Kingston

What did this gratituous smear have to do with zombies?

Mr. Kingston deliberately and dishonestly missed the point of my
post: he is not even in the same league with GM Evans who is not only a
far better player but also a far better writer. Instead he changes the
subject and mentions some historian named Richard Forster whose work I
never addressed.

The final paragraph of a letter rejected by Hanon Russell on the
ChessCafe bulletin board at the height of the attack on GM Evans by
Edward Winter and his cohort Taylor Kingston sums up those two
worthies: "dyspeptic critics who are gnawed by the worm of envy."

"Evans On Chess is lively, informative and entertaining. I have often
seen him print questions from readers who point out his mistakes, and I
never saw him duck a controversial issue. I don't care about reams of
analysis (my computer can do that) or whether Mitchell is spelled
Michell. I do care what a legendary grandmaster has to say about the
hot topics of the day. GM Evans: Keep up the good work. Ignore
dyspeptic critics who are gnawed by the worm of envy. Don't let the
bastards grind you down." -- Lawrence Zimmerman

parrthenon@cs.com

2005-05-30, 6:47 am

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO KINGSTON

<The matter of Mr. Laurie is far more significant, in terms of what
it tells us about Mr. Parr. I will be exploring that further today.>
Taylor Kingston

<Friend Kingston is a verystrange individual. Perhaps Iceland will give
him refuge if he stays offthe net.> Richard Laurie

It appears that we are in for another treat. We seem to be
entering a new phase: playwright Laurie, author of Knight of the Id
about Alekhine's last days in portugal, is also a liar according to the
gospel of Kingston.

Now, then, the number of Kingston letters Evans published is
important because he alleged GM Evans was quashing an inordinate number
of his missives. It turns out that Mr. Kingston, could not remember
much about what he actually had sent to GM Evans. It turns out that GM
Evans published at least 50% of the letters Mr. Kingston claims to have
sent to him, and the percentage will likely prove to be still higher.

Bottom line: Mr. Kingston was treated with kid gloves by GM
Evans. Most readers never have a letter published given the
grandmaster's heavy mailbag.

One compares GM Evans' record of publishing at least half of Mr.
Kingston's letters in a hardcopy format limited to less than 60 column
inches a month with that of Mr. Kingston's ChessCafe ally. GM Evans
had at least six letters in his defense quashed, and we may reasonably
expect there were more. If memory serves, the Cafe bulletin board with
its virtually unlimited space consented to publish only a few letters
in the grandmaster's defense against a vicious attack launched by
Edward Winter and his zombies..

AND NOW AN ALPHONSE AND GASTON ROUTINE

Now to Mark Houlsby and Mr. Kingston's gingerly teatment of a
supporter who has uttered indirect death threats; e.g., against Tim
Hanke.

Granted, Mr. Houlsby is no threat to anyone. Granted, the man
will never act on his fantasies precisely because he is the type who
publicizes them. Granted, that if one lives any distance from the man,
then action on his part would require sustained determination, which he
plainly does not possess. Granted, the man is harmless, blissfully
supine in his life, and unaggressive. Granted that those who speak
about not giving him an address are alarmist.

Having granted all of the above in an attempt not to demonize
Mr. Houlsby, I still think it fair to say that Mr. Kingston has an
attenuated responsibility for encouraging the feller.

<However, I do not endorse Mr. Houlsby's occasional epithets.> Taylor
Kingston

"Indeed, and neither should you, they are not worthy of *any*
endorsement and, as such, are *entirely* my own responsibility, as I
have just explained to Parr in another thread. He seems determined to
mistake everything he possibly can....Oh, well. Sincere apologies to
you, Taylor, for any embarrassment which my vituperative prose
(coupled with Parr's evident native idiocy) may have caused you."--
Mark Houlsby

Based on Trollsby's past record here in Tinytown I can predict
with certainty that he will prove unable to control himself as time
goes by. I can also predict with utter confidence that Taylor Kingston,
still nursing a bruised ego, will continue his never-ending quest to
find something -- anything -- anyone -- to use against GM Larry Evans.

Taylor Kingston has some idea that Mr. Houlsby, though utterly
harmless, is troubled. That earlier stuff about bullets in Hanke's
head surely must tell him that.

His suggestion that our Trollsby hang around gives him an
attenuated responsibility for what the guy is likely about to do. Not
much, but a smidgin.

Trollsby is probably correct in his depressive avowal that he is
basically a nothing (though earlier in a manic episode, he was bucking
for Zhukov status). And it's true that I no longer care about what he
writes. At first there was a glimmer of intelligence. Then it vanished.

Tinytown is a site half for info and half for forensic sport.

Mark Houlsby

2005-05-30, 6:47 am

There you go again lumping Taylor and me together and calling us
"Alphonse and Gaston"

Would that I *could* play as well as Korchnoi....

parrthenon@cs.com

2005-05-30, 8:32 pm

TROLLSBY IS WATCHING

quote:

>I'll be keeping an eye on him [Parr] to be sure, but I'll treat him like a disturbed child for as long as he behaves like a disturbed child.> Mark Houlsby

Considering that Mark Houlsby spoke of Tim Hanke having a
bullet put in his head (though not by Mr. Houlsby, to be sure) Taylor
Kingston's avowal that he isn't "very fond of him [Tim] myself" is
surely an understatement.

Mr. Houlsby written product is far less agitated than
yesterday. He is on his better behavior for Taylor. Kingston's sake.
Yet we know that pressure will build inside his cranium and that the
verbal, though not physical, explosion will come.

Mr. Kingston has offered an agnostic support for Mr. Houlsby:
he only knows the man of the last few days, not the man of days past.
Perhaps someone could post a few of Mr. Houlsby more purple moments?

THE RULES OF THE GAME

Given that we have a given -- that Mr. Houlsby will eventually lose
control again -- here are the rules by which we will have to play.

INSULTS: I enjoy being called names, and so long as the lexicon
of abuse does not become profane or lubricious, I will remain engaged
with Mr. Houlsby.

THREATS: Evidently jocose threats are okay, so long as they do
not appear antic, suggestive of a prolonged immersion in violent
fantasy.

INDIRECT THREATS: These are seldom jocose, and they are uttered
by persons who will never act upon them and who even lack the courage
to own up to their own thoughts. Instead they attribute the desire for
violence to others. Mr. Houlsby makes such threats.

The game rule here is that the first evidently serious-antic
direct threat or the first evidently serious indirect threat will bring
our conversation to a conclusion.

Fair enough?

WINTERIAN ZOMBIFICATION PROCESS (W.Z.P.)

Taylor Kingston does not go back far enough in Hollywood history when
researching clues to the Winterian Zombification Process or, as it is
simply
known in Haitian circles, W.Z.P.

I refer him to that wonderfully eerie film, White Zombie
(1932), since Mr. Winter's zombies are most certainly white boys with
some virtues. Bela Lugosi, who plays the part of 'Murder' Legendre,
runs a mill in Haiti and wants willing workers who don't unionize or
eat much. Hence he turns people into zombies, the living dead.

Victims drink a potion. There are scenes in which zombies walk
along hills as they move about listlessly. I see the scene at
ChessCafe as electronically similar, though the action there does not
take place in Haiti.

So how does Mr. Winter drug his white zombies?

There may be a transference process similar to that of the mummy
Kharas, played by Boris Karloff, in The Mummy (1932).

W.Z.P. appears to be an advance upon the technology exercised by
either Lugosi or Karloff. That does not make Mr. Winter a genius. It
merely means that zombification research and development moves ahead in
each generation.