Chess One wrote:

:

isn't that /really/ strange!

--Not 'arf as strange as the 'Carrick Roads'. Them be real strange, deep
& unfathomable currents - Philsky..

Howard..

Phil Innes wrote (Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:27:30 GMT):
7 ... its interesting to think that people who will not even
7 discuss their own attitudes without resorting to name
7 -calling can be entirely confident that their public
7 behavior is well seen to be other than their private stuff
7 ...
_
I wrote (8 Nov 2006 08:21:37 -0800):
7 "... the guy is a ****." - Phil Innes (Thu,
7 02 Nov 2006 21:22:00 GMT)
7
7 "... you idiotic reprobate!" - Phil Innes
7 (Fri, 03 Nov 2006 23:55:59 GMT)
7
7 "... writes as a nincompoop!" - Phil Innes
7 (Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:25:38 GMT)
_
Phil Innes wrote (Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:19:23 GMT):
7 Don't cut the context Blair - or you too join the ranks of
7 pale commentators, too shy to say if they would, eg,
7 exempt a person's family members from the grossest
7 possible material that could be suggested.
7
7 That's is where you are now, bucko! ...
_
I wrote (8 Nov 2006 15:00:13 -0800):
7 Phil Innes has cut context from notes of mine. Does that
7 mean that he has "join"ed "the ranks of pale commentators,
7 too shy to say if they would, eg, exempt a person's family
7 members from the grossest possible material that could
7 be suggested"?

_
Phil Innes wrote (Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:03:30 GMT):

7 No.
7
7 Your contexts are insufferably thousands of words long,
7 and are in no way any justification for you to mix these
7 two issues to do with family abuse, and long-winded
7 inventive collations.

_
It was Phil Innes, not me, who chose to "mix" "family
abuse" with this discussion. I see no "justification" for
him to do so.

_
I wrote (8 Nov 2006 15:00:13 -0800):
7 Assertions are not true just because Phil Innes makes
7 them.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:03:30 GMT):

7 That's wrong! Assertions are not //necessarily// true
7 because anyone 'makes them'!
7
7 As well as utterly specious logic, Blair's sentence is also
7 tautological.

_
Assertions are not true just because Phil Innes makes them.

_
I wrote (8 Nov 2006 15:00:13 -0800):
7 Right now, I am simply in the position of not knowing what
7 Phil Innes is talking about.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:03:30 GMT):

7 Then shut up.

_
Phil Innes has no authority to give orders.

"michael adams" wrote in message
...
Chess One wrote:

:

isn't that /really/ strange!

--Not 'arf as strange as the 'Carrick Roads'. Them be real strange, deep
& unfathomable currents - Philsky..

Howard..

Dear 'Oward, my ansom

Bit of yer Trissy and Isolde wus sposed be up the top end near Sunny Corner
where ee rowed er across, dinna? Saw pictures of the 4 or 5 arched stone
bridge at Ruan Lanihorne 'Sett Bridge' recently, near St. Micky Penkevil.
Must be 10 miles up there and still tidal. Just south of'n is Trethella,
Trelonk and Treworga, which is how you get down the StJ Roseland
peninsula -- stayed on lord falmouth's estate once, pheasants.

Ever go courtin up by Treworran Woods did ee? You went see Digby in those
parts since ees too short, and they went av they up there, so eed better
stay in town, dunna?

Least I never threatened to throw young Mick in the Fal - that's awful! Do
you got any game scores ave you?

Lord Roxeburghe.

Chess One wrote:

--Not 'arf as strange as the 'Carrick Roads'. Them be real strange, deep
& unfathomable currents - Philsky..

Howard..

Dear 'Oward, my ansom

Bit of yer Trissy and Isolde wus sposed be up the top end near Sunny Corner
where ee rowed er across, dinna? Saw pictures of the 4 or 5 arched stone
bridge at Ruan Lanihorne 'Sett Bridge' recently, near St. Micky Penkevil.
Must be 10 miles up there and still tidal. Just south of'n is Trethella,
Trelonk and Treworga, which is how you get down the StJ Roseland
peninsula -- stayed on lord falmouth's estate once, pheasants.

Ever go courtin up by Treworran Woods did ee? You went see Digby in those
parts since ees too short, and they went av they up there, so eed better
stay in town, dunna?


