(Don Mihokovich) wrote in message . com...
O.k. guys. This subject has been discussed ad nauseum, and the
election is over. Unless Tim makes some new "culturally prejudiced"
remarks that are newsworthy, why don't we just put this to rest? It's
time to try to work together.

"La politique c'est comme l'andouillette, ca doit sentir un peu la merde,
mais pas trop."
--Edouard Herriot (1872-1957)

Mr. Mihokovich,

I write on behalf of myself, no one else. Mark Houlsby and I have expressed
our differences at times, lately in the thread, "Alexander Zaitsev".

I have no interest in USCF politics; I did not follow the USCF election.
I don't care about the perpetual conflicts among the USCF Executive Board
members (or candidate members)--past, present, or future. I expect that
the USCF Executive Board's decisions, whatever they might be, will have no
influence on my enjoyment of chess.

I don't know much about you. As far as I have noticed, you seem to be a
USCF politician (or a political activist), who tends to act, as most
politicians do, according to political expediency.

Before the USCF election, you created this thread, "Tim Hanke's Cultural
Prejudice", and cross-posted it from rec.games.chess.politics (where it
belonged) to rec.games.chess.misc (where I became aware of it) in order,
evidently, to make a political campaign attack on Tim Hanke.

After the USCF election, you seem to have decided that it's expedient to
embrace Tim Hanke and his supporters. Recently, you created the widely
(and unnecessarily) cross-posted off-topic thread, "Core Values", in order,
evidently, to make a "flag-waving" attack on Noah Roberts. By the way, can
you please explain why the readers of rec.games.chess.computer should take
interest in the ongoing arguments about the values of the United States flag?

Here's my primary interest in this matter:

Tim Hanke created the thread, "Nick Bourbaki's Many Lies", to make a baseless
ad hominem attack on me. Tim Hanke has *not* provided evidence of my alleged
"many lies" about him. Also, Tim Hanke has *not* retracted his accusation,
and Tim Hanke has *not* apologised. Although perhaps not in your eyes,
Tim Hanke's misbehaviour brings dishonour only to him, none to me.

I have no connection to USCF politics. Mark Houlsby often has asked Tim
Hanke and his zealous supporters, Briarroot and StanB, why they continue
to make ad hominem attacks on me, when I could not care less about whatever
they do in rec.games.chess.politics--as long as they leave my name out of it.
As far as I know, Mark Houlsby has not received an explanation from them.
My impression is that Mark Houlsby has decided to write many posts in my
defence not because he always agrees with me (sometimes we have disagreed
on specific issues in public here) but because he regards me as a honest
writer who has been unjustly and flagrantly abused.

I have no interest whatsoever in the personal lives or careers of anyone
else who writes here. I don't understand why persons such as StanB and
Briarroot, who has written at length about it, seem to have become so
obsessed in speculating about my personal identity and national origin(s).

If Tim Hanke, StanB, and Briarroot are each ready to make full unqualified
retractions of and apologies for their many abusive statements to and about
me, then they will be free, as far as I am concerned, to fight with their
USCF political enemies to their hearts' content without any interference
from me. I reserve the right to respond to anything that they already have
written to or about me. If they stop writing to or about me, then I shall
stop after I have completed my responses.

I cannot promise that whatever I may write will conform to your latest
perceived political interests. That may disappoint you, but most politicians
have to learn to live with disappointments.

"'It's always best on these occasions to do what the mob do.'
'But suppose there are two mobs?' 'Shout with the largest.'"
--Charles Dickens (Pickwick Papers)

--Nick