Brennen simply won't give up, and here he makes further suggestions that are
completely indecent.

Brennen is such a dirty fellow he now suggests that I would write filth
about my family. I ask anyone here, why would Brennen suggest these things?
How curious?

One poster, most probably Innes himself, under the name "xagnnon".
Also, the posts appeared after altercations with Wick Deer, James Eade,
Frank Niro, and others. I'm not aware Innes has villified anyone but me
for them, however.

I simply offer this notice of a matter of fact. Should this complaint
prove
insufficient I suppose I could resurrect another stalking [this time of a
woman] by Brennen from another newsgroup.

Again, have you gotten permission from the woman in question to
republish her newsgroup posts? And have you asked her if she agreed
with your use of the term "stalked"? I know you can't answer these
questions truthfully, because I know the answers to them, but I thought
I'd remind you of them.

ROFL! Brennen thinks we must have 'permission' to use particular words to
characterise his behavior, presumably because the person he stalked herself
used "goading", "hounding" and "vilifying" and these are insufficiently
unclear to count as stalking?

Should any person think me unfair or inventive in my usage of 'stalking' I
shall certainly reprint her full text here. Brennen is already afraid of
that so he attempts to pre-emptively resist it.

I do wish to say that I have not done so on this occasion since this person
craves any sort of attention at all - but perhaps a little bit more is
necessary since there appears to be some dispute on what is true. And it
would certainly save anyone else any amount of time in deciding who is
talking straight and who ain't.

Phil Innes

Catalan wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...

And to note: If he should ever mention my family in a hostile way
...... I will make a phone call to family friends in Philly.

They're the Mitchell's that were saved by the guy that killed the
****-eating dog?

Stan, I did not authorize you to post that! Bad Stan! Bad, bad Stan!

Goran Tomic wrote:
"The Histerian" wrote in message
oups.com...


"Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."

I must not count as anyone.

1. Did you undersigned your text as Neil Brennen or with false name?
Answer: With false name!

If so, what name did I use?

2. Did you wrote about yourself?

????

3. Did the post was truthful?
Answer: No, it was false post.

Do you dispute the additions I made? Mr. Sloan's felony conviction is
true, Goran. So is his ban from the securities industry. And the
kidnapping.

4. Why did Wikipedia's editor named you and you thief's fellow Mr Kingston
as VANDAL? Do you mean that's some type of compliment?

Can you show me in the Wikipedia news release where I am named?

5. Why they changed post's rules?
Answer: Because you and your thief's fellow Mr Kingston!

You're zero for five so far.

Chess One wrote:
Brennen simply won't give up, and here he makes further suggestions that are
completely indecent.

Brennen is such a dirty fellow he now suggests that I would write filth
about my family. I ask anyone here, why would Brennen suggest these things?
How curious?

Only as an possible reason you never attempted to determine the author
of the "xganon" posts. BTW, did you ever contact the remailing service
xganon.com about the abuse?

One poster, most probably Innes himself, under the name "xagnnon".
Also, the posts appeared after altercations with Wick Deer, James Eade,
Frank Niro, and others. I'm not aware Innes has villified anyone but me
for them, however.

I simply offer this notice of a matter of fact. Should this complaint
prove
insufficient I suppose I could resurrect another stalking [this time of a
woman] by Brennen from another newsgroup.

Again, have you gotten permission from the woman in question to
republish her newsgroup posts? And have you asked her if she agreed
with your use of the term "stalked"? I know you can't answer these
questions truthfully, because I know the answers to them, but I thought
I'd remind you of them.

ROFL! Brennen thinks we must have 'permission' to use particular words to
characterise his behavior, presumably because the person he stalked herself
used "goading", "hounding" and "vilifying" and these are insufficiently
unclear to count as stalking?

Stalking has a legal meaning you seem to be aware of but insist on
using when it isn't warrented. Meanwhile this poor woman has had her
name and email address used by you on chess newsgroups swarming with
cranks like Goran. You've also implied she agrees with you; again, have
you contacted her?

Should any person think me unfair or inventive in my usage of 'stalking' I
shall certainly reprint her full text here. Brennen is already afraid of
that so he attempts to pre-emptively resist it.

If you wish to bore us with it again, please do so. May I ask that you
remove the woman's name and email address this time?

I assume that you will then resort to posting under another moniker at that
point.

Apparently this goes to the root of the problem; many people criticize
Phil; Phil can't be bad; therefore it is one or two people posting
under one set of names to discredit Phil.

The history of these attacks has nothing to do with names. It has to do
with the fact that anyone hanging around here long enough, and without
some sort of agenda to promote, simply finds him insufferable;
insufferably stupid about chess and just about everything else. So
after a while you become like the Historiam and call him on his crap
daily.

I propose we call this affliction, Innitis. How about we use Phil's
asthma cure- tobacco? At least then our nerves will be calmed before
reading his posts.

That raises the questions of on which rating system and when this 2450
was obtained. Can you provide a rough date and rating system so that we
can try to find verification for your claim?

No Tom. I choose not to.

I'm sorry that you aren't interested in providing that basic
information. If it was a USCF or FIDE rating I would have gladly helped
to provide you and post here the exact facts (just as I helped Mr
Kingston in getting the exact facts about his peak USCF Postal Rating
and position in the annual top postal list). I would probably not have
been able to help with a British rating, but a request on the newsgroup
would likely have found someone willing and able to do that. It is nice
when factual issues are called into question to know who is factually
correct. Especially when someone else is willing to do the work in
trying to find those facts.

- Tom Martinak

Goran Tomic wrote:
I think that you don't deserve any explanation. The first reason is because
you and Mr. Kingston were cached like two miserable thieves with false posts
under false nicknames in Wikipedia.

Not that I think anyone believes Tomic, but just for the record, I
have never posted anything at all on Wikipedia.

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


"Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."

I must not count as anyone.

1. Did you undersigned your text as Neil Brennen or with false name?
Answer: With false name!

2. Did you wrote about yourself?

3. Did the post was truthful?
Answer: No, it was false post.

4. Why did Wikipedia's editor named you and you thief's fellow Mr Kingston
as VANDAL? Do you mean that's some type of compliment?

5. Why they changed post's rules?
Answer: Because you and your thief's fellow Mr Kingston!

So everything is clear. You dont need to give your explanation! Everybody
know: You and Mr Kingston are thieves. We don't like that thieves are on
this newsgroup. There are young children and mother who can think that all
chess players are thieves like you and Mr Kingston. So, that's my last
appeal in the name of future generation, thousand chess players, masters,
grandmasters and ches fans. Stop this chessnocide, Brennenchessnoocide, and
Kingstonchessnocide! Please go away from this newsgroup. We all want only
one thing. That's to say you good bye and don't turn back! GOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

"Chess One" wrote in message
news:NwJLe.959$Pm3.233@trndny08...

"Tom Martinak" wrote in message

care what you think? I am not interested in being interogated, especially
by you who publish Brennen )



Yes, that's right. That' Mr. Martinak knows that Brennen used several
nicknames, sent false posts and he knows all Brennen's dirty. But he didn't
do anything to stop that false posts and cheating in his federation. I think
that the same culpability is on Mr. Maritnak because he didn't stop that
cheater Brennen in his false posts. So, Mr Martinak, it's time for you to go
out from your leader's function in your federation. You would let your
leader's function to somebody who can do your job much better than you! And
more honest!

As I said, ****-for-brains. His parents went to every doctor, but it
didn't help. Smile, SFB.

http://sah.paracin.co.yu/Goran2004.JPG