Aye, y'all got one heckuva strong British accent, 'aven't
ya now? Sposin' you two pirates put down yer mugs o'
rum, an' lern ta speak English proper like, eh? Then ya
kin kummunikate with us'n intullecktials on are eluvated
levul, mateys. An' iffin you like the British isles so much,
what are ya doing here, in 'Murica? You ought to know
that in my heyday, we taught y'all a lessun by tossin' yer
tea overboard, inta the 'arbor! Remember the Maine!
Fifty-four fourty of fight! We won't go home, 'till it's over
over there! (quite a tussle, that one). (Gawd, am I tired of
fighting overseas. Why can't y'all come here to fight us?)

One thing's fer certain su that ol' Mickey Adams has
been out ta sea too long. His accent is stronger than a
blue whale. What good is it ta have a common language,
when one of the parties of the first part mucks it all up soes
the party of the second part canna unurstan halfa what he
sez mosta the time? Git an edukation, willya? I done it,
so any fool can.

-- help bot

Let me back up Neil in general here, while disagreeing in one
particular. Neil has every right to call himself a chess historian. He
is an excellent chess historian, and was willing to give me helpful
advice even when I did not know some of the basics of the field. Neil
has been writing interesting articles about characters from the history
of chess for many years, and I am sad that they will not be able to be
made available, for free, to the public as they were for many years
because of copyright infringement.

On the other hand, I do not feel that I was continually trashed in the
newsgroups. My first writing on chess history came in the newsgroups,
and the positive feedback I got played a major part in helping me
become more serious about the subject. In its own strange way,
rec.games.chess is a very welcoming place. In my case, I found it to
be a nice, and very non-threatening, place to "publish" my first work.
Even the fact that there is so much nonsense printed here is useful,
since it helped make me confident that I was not bringing down the
level of conversation even when (and this happened fairly often in my
early posts in chess history) I wrote things that turned out to be
inaccurate after more research had been done.

Incidentally, I have pretty much dropped of r.g.c.m. not because I am
disappointed with it, but because my computer no longer supports my old
newsreader. I find it harder to keep up with issues I want to look at
through google. For old times sake, I will try to start a whimsical
thread related to chess history elsewhere.

Jerry Spinrad

Rob wrote:



." When one crab
tries to crawl out of the bucket, the other crabs pull him back inside.
Why do you think chess historians such as Winter, myself, Spinrad, etc,
are continually trashed on the newsgroups? The other crabs want to pull us
back to their level.

LOL!!!

Brennen thinks he is the equal of Winter and Spinrad! Well the only
thing accurate in is post is that he admits he has and is a crab!


Actually you are attacked HisTrollian because you always attempt to
silence anyone with a differing opinion than your own. You are a huge
internet bully and a newsgroup fascist in my opinion as is exibited by
your behaivor.

wrote:
Let me back up Neil in general here, while disagreeing in one
particular. Neil has every right to call himself a chess historian.

Thank you.

He
is an excellent chess historian, and was willing to give me helpful
advice even when I did not know some of the basics of the field.

Jerry, I would much rather read good chess history than write it. I
enjoy your work a great deal. Please keep writing.

Neil
has been writing interesting articles about characters from the history
of chess for many years, and I am sad that they will not be able to be
made available, for free, to the public as they were for many years
because of copyright infringement.

Thanks to the outpouring of support I had during the recent theft of my
copyrighted material, I was persuaded to let my online publishers
restore my work to their webpages. Incidentally, you've responded to
the thief, a man very appropriately named "Rob."

I should mention that my work often appears in print magazines as well.
For instance, a two part essay on chess in Atlanta is now appearing in
Georgia Chess. GC has also accepted two other articles for future
publication. Meanwhile, I have articles drafted I am submitting to
Chess Life and The Chess Journalist. I mention this merely to feed my
personal trolls.

On the other hand, I do not feel that I was continually trashed in the
newsgroups.

I had in mind Nick's flaming of you, and the offers of 'help' from the
Nearly an IM 2450. Getting such 'aid' from Innes is like inviting
Lucrezia Borgia to help you cook.

My first writing on chess history came in the newsgroups,
and the positive feedback I got played a major part in helping me
become more serious about the subject. In its own strange way,
rec.games.chess is a very welcoming place. In my case, I found it to
be a nice, and very non-threatening, place to "publish" my first work.
Even the fact that there is so much nonsense printed here is useful,
since it helped make me confident that I was not bringing down the
level of conversation even when (and this happened fairly often in my
early posts in chess history) I wrote things that turned out to be
inaccurate after more research had been done.

