While I seriously doubt the threads in question are directly related
to politics, there is another reason to post them on both groups: to
make it easier for the braindeaders to find them.

We have seen just how difficult this can be for some of the Keene
ratpackers, who no doubt believe Kingston was "hiding" his response in
order to make them look stupid for insisting he had not responded when
he in fact had. Of course, they fail to consider that when it comes to
making them look dumb, they have no need of outside help.
--

Again, I would point out that Keene is "reviewing" a review by TK of
one of Keene's better works. To the extent that this is one of Keene's
better works there is really no need for TK to poke holes, for the
criticism directed at Keene which originally drew him here was of his
inferior works.
IMO, this psychological need to poke holes even in good books tells
us something about the reviewer, here Taylor Kingston. But I noticed
that John Watson and Edward Winter have the same tendency. It seems as
though they feel a psychological need to establish their superiority by
finding flaws, however insignificant. For example, Keene says his
wrong date for Euwe dethroning Alekhine was a typo, as evidenced by the
fact that the correct dates are given on the very same page. In view
of this, why is this error not treated as a typo, but instead blown up
into a Hindenburg sized thing?

-- help bot