THE MEANING OF WORDS

Recently I posted "How Randy Bauer Shifted
Ground," an essay in which I noted that while there
was little dispute that Mr. Bauer shifted ground in a
series of attacks on the books of GM Ray Keene, there
was an attempt to shift the debate from Mr. Bauer
abandoning his initial position to accusing me of
lying when epitomizing that position. I was accused of
being a "sophist" in lieu of disputing my definitions
of words and the logic of what Mr. Bauer actually wrote.

Mr. Bauer and Vinnie Hart have written
responses, the latter's effort being gratifyingly
weak. (Our Vinnie always bottoms out.) The man does
not deny altering the definition of "some" because a
portion of its meaning was inconvenient to Mr. Bauer's case.

In a bit of doublethink, Mr. Bauer would have us
understand that although there was nothing inexact or
wrong in his initial attack on GM Keene (which he
nonetheless amended) "It was a newsgroup post, Phil,
not a book review. I'd be happy to grab a few
paragraphs from some of your newsgroup posts and
subject them to similar scrutiny."

In short, don't hold the man to what he wrote because, after all,
his damning the oeuvre of a famous chess author was done casually.

Please see my response below. The material in
multiple brackets includes the responses to my essay
by the Messrs. Bauer and Hart with my rebuttal
following in the same bracketed paragraphs.

HOW RANDY BAUER SHIFTED GROUND

Randy Bauer posted as follows, "Ray Keene wrote a
few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap. I
wouldn't hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I would buy
before some of Keene's later efforts."

Not long after writing the above, Mr. Bauer began to
shift ground. He told us that "several" good books
would have been preferable to "few." Since few means
"a small number of," the word "several" was
obviously being employed to mean "many" good books. In
one posting he suddenly named more good books than
those he regarded as "crap" or, if you will, "absolute
crap." (Mr. Bauer has never been one to de-absolutize
his "crap" references.)

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Several is not many." Mr. Bauer
dishonestly dismisses by naked assertion my Webster's
which states that "several" may mean "many," and which
it certainly does mean when juxtaposed to "few," which
means "a small number off."]]]]

I noted the evident shifting of ground. A small
number of good books had become many good books. Mr.
Bauer angrily claimed that he was now offering a
"balanced" argument. True enough, so far as it went.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "As noted previously, my views on
Keene have been the same for several years. Look up
the newsgroup postings if you're interested in the
truth rather than Parrisms." Mr. Bauer does not deny
that a "few" books became "several" and that, in
truth, he shifted ground. Hence he attacks
"Parrisms," elsewhere misspells my name and the like.]]]]]

My main claim about Mr. Bauer shifting ground went
largely undisputed.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Largely because few people care to
read your crap anymore." Which is why the ratpackers
responded so fervently and so often. Mr. Bauer's
statement is a rhetorical lie that he contradicts by
his resort to emotional renditions of my name and the
like. The guy is a beaut'.]]]]]

Instead, I was accused of lying -- Mr. Bauer trotted
out his "Liarry" tradition -- because I concluded that
"few" might mean, say, from three to 10 books out of
130 and that Mr. Bauer mainted the rest were "crap."

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "The claim that I maintain that the
rest were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the quote
above and tell me when I say 'the rest were crap.'"
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words to that
effect from him. The issue is not whether Mr. Bauer
used a particular phrase but whether a fair reading of
what he wrote may be construed as such. In his
statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided GM Keene's
work into ONLY TWO kinds of books: a "few" good ones
("a small number of") and "some absolute crap." The
word "some" may mean, in a common Webster's
definition, "being of a certain unspecified (but often
considerable) number, quantity, degree, etc." The two
key issues are whether Mr. Bauer shifted ground (he
did) and whether I wrote a lie. My reading of Mr.
Bauer's statement followed logically from mainstream
definitions of the words in his statement. He is now
trying to argue that he wrote casually, which is true
enough. That is, however, no excuse for his
scurrilous attack on GM Keene's oeuvre.]]]]]

