"Louis Blair" wrote in message
ups.com...

1,000 [!] words snipped ROFL!! I answer only things which seem
answerable rather than the 'context' that Louis supplies.

7 and indeed by the same theme appearing on the
7 next 20 occassions to the exclusion of virtually all
7 else, except to also air the reprehensible subjects;
7 Schiller, Parr, Keene, Laurie.

_
On "the next 20 occasions", was Taylor Kingston
discussing the reasons that he would have had to
attend the ChessCafe event?

No. On the next 20 occassions Kingston wrote of Evans Parr Laurie and
Schiller. I never said he wrote 20 e-mails about the event he never
attended! What a diversion!


Phil Innes wrote (Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:26:31 GMT):

7 That's where.

_
Is Phil Innes (at last) admitting that, in the quote that
he presented, one can not find an assertion about 'the
only reason' that Taylor Kingston would have attended
the ChessCafe event?

To the contrary - the quote I offered was the ONLY reason that would tempt
TK to go

..

7 yet proportionately out of wack with author titles sold
7 elesewhere, so that they are still not commercially
7 adjusted in proportion compared with the rest of the
7 market.

_
As I remember it, we found no great difference between
ChessCafe and Chess4Less.

NO GREAT...

True $100,000 is not matter at all - and a //guaranteed $100,000// at that.
This is important since Chesscafe actually reneaged on their promise of
money, and USCF rewarded them for it by ecxtending their contract! [This
comment only concerns grown-ups who have been around the block at least
once.]

But let us pass over what 'we' found as no 'great' difference. A hundred
grand of members money is nothing to 'we'. What happened is that Chesscafe
were given another opportunity 'to bid', and then a third opportunity! You'd
think they had some favoured status, no?

In any event, it indicates no
connection with Taylor Kingston.

It indicates a direct connection between his tiff as a private writer to CL,
and as invitee as book reviewer to Chesscafe. Louis Blair can't find any
point in anything, nevermind his own 'thinking'. Poor Louis cannot connect
this private tiff, vehement on the part of Kingston, with the objective
person who had nothing to do with the totally coincidental absence of
representation of books by the people Kingston fell out with. )

Louis is not even a tiny bit suspicious. I wonder if he bought into
fusion-in-a-test-tube? Many did!

Phil Innes