On Oct 15, 9:00 am, Mike Murray wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 04:47:54 -0700, The Historian

wrote:
This doesn't get dull.
No, but it does remind me of why I'm not involved in chess aside from
historical research.

When does "commentary on current events" end and "historical research"
begin?

As far as commentary on these current events, we've dwindled from a
promising discussion on identity theft and the Polgar Problem to
arguing with Innes and Mitchell, which is an activity as useful as
arguing with Sam Sloan. I'd prefer to let the dust settle before
saying more; then we can harvest the wheat from amid the Innes/
Mitchell/Gordon/Roberts/Sloan chaff.

I feel like we're standing on the grassy knoll. Or, maybe,
making posts about Russia in 1921.

I don't. The dirty tricks have been going on for years. Recall "Bob
Bennett" and the phony PhD?