We have definitions for two of three key words: few
and several. The third key word is "some" as in Mr.
Bauer's "he wrote some absolute crap."

Enter the Vinster. Which is to say, our Vinnie Hart.

The Vinster offered a definition without an ellipsis
to note some missing words which contained a veddy,
veddy interestink phrase. Noted the Vinster, "'Some is
defined as 'one indeterminate quantity, portion or
number AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE REST'" [his emphasis].

I have virtually the same definition in my Webster's
New World Dictionary, but it reads in FULL (heh, heh,
heh): "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." To nail the point, the word "often" means "many times."

[[[[[Vinnie Hart's non-response: "As usual, when
Parr's lies are exposed, he insists the lies did not
constitute a significant part of his argument. The
'gravamen' lay elsewhere. Quelle absolute crap!"
Translation: Mr. Hart does not deny doctoring a
dictionary definition because it was damaging to Mr.
Bauer's case. Mr. Hart lied ex omissio.]]]]]

The Vinster left out the phrase, "but often
considerable," from the definition for an obvious
enough reason.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Liarry, if I had wanted to write
'the rest were crap' I would have. Obviously I did
not. Quit the lies." It is not for me to answer for
Mr. Bauer's intentions; I have merely analyzed what he
did write. What he wrote may be fairly construed to
read that a "considerable" number of GM Keene's books
are "absolute crap," and that this number is part of a
two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of over 130
books. The other division includes a "few" books,
perhaps between three to 10 books.]]]]]

The gravamen of my statement was that Randy Bauer
found it necessary to shift ground from an initial
position, which could fairly be understood as meaning
that GM Keene had written, oh, five or so good books
and over 120 bad ones.

Mr. Bauer never offered a third category of books in
his analysis -- never told us there were mediocre
books or rather good books or not so good books, etc.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: I wasn't writing a review of the
history of Keene, I was making a comment." Absolutely
true. Elsewhere he calls it just "a newsgroup post."
The truth is that Mr. Bauer casually and meanly damned
the oeuvre of a distinguished chess author, for which
he has been called to intellectual account.]]]]]

He just said there were a "few" good ones and "some"
that were "absolute crap." Those were the two
categories he initially offered. I read "some" to mean
what it means!

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "No, you read it to mean what you
want it to me [sic]. It is a fabrication, the usual
LIARRY fiction." Translation: Mr. Bauer does not
deny dividing GM Keene's work into two categories: a
"few" good books and "some" (which may mean a
"considerable" number) "absolute crap." If there are
only two categories of a body of work offered and if
one category contains a "few" books, the remainder
must be held as "absolute crap." Given, that is, what
Mr. Bauer actually wrote.]]]]]

It means an indeterminate number of books that is
often (or many times) "quite considerable." My
suggestion of over 120 books being damned by Mr. Bauer
would not be out of line.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Only in your sick, twisted mind."
Mr. Bauer learned his politics well in state
government. Issue vicious personal attacks when
unable to dispute the definitions of words and the
logic of an argument.]]]]]

I did nothing more than apply commonly understood
meanings of words to Mr. Bauer's attempt to damn the
oeuvre of a major chess author.

wrote:
THE MEANING OF WORDS

Recently I posted "How Randy Bauer Shifted
Ground," an essay in which I noted that while there
was little dispute that Mr. Bauer shifted ground in a
series of attacks on the books of GM Ray Keene, there
was an attempt to shift the debate from Mr. Bauer
abandoning his initial position to accusing me of
lying when epitomizing that position. I was accused of
being a "sophist" in lieu of disputing my definitions
of words and the logic of what Mr. Bauer actually wrote.

Mr. Bauer and Vinnie Hart have written
responses, the latter's effort being gratifyingly
weak. (Our Vinnie always bottoms out.) The man does
not deny altering the definition of "some" because a
portion of its meaning was inconvenient to Mr. Bauer's case.

