Nick wrote:

Briarroot wrote in message
...
Nick (The Pedantic Twit) wrote:
"Tim Hanke" wrote in message
t.net...
"Nick" wrote .

Ludicrous racist accusations warrant no response beyond disdain.
Only racists would believe that those accusations could be true,
and those racists would not be convinced by any denials of them.

Only a pedantic twit would call these gibes "accusations."
And only someone with a massive ego problem would not have
laughed off this **** and moved on, weeks ago.

Unlike Briarroot, evidently, I have a busy schedule full of better things to
do than to reply *immediately* to every post here.

So you say. Yet you seem to have time to make inane 'corrections'
to your own posts weeks after they originally appeared, as if they
were somehow important in the grand scheme of things. You must be
a legend in your own mind. I find you pathetic.

Here's the complete context of the "discussion" about me among
StanB, Tim Hanke, and Briarroot in this thread:

On 25 May 2003, StanB wrote to me (his complete original post, quotes
snipped):
"I ask you this Bwana Nick, have you ever eaten pygmy?
StanB"

On 9 June 2003, Tim Hanke wrote to me (his complete original post, link
snipped)
"Let the record show that Bwana Nick does not deny eating pygmy.
Tim Hanke"

On 10 June 2003, Briarroot wrote (his complete original post, link snipped):
"The only remaining question is: does Nick prefer boiled, baked or barbecued
pygmy? LMAO"

How can you deny this was a jibe against you? There is no implied
racism here, just a clearly stated lack of respect for you.


It should be noted that Briarroot now has admitted contributing "this ****"
to rec.games.chess.misc. It should also be noted that Briarroot regards
"this ****" as hilarious (e.g. "LMAO", "laughed off").

No sane person would take this stuff as seriously as you seem to.


On 11 May 2003 in the thread, 'Zhang Zhong revisited', Briarroot wrote:
"Well I may be completely wrong, what does it matter?"

Oh-ho! Aren't you the one always complaining that I snip the relevant
portions of posts when replying. I see you have no scruples in this
regard. You are clearly prevaricating here since you are fully aware
that this is taken out of context, but that is your habit, isn't it?
You are a liar and a phony, who attempts to appear as an intellectual
but whose standards of proof and logic are really tilted in favor of
your own tired arguments.

The proper context of the above statement was in Mark Houlsby's and
my attempt to determine your home country (something you wish to keep
hidden). I was speculating that you were from Europe, but admitted
that it didn't matter, because where ever you are from, I am sure
that your homeland's history of racism, brutality and naked aggression
is little different from America's.


Briarroot seems to have admitted to a lack of standards in writing his
posts.
That admission might imply that Briarroot intends to keep writing "this
****"
to rec.games.chess.misc, even though everyone else may agree that he is (and
has been) "completely wrong". But "what does it matter" to Briarroot?

Most other people reading that post, would take me to mean that the
thread is pointless except as an arena for our personal slagging match.
But, as you continue to demonstrate, you are unable to Observe the
Obvious.

As someone else here put it, Briarroot is "beneath human dispute".

Which is bad grammar. Perhaps he meant that 'Briarroot is beneath
human contempt' which would only be redundant; or perhaps he meant
that 'Briarroot is not worth disputing with' which would merely be
irrelevant, as you keep proving.