I wrote (14 Dec 2006 13:19:22 -0800):
7 ... I am seeking identification of specific examples of
7 the moderator behavior to which Phil Innes objects. I
7 am also seeking a specific identification of the supposed
7 "less-than-honest reporting about Tanner".
_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:05:00 GMT):
7 Look at USCF's website Forum, and also their public
7 announcements ... I already wrote these references
7 and Blair cut them. ...
_
Taylor Kingston wrote (15 Dec 2006 07:26:50 -0800):
7 There are many posts and announcements on USCF's
7 website. Looking there does not tell us to which *_specific_*
7 posts and/or announcements you refer.
7 ...
7 I already wrote these references ...
7
7 You did no such thing. You have never specified what
7 you are referring to. You have not said what you
7 considered "rash and offensive abuse of speech," nor
7 what you considered "less-than-honest reporting about
7 Tanner."
7
7 and Blair cut them.
7
7 Nonsense. Blair cannot cut what was never there. He
7 cannot even cut what _is_ there, because your original
7 posts are still there, exactly as you wrote them. And
7 they contain none of the information you claim they do.
7 ...
_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:09:20 GMT):
7 ... What information? Be specific otherwise you are
7 merely Vaguer-than-thou! If you can't find this material
7 at USCF's forum, jovially known as Nolanland, then I
7 say you are not looking very hard. Lots of other people
7 found it, so you must consider that it is you, not me. ...
_
I wrote (29 Dec 2006 14:29:00 -0800):
7 Who specifically knew what supposed moderator
7 misbehavior Phil Innes was referring to, before Phil Innes
7 revealed that he was referring to Herbert Vaughn (who is
7 not the moderator) as the moderator? Who, even now,
7 knows what supposedly "less-than-honest reporting about
7 Tanner" was being mentioned by Phil Innes?
7
7 About two weeks ago, I wrote:
7
7 "... I have seen an 'announcements' page
7 that contained a link for details about the
7 recent resignation. Is that where the
7 supposedly 'less-than-honest reporting
7 about Tanner' can be accessed? (The
7 'report' begins: 'On Dec. 4, 2006, USCF
7 Executive Board Secretary Robert B.
7 Tanner resigned. ...')
7
7 Would Phil Innes care to be specific about
7 which previous Phil Innes note supposedly
7 referred to 'their public announcements'? ..."
7 - Louis Blair (15 Dec 2006 10:44:37 -0800)
7
7 I still have not seen Phil Innes answer those questions.

_
Snipping all but the last line above,
Phil Innes wrote (Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:44:58 GMT):

7 Perhaps they could therefore be made more prominent,
7 and not at the end of another thousand word message
7 in duplicate.

_
If Phil Innes could find his way to the last line of my note,
he is certainly capable of finding the questions that were
just above it. Moreover, some of the questions were
reproduced from my shorter 15 Dec 2006 10:44:37 -0800
note and still not answered by Phil Innes.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:44:58 GMT):

7 And they could also say why they are being requested
7 after being cut by the requestor!

_
Phil Innes, of course, is not clear and specific about what
was supposedly cut, when it was cut, and from what it was
cut.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:44:58 GMT):

7 In short - who are you kidding Blair? What do you care
7 for the issue - you forgot to say.

_
"... We learned [that Phil Innes was referring to
Herbert Vaughn as the moderator] by seeking
specifics from Phil Innes. Phil Innes may
consider it to be a waste of time for us to learn
such things, but I disagree. After all, Herbert
Vaughn is not the moderator. ..." - Louis Blair
(17 Dec 2006 13:37:28 -0800)
_
"... My current interest, at the moment, is to
correct the misleading Phil Innes statements."
- Louis Blair (17 Dec 2006 14:58:58 -0800)

_
Phil Innes wrote (Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:44:58 GMT):

7 I have still not seen answers to questions put to you
7 about Morphy, which you state you do not feel obliged
7 to answer. Let your own standard be your guide, unless
7 your response is a formal plea for double standards.

_
My standard is that one should be prepared to be
specific about the charge and the evidence when making
a public attack. Asking for such specifics does not
oblige one to respond to every random question that
comes along.