In a bit of doublethink, Mr. Bauer would have us
understand that although there was nothing inexact or
wrong in his initial attack on GM Keene (which he
nonetheless amended) "It was a newsgroup post, Phil,
not a book review. I'd be happy to grab a few
paragraphs from some of your newsgroup posts and
subject them to similar scrutiny."

In short, don't hold the man to what he wrote because, after all,
his damning the oeuvre of a famous chess author was done casually.

Please see my response below. The material in
multiple brackets includes the responses to my essay
by the Messrs. Bauer and Hart with my rebuttal
following in the same bracketed paragraphs.

HOW RANDY BAUER SHIFTED GROUND

Randy Bauer posted as follows, "Ray Keene wrote a
few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap. I
wouldn't hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I would buy
before some of Keene's later efforts."

Not long after writing the above, Mr. Bauer began to
shift ground. He told us that "several" good books
would have been preferable to "few." Since few means
"a small number of," the word "several" was
obviously being employed to mean "many" good books. In
one posting he suddenly named more good books than
those he regarded as "crap" or, if you will, "absolute
crap." (Mr. Bauer has never been one to de-absolutize
his "crap" references.)

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Several is not many." Mr. Bauer
dishonestly dismisses by naked assertion my Webster's
which states that "several" may mean "many," and which
it certainly does mean when juxtaposed to "few," which
means "a small number off."]]]]

I noted the evident shifting of ground. A small
number of good books had become many good books. Mr.
Bauer angrily claimed that he was now offering a
"balanced" argument. True enough, so far as it went.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "As noted previously, my views on
Keene have been the same for several years. Look up
the newsgroup postings if you're interested in the
truth rather than Parrisms." Mr. Bauer does not deny
that a "few" books became "several" and that, in
truth, he shifted ground. Hence he attacks
"Parrisms," elsewhere misspells my name and the like.]]]]]

My main claim about Mr. Bauer shifting ground went
largely undisputed.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Largely because few people care to
read your crap anymore." Which is why the ratpackers
responded so fervently and so often. Mr. Bauer's
statement is a rhetorical lie that he contradicts by
his resort to emotional renditions of my name and the
like. The guy is a beaut'.]]]]]

Instead, I was accused of lying -- Mr. Bauer trotted
out his "Liarry" tradition -- because I concluded that
"few" might mean, say, from three to 10 books out of
130 and that Mr. Bauer mainted the rest were "crap."

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "The claim that I maintain that the
rest were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the quote
above and tell me when I say 'the rest were crap.'"
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words to that
effect from him. The issue is not whether Mr. Bauer
used a particular phrase but whether a fair reading of
what he wrote may be construed as such. In his
statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided GM Keene's
work into ONLY TWO kinds of books: a "few" good ones
("a small number of") and "some absolute crap." The
word "some" may mean, in a common Webster's
definition, "being of a certain unspecified (but often
considerable) number, quantity, degree, etc." The two
key issues are whether Mr. Bauer shifted ground (he
did) and whether I wrote a lie. My reading of Mr.
Bauer's statement followed logically from mainstream
definitions of the words in his statement. He is now
trying to argue that he wrote casually, which is true
enough. That is, however, no excuse for his
scurrilous attack on GM Keene's oeuvre.]]]]]

We have definitions for two of three key words: few
and several. The third key word is "some" as in Mr.
Bauer's "he wrote some absolute crap."

Enter the Vinster. Which is to say, our Vinnie Hart.

The Vinster offered a definition without an ellipsis
to note some missing words which contained a veddy,
veddy interestink phrase. Noted the Vinster, "'Some is
defined as 'one indeterminate quantity, portion or
number AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE REST'" [his emphasis].

I have virtually the same definition in my Webster's
New World Dictionary, but it reads in FULL (heh, heh,
heh): "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." To nail the point, the word "often" means "many times."

