Chess One wrote:
This is a chess newsgroup Murray - if the dirty vicar here wants to snip
references and admonitions to him to discuss chess, and insist that others
are terrible, he would be just like any other flash newbie, and those who
never got past the very self-satisfied clever level... but then he won't be
like you, and Brennan, will he, since that's all you do - and as you know,
there is safety in numbers. 'Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil.'
You'd better protest more, otherwise you'll lose him if he dared actually
talk chess. Do /you/ play, by the way? Do you like it?

I 'snipped' several of your entries earlier because you filled them with
incoherent insults -- as you did above. You don't like being snipped.
One alternative you could pursue is to write more civilly and depend
less on insulting people. The paragraph above is difficult to parse.
It is clear you are upset, and you are attempting to abuse me again. I
will not ask you for an apology this time. It would be a wasted effort.

I see once again you are attempting to control the discourse here by
insisting that it be about 'playing chess.' Nevertheless, I did answer
this question here some time ago. I will not go over it again, but if
you have skill with the archives, you should have no problem retrieving
it. I hope you are aware that chess culture has far more to it than just
playing rated tournament games...

You see, admonishing others to do things you don't do yourself is
hypocritical, whether you wear a dog-collar or a ten-gallon hat.

You will have to be more specific Mr. Innes. What admonishment are you
talking about? Since I do not know what you are referring to I have no
way to address your claim of hypocrisy other than to suggest you learn
to write with more clarity. How does your reference to hats and collars
have anything to do with it?

Phil Innes

I have tried to take something positive out of this. I noted that you
expressed disdain for my signature. I have changed it for your sake.
--


Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.

" If only Phil [Innes] would apologize to the group, admit he's
substituted bombast for reasoned discourse, promise to conduct
rationally these discussions in the future, eschew exhibitionist use of
foreign phrases, and, last but not least, commit to a spell-checker,
we'd welcome him back into the communion of chess fans." -- Mike Murray