"Mark Houlsby" wrote in message
oups.com...

Chess One wrote:

"Mark Houlsby" wrote in message
ups.com...

Don't ask more questions,
since you merely abuse people's attention, and you prove yourself
incapable
of writing to a topic without personal abuse.


Demonstrate this.

I have no need to demonstrate it /further/.

You /do/ need to demonstrate it, Phil. You /need/ to /demonstrate/ that
your /accusation/ that /every time/ I wriite about a topic, I am
abusive, is /true/. If you can't do that, then you will have been
caught, red-faced, yet again.

Mark - you are such a dunce that you do not recognise that by again ignoring
the thread's context in preference to exclaiming why, in your exalted
opinion, other people owe your majesty something, you proclaim yourself no
more than the usual abuse nutter. I think you have failed to understand
this, since others of the same stripe support your repression of chess
topics, and you are so very dependent on the opinion of other people.

Since the challenge is to write
about chess, and the topic is Sloan's board tenancy, and you repond to a
cue
to write about that by demanding that others explain to you further,
there
is an ipso facto absolute failure to understand what a topic is.


More nonsense from Innes.

More 'refusal' from junior holesby who admits here he cannot write to any
topic, refuses the challenge, and is shown to be without need of further
response, as I said before.

PI


You have now placed an obligation upon yourself to
prove that
every single topic to which I contribute contains at least one example
of abuse.

Actually, it is you who place an obligation on me to prove something, but
you can't even demonstrate you know what on-topic, and off-topic means.
Therefore you ask for something which you yourself are unable to do.


Yet more nonsense.

You ACCUSE me of writing ABUSE /every time/ I post. If you can't
demonstrate that it's /true/ that I write abuse all the time, then you
look like an imbecile. Again.

Seek applause from those who like that, but not from adults.


Why do you insult children? Is it absolutely necessary? I've known
several three-year-olds who are much smarter than you...

Perhaps restrict yourself to conversing with them in future, if this
material is too hard?

Demonstrate that I write abuse in my every post, Phil.

Or try going back to the first thread and responding
to the topic.

When I respond to the topic, you fail to answer satisfactorily. When I
write aphoristically, you fail to answer. We have covered this ground
many times, but it never penetrates your thick skull. Many people have
noticed this tendency of yours, Phil. These people include:

Louis Blair, Engineer, Kenneth Sloan, Chess Freak, Guy Macon, Greg
Kennedy, Christopher Mattern, rexartu..., Taylor Kingston, Neil
Brennen, Steve Dowd, Mike Murray, James Rynd, Matt Nemmers, David
Richerby, Mark Wing, Henri H. Arsenault, vkarlamov, Wick Deer, Larry
Tapper, g4, Tom Martinak, Randy Bauer, Vince Hart, Don Schultz, Bill
Brock, David Kane, Joel Channing, parker.r..., sivad..., Stan Booz,...


Its a choice. Some people truly don't care for topics and all
they write about is why other people shouldn't write, like demented
commissars on a mission.


Now, you see, therein lies the problem you have set for yourself. You
must now demonstrate that I "truly don't care" for *any* of the thread
topics in which I make contributions. If you can't do that, you'll look
like an imbecile, yet again.

I think that's a challenge to you - which you need not accept, and by the
same measure I shall safely ignore all your future messages since our
interest differ to such extent they do not overlap.


Chessville, Phil? I write there. You write there. You make Chessville
look so **** that sometimes people feel constrained to write open
letters to the powers-that-be there, pleading for your removal. That is
bad. You are mentally ill. Go see a psychiatrist.

Mark Houlsby

Phil Innes