[[[[[Vinnie Hart's non-response: "As usual, when
Parr's lies are exposed, he insists the lies did not
constitute a significant part of his argument. The
'gravamen' lay elsewhere. Quelle absolute crap!"
Translation: Mr. Hart does not deny doctoring a
dictionary definition because it was damaging to Mr.
Bauer's case. Mr. Hart lied ex omissio.]]]]]

The Vinster left out the phrase, "but often
considerable," from the definition for an obvious
enough reason.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Liarry, if I had wanted to write
'the rest were crap' I would have. Obviously I did
not. Quit the lies." It is not for me to answer for
Mr. Bauer's intentions; I have merely analyzed what he
did write. What he wrote may be fairly construed to
read that a "considerable" number of GM Keene's books
are "absolute crap," and that this number is part of a
two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of over 130
books. The other division includes a "few" books,
perhaps between three to 10 books.]]]]]

The gravamen of my statement was that Randy Bauer
found it necessary to shift ground from an initial
position, which could fairly be understood as meaning
that GM Keene had written, oh, five or so good books
and over 120 bad ones.

Mr. Bauer never offered a third category of books in
his analysis -- never told us there were mediocre
books or rather good books or not so good books, etc.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: I wasn't writing a review of the
history of Keene, I was making a comment." Absolutely
true. Elsewhere he calls it just "a newsgroup post."
The truth is that Mr. Bauer casually and meanly damned
the oeuvre of a distinguished chess author, for which
he has been called to intellectual account.]]]]]

He just said there were a "few" good ones and "some"
that were "absolute crap." Those were the two
categories he initially offered. I read "some" to mean
what it means!

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "No, you read it to mean what you
want it to me [sic]. It is a fabrication, the usual
LIARRY fiction." Translation: Mr. Bauer does not
deny dividing GM Keene's work into two categories: a
"few" good books and "some" (which may mean a
"considerable" number) "absolute crap." If there are
only two categories of a body of work offered and if
one category contains a "few" books, the remainder
must be held as "absolute crap." Given, that is, what
Mr. Bauer actually wrote.]]]]]

It means an indeterminate number of books that is
often (or many times) "quite considerable." My
suggestion of over 120 books being damned by Mr. Bauer
would not be out of line.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Only in your sick, twisted mind."
Mr. Bauer learned his politics well in state
government. Issue vicious personal attacks when
unable to dispute the definitions of words and the
logic of an argument.]]]]]

I did nothing more than apply commonly understood
meanings of words to Mr. Bauer's attempt to damn the
oeuvre of a major chess author.

I recall a song from the mid-1960s with the line "Sometimes I laugh,
sometimes I cry." I guess Larry Parr would claim that means the singer
had only two emotional states: laughing and crying. No calm, no quiet
joy or sadness, no fear, no anger, no mild bemusement, etc. Just as he
claims Bauer's "some are good, some are crap" was meant to cover the
entire works of Keene.
I wouldn't even dignify Parr's nonsense with the term "sophistry."
It's pure bull, and if it fools anyone, it's just Larry himself. But at
least watching him make a fool of himself affords some mild amusement.

Taylor Kingston wrote:
wrote:
THE MEANING OF WORDS

Recently I posted "How Randy Bauer Shifted
Ground," an essay in which I noted that while there
was little dispute that Mr. Bauer shifted ground in a
series of attacks on the books of GM Ray Keene, there
was an attempt to shift the debate from Mr. Bauer
abandoning his initial position to accusing me of
lying when epitomizing that position. I was accused of
being a "sophist" in lieu of disputing my definitions
of words and the logic of what Mr. Bauer actually wrote.

Mr. Bauer and Vinnie Hart have written
responses, the latter's effort being gratifyingly
weak. (Our Vinnie always bottoms out.) The man does
not deny altering the definition of "some" because a
portion of its meaning was inconvenient to Mr. Bauer's case.

In a bit of doublethink, Mr. Bauer would have us
understand that although there was nothing inexact or
wrong in his initial attack on GM Keene (which he
nonetheless amended) "It was a newsgroup post, Phil,
not a book review. I'd be happy to grab a few
paragraphs from some of your newsgroup posts and
subject them to similar scrutiny."

