From: (Nick)
Date: 26/08/03 23:20 GMT Daylight Time
Message-id:

-remove- (Mhoulsby) wrote in message
...
From: illspam (NoMoreChess)
Date: 29/07/03 03:49 GMT Daylight Time
Message-id:
(snipped)
While my "help" may be quite unnecessary for that, I will point out that
my
quote of Nick's statement in no way referred to only Stan Booz and
Briarroot,
as Mr. Lickspittle has it. Obviously, this *distortion* is the result of a
lack of reading skill by Dorkus, who is in a tizzy over his hero having
been
hoist on his own petard.

Dear Mr. Houlsby,

Although occasionally you have misread me, in my authoritative judgement as
the writer, you consistently read my posts more honestly, accurately, and
insightfully than NoMoreChess, as evident by contrasting some of his posts
and yours about mine.


Not only have I misread you occasionally, I have sometimes read you accurately,
but (owing chiefly to the scope of my ignorance, which is regrettably
considerable) completely failed to avoid *misinterpreting* what you have
written, particularly with respect to those subjects about which you know more
than I do....

BTW, it was Nick who asserted that *all* the critics and (American)
political activists here were ganging up on him unfairly because he was
an "outsider," and it was also Nick who explained that they did this
because they were all white, flag-waving, psuedo-patriotic American
racists.

That's another distortion by NoMoreChess; I made no such assertion.
My statement about StanB and "his *fellow* American political activists here"

was intended to refer *only* to a few writers here who have expressed their
*fellowship* (or agreement) with StanB's jingoistic or racist comments: the
other members of his evident political clique are Tim Hanke and "Briarroot".

I don't agree. Not entirely, that is. A few of Nick's critics do not fit
that mold. Some of them were not motivated by Nick's alleged status as
an "outsider," and in fact, have no interest in where he is from. They
simply found fault with something he wrote, and got carelessly tossed into
a bucket with the others by Nick, who mislabelled them all the same.

Can NoMoreChess name any of these alleged critics of mine (apart from Tim
Hanke, Stan Booz, and "Briarroot") and cite evidence that I have "mislabelled
them all the same"? Who are they? Michael Adams on occasion, perhaps?
He's an Aussie, and I know that he could not be a jingoistic American.

Mark Houlsby wrote:
Which of these people is *not* caucasian?

I wouldn't know. Do you track such things for Nick?
May I suggest some additional tracking questions: (snipped)
Don't worry, Nick and his lickspittle will not use this info for any
purpose other than their ad hominem attacks here on these newsgroups.

Give an example of one of these, if you please.

May silence be considered evidence?

Ok then, name *any* of Bourbaki's non-White vociferous vituperative
critics.

May silence be considered evidence?

'He is no fool, but his sense consists chiefly in holding his tongue.'

I tried that once, but it made my eyes water....

Mark