View Single Post
  #67  
Old November 14th 07, 01:41 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
parrthenon@cs.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,488
Default The Devil's Disciple

WHY DID KINGSTON TELL LAURIE TO KEEP IT CONFIDENTIAL?

One of NMnot Taylor Kingston's trademarks is to
explain away cowardice (his obvious horror of losing a
match to Sam Sloan) and rank intellectual dishonesty
(writing under false names IN PRAISE OF HIMSELF) with
a series of shifting or absurd explanations and justifications.

What follows is a bit of past history. NMnot Kingston
told us that he marked his correspondence with Richard
Laurie "Confidential" because ... well, here is his reason:

The reason should be obvious to anyone familiar with Mr. Parr's newsgroup

tactics, with which by then I was thoroughly familiar. I knew that if
Laurie told Evans, Evans would tell Parr, and Parr would mount a smear
campaign,
misrepresenting my correspondence with Mr. Laurie. -- Taylor
Kingston, May 23, 2005

NMnot Kingston feared a smear campaign; therefore, the gent
preferred to keep his pristine, totally innocent correspondence
private. Nonsense. He could defend innocence, but what he could not
defend was what playwright Laurie smelled.

Smelled? That was the excuse NMnot Kingston used to avoid
playing Sam Sloan. He jabbered to us that he feared his olfactory
senses would be offended by breathing the same air in the same room
with Sam. The actual reason why our self-proclaimed, 2300+ Elo NMnot
refused to play 1900-or-so rated Sam for four-figure money was obvious
to everyone else.

We continue with yet another NMnot excuse for trying to keep his
e-mails with Richard Laurie from ever seeing the light of day. Like a
good defense lawyer, he tailored his responses as the pressure
mounted.

[But] the first time around Mr. Kingston claimed he marked many of
his letters CONFIDENTIAL and that it had no special significance. --
Larry Parr

That is also true. I was trying to spare your feelings, Larry,
then I realized you have none. If you consider this condemnatory, I'm
sorry. ;-D -- Taylor Kingston

Readers will judge for themselves whether NMnot acted to spare
this writer's feelings. Yet another lie replete with the man's proud
contumely.

NMnot Kingston tells us he has "standards."

WE ASK ONCE AGAIN: Did our NMnot post under false names on this
forum (Xylothist, Paulie Graf) in PRAISE OF HIMSELF, for Pete's
sake? Does he regard self-praise using false monickers as an example
of his "standards."

He won't answer. Never has. Never will.

Finally, we ask that he make ALL of his e-mails with Richard
Laurie public, not just the "relevant" portions that he wants us to
see so we can compare them with the e-mails that Laurie actually
received. Let there be no gaps a la president Richard Nixon.

Yours, Larry Parr




wrote:
LAURIE REBUTS KINGSTON'S VERSION OF EVENTS

[Playwright Richard Laurie just authorized me to post this message.]

"When I refused to retract my letter to Chess Life, Taylor Kingston
told me, in effect, that I was even more evil than Larry Evans. That
was the last I heard from him directly. I will keep looking for his e-
mails to me. It is largely a matter of time. I have them somewhere
and will keep searching." -- Richard Laurie


Ads
 

Car Insurance - Buy Anything On eBay - Debt Help - Loan - Free Advertising