In short, don't hold the man to what he wrote because, after all,
his damning the oeuvre of a famous chess author was done casually.

Please see my response below. The material in
multiple brackets includes the responses to my essay
by the Messrs. Bauer and Hart with my rebuttal
following in the same bracketed paragraphs.

HOW RANDY BAUER SHIFTED GROUND

Randy Bauer posted as follows, "Ray Keene wrote a
few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap. I
wouldn't hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I would buy
before some of Keene's later efforts."

Not long after writing the above, Mr. Bauer began to
shift ground. He told us that "several" good books
would have been preferable to "few." Since few means
"a small number of," the word "several" was
obviously being employed to mean "many" good books. In
one posting he suddenly named more good books than
those he regarded as "crap" or, if you will, "absolute
crap." (Mr. Bauer has never been one to de-absolutize
his "crap" references.)

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Several is not many." Mr. Bauer
dishonestly dismisses by naked assertion my Webster's
which states that "several" may mean "many," and which
it certainly does mean when juxtaposed to "few," which
means "a small number off."]]]]

I noted the evident shifting of ground. A small
number of good books had become many good books. Mr.
Bauer angrily claimed that he was now offering a
"balanced" argument. True enough, so far as it went.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "As noted previously, my views on
Keene have been the same for several years. Look up
the newsgroup postings if you're interested in the
truth rather than Parrisms." Mr. Bauer does not deny
that a "few" books became "several" and that, in
truth, he shifted ground. Hence he attacks
"Parrisms," elsewhere misspells my name and the like.]]]]]

My main claim about Mr. Bauer shifting ground went
largely undisputed.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Largely because few people care to
read your crap anymore." Which is why the ratpackers
responded so fervently and so often. Mr. Bauer's
statement is a rhetorical lie that he contradicts by
his resort to emotional renditions of my name and the
like. The guy is a beaut'.]]]]]

Instead, I was accused of lying -- Mr. Bauer trotted
out his "Liarry" tradition -- because I concluded that
"few" might mean, say, from three to 10 books out of
130 and that Mr. Bauer mainted the rest were "crap."

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "The claim that I maintain that the
rest were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the quote
above and tell me when I say 'the rest were crap.'"
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words to that
effect from him. The issue is not whether Mr. Bauer
used a particular phrase but whether a fair reading of
what he wrote may be construed as such. In his
statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided GM Keene's
work into ONLY TWO kinds of books: a "few" good ones
("a small number of") and "some absolute crap." The
word "some" may mean, in a common Webster's
definition, "being of a certain unspecified (but often
considerable) number, quantity, degree, etc." The two
key issues are whether Mr. Bauer shifted ground (he
did) and whether I wrote a lie. My reading of Mr.
Bauer's statement followed logically from mainstream
definitions of the words in his statement. He is now
trying to argue that he wrote casually, which is true
enough. That is, however, no excuse for his
scurrilous attack on GM Keene's oeuvre.]]]]]

We have definitions for two of three key words: few
and several. The third key word is "some" as in Mr.
Bauer's "he wrote some absolute crap."

Enter the Vinster. Which is to say, our Vinnie Hart.

The Vinster offered a definition without an ellipsis
to note some missing words which contained a veddy,
veddy interestink phrase. Noted the Vinster, "'Some is
defined as 'one indeterminate quantity, portion or
number AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE REST'" [his emphasis].

I have virtually the same definition in my Webster's
New World Dictionary, but it reads in FULL (heh, heh,
heh): "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." To nail the point, the word "often" means "many times."

[[[[[Vinnie Hart's non-response: "As usual, when
Parr's lies are exposed, he insists the lies did not
constitute a significant part of his argument. The
'gravamen' lay elsewhere. Quelle absolute crap!"
Translation: Mr. Hart does not deny doctoring a
dictionary definition because it was damaging to Mr.
Bauer's case. Mr. Hart lied ex omissio.]]]]]