It's hard to bring down the level of the chess groups. Witness the
witless comment below:

"In short: I have not found a single first-hand refererence nor
artifact which would
verify that the event [Cambridge Springs 1904] ever took place." - Phil
Innes

After that, there is no place to go but up.

Incidentally, I have pretty much dropped of r.g.c.m. not because I am
disappointed with it, but because my computer no longer supports my old
newsreader. I find it harder to keep up with issues I want to look at
through google. For old times sake, I will try to start a whimsical
thread related to chess history elsewhere.

Jerry Spinrad

Thank you, Jerry. It's always good to hear kind words from a peer.

The Historian wrote:
I lie.

"The Historian" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Let me back up Neil in general here, while disagreeing in one
particular. Neil has every right to call himself a chess historian.

Thank you.

He
is an excellent chess historian, and was willing to give me helpful
advice even when I did not know some of the basics of the field.

Jerry, I would much rather read good chess history than write it. I
enjoy your work a great deal. Please keep writing.

Neil
has been writing interesting articles about characters from the history
of chess for many years, and I am sad that they will not be able to be
made available, for free, to the public as they were for many years
because of copyright infringement.

Thanks to the outpouring of support I had during the recent theft of my
copyrighted material, I was persuaded to let my online publishers
restore my work to their webpages.

To which they declined )

Incidentally, you've responded to
the thief, a man very appropriately named "Rob."

I should mention that my work often appears in print magazines as well.
For instance, a two part essay on chess in Atlanta is now appearing in
Georgia Chess. GC has also accepted two other articles for future
publication. Meanwhile, I have articles drafted I am submitting to
Chess Life and The Chess Journalist. I mention this merely to feed my
personal trolls.

This particular 'troll' is nonplussed by such self promotion. A Chess Life
/submission/? - and the Chess-Jerry, the famous CJA publication which has
the ethical stance of a -- well! George Clooney would disagree!

On the other hand, I do not feel that I was continually trashed in the
newsgroups.

I had in mind Nick's flaming of you, and the offers of 'help' from the
Nearly an IM 2450. Getting such 'aid' from Innes is like inviting
Lucrezia Borgia to help you cook.

Is it like that? This moron has prognoisticated that, after inviting me to
show him a game, that it was 'not master chess', from his viewpoint of a
1500 player, not even that my opponent had beaten the great Frank Marshall
and all the NY crowd at the time.

Otherwise I never noticed that he wrote about chess at all - not in 5 years


Of course, Jerry can make up his own mind about this writer who thought he
could even correct Jenn Shahade's book to what she should have written as a
woman, about being a woman in chess, but to quote her direct reply on the
phone would burn your screen.

And, I think, this is enough of this malicious climber, who sucks up to
whatever he thinks will advance his librarian's writing, understanding just
a little vicariously, and understanding even less than Kingston.

This guy is a lair, a stalker, and out-and-out chess-nazi, Spinrad.

I sincerely hope you don't need someone like this to buck up your
self-esteem, and will not reply mentioning that he has written about dead
'b' players of note.

Ker-ist!

Phil Innes

My first writing on chess history came in the newsgroups,
and the positive feedback I got played a major part in helping me
become more serious about the subject. In its own strange way,
rec.games.chess is a very welcoming place. In my case, I found it to
be a nice, and very non-threatening, place to "publish" my first work.
Even the fact that there is so much nonsense printed here is useful,
since it helped make me confident that I was not bringing down the
level of conversation even when (and this happened fairly often in my
early posts in chess history) I wrote things that turned out to be
inaccurate after more research had been done.

It's hard to bring down the level of the chess groups. Witness the
witless comment below:

"In short: I have not found a single first-hand refererence nor
artifact which would
verify that the event [Cambridge Springs 1904] ever took place." - Phil
Innes

After that, there is no place to go but up.

Incidentally, I have pretty much dropped of r.g.c.m. not because I am
disappointed with it, but because my computer no longer supports my old
newsreader. I find it harder to keep up with issues I want to look at
through google. For old times sake, I will try to start a whimsical
thread related to chess history elsewhere.

Jerry Spinrad

Thank you, Jerry. It's always good to hear kind words from a peer.