The Vinster left out the phrase, "but often
considerable," from the definition for an obvious
enough reason.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Liarry, if I had wanted to write
'the rest were crap' I would have. Obviously I did
not. Quit the lies." It is not for me to answer for
Mr. Bauer's intentions; I have merely analyzed what he
did write. What he wrote may be fairly construed to
read that a "considerable" number of GM Keene's books
are "absolute crap," and that this number is part of a
two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of over 130
books. The other division includes a "few" books,
perhaps between three to 10 books.]]]]]

The gravamen of my statement was that Randy Bauer
found it necessary to shift ground from an initial
position, which could fairly be understood as meaning
that GM Keene had written, oh, five or so good books
and over 120 bad ones.

Mr. Bauer never offered a third category of books in
his analysis -- never told us there were mediocre
books or rather good books or not so good books, etc.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: I wasn't writing a review of the
history of Keene, I was making a comment." Absolutely
true. Elsewhere he calls it just "a newsgroup post."
The truth is that Mr. Bauer casually and meanly damned
the oeuvre of a distinguished chess author, for which
he has been called to intellectual account.]]]]]

He just said there were a "few" good ones and "some"
that were "absolute crap." Those were the two
categories he initially offered. I read "some" to mean
what it means!

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "No, you read it to mean what you
want it to me [sic]. It is a fabrication, the usual
LIARRY fiction." Translation: Mr. Bauer does not
deny dividing GM Keene's work into two categories: a
"few" good books and "some" (which may mean a
"considerable" number) "absolute crap." If there are
only two categories of a body of work offered and if
one category contains a "few" books, the remainder
must be held as "absolute crap." Given, that is, what
Mr. Bauer actually wrote.]]]]]

It means an indeterminate number of books that is
often (or many times) "quite considerable." My
suggestion of over 120 books being damned by Mr. Bauer
would not be out of line.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Only in your sick, twisted mind."
Mr. Bauer learned his politics well in state
government. Issue vicious personal attacks when
unable to dispute the definitions of words and the
logic of an argument.]]]]]

I did nothing more than apply commonly understood
meanings of words to Mr. Bauer's attempt to damn the
oeuvre of a major chess author.

I recall a song from the mid-1960s with the line "Sometimes I laugh,
sometimes I cry." I guess Larry Parr would claim that means the singer
had only two emotional states: laughing and crying. No calm, no quiet
joy or sadness, no fear, no anger, no mild bemusement, etc. Just as he
claims Bauer's "some are good, some are crap" was meant to cover the
entire works of Keene.
I wouldn't even dignify Parr's nonsense with the term "sophistry."
It's pure bull, and if it fools anyone, it's just Larry himself. But at
least watching him make a fool of himself affords some mild amusement.

Let's do another one:

Some Americans are Roman Catholics.

"Some" means millions.

Oh my God! Bauer is saying that Keene wrote millions of books that are
absolute crap!

I've generally found that there is an inverse relationship between the
number of words Parr writes to make a point and the validity of the
point.

To cut through all the pseudo-analysis, it all boils down to the fact
that Parr would have us believe the following two sentences have the
same meaning:

"The author wrote a few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap."

"The author wrote a few good books, and the rest were absolute crap."

There they are, in black and white. Now, with your reputation as a
reasonable, thoughtful person on the line, do you believe they mean the
same thing?

It isn't even close.

Randy Bauer



wrote:
THE MEANING OF WORDS

Recently I posted "How Randy Bauer Shifted
Ground," an essay in which I noted that while there
was little dispute that Mr. Bauer shifted ground in a
series of attacks on the books of GM Ray Keene, there
was an attempt to shift the debate from Mr. Bauer
abandoning his initial position to accusing me of
lying when epitomizing that position. I was accused of
being a "sophist" in lieu of disputing my definitions
of words and the logic of what Mr. Bauer actually wrote.

Mr. Bauer and Vinnie Hart have written
responses, the latter's effort being gratifyingly
weak. (Our Vinnie always bottoms out.) The man does
not deny altering the definition of "some" because a
portion of its meaning was inconvenient to Mr. Bauer's case.

In a bit of doublethink, Mr. Bauer would have us
understand that although there was nothing inexact or
wrong in his initial attack on GM Keene (which he
nonetheless amended) "It was a newsgroup post, Phil,
not a book review. I'd be happy to grab a few
paragraphs from some of your newsgroup posts and
subject them to similar scrutiny."

In short, don't hold the man to what he wrote because, after all,
his damning the oeuvre of a famous chess author was done casually.

Please see my response below. The material in
multiple brackets includes the responses to my essay
by the Messrs. Bauer and Hart with my rebuttal
following in the same bracketed paragraphs.

HOW RANDY BAUER SHIFTED GROUND

Randy Bauer posted as follows, "Ray Keene wrote a
few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap. I
wouldn't hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I would buy
before some of Keene's later efforts."

Not long after writing the above, Mr. Bauer began to
shift ground. He told us that "several" good books
would have been preferable to "few." Since few means
"a small number of," the word "several" was
obviously being employed to mean "many" good books. In
one posting he suddenly named more good books than
those he regarded as "crap" or, if you will, "absolute
crap." (Mr. Bauer has never been one to de-absolutize
his "crap" references.)

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Several is not many." Mr. Bauer
dishonestly dismisses by naked assertion my Webster's
which states that "several" may mean "many," and which
it certainly does mean when juxtaposed to "few," which
means "a small number off."]]]]

I noted the evident shifting of ground. A small
number of good books had become many good books. Mr.
Bauer angrily claimed that he was now offering a
"balanced" argument. True enough, so far as it went.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "As noted previously, my views on
Keene have been the same for several years. Look up
the newsgroup postings if you're interested in the
truth rather than Parrisms." Mr. Bauer does not deny
that a "few" books became "several" and that, in
truth, he shifted ground. Hence he attacks
"Parrisms," elsewhere misspells my name and the like.]]]]]

My main claim about Mr. Bauer shifting ground went
largely undisputed.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Largely because few people care to
read your crap anymore." Which is why the ratpackers
responded so fervently and so often. Mr. Bauer's
statement is a rhetorical lie that he contradicts by
his resort to emotional renditions of my name and the
like. The guy is a beaut'.]]]]]

Instead, I was accused of lying -- Mr. Bauer trotted
out his "Liarry" tradition -- because I concluded that
"few" might mean, say, from three to 10 books out of
130 and that Mr. Bauer mainted the rest were "crap."

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "The claim that I maintain that the
rest were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the quote
above and tell me when I say 'the rest were crap.'"
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words to that
effect from him. The issue is not whether Mr. Bauer
used a particular phrase but whether a fair reading of
what he wrote may be construed as such. In his
statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided GM Keene's
work into ONLY TWO kinds of books: a "few" good ones
("a small number of") and "some absolute crap." The
word "some" may mean, in a common Webster's
definition, "being of a certain unspecified (but often
considerable) number, quantity, degree, etc." The two
key issues are whether Mr. Bauer shifted ground (he
did) and whether I wrote a lie. My reading of Mr.
Bauer's statement followed logically from mainstream
definitions of the words in his statement. He is now
trying to argue that he wrote casually, which is true
enough. That is, however, no excuse for his
scurrilous attack on GM Keene's oeuvre.]]]]]

We have definitions for two of three key words: few
and several. The third key word is "some" as in Mr.
Bauer's "he wrote some absolute crap."

Enter the Vinster. Which is to say, our Vinnie Hart.

The Vinster offered a definition without an ellipsis
to note some missing words which contained a veddy,
veddy interestink phrase. Noted the Vinster, "'Some is
defined as 'one indeterminate quantity, portion or
number AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE REST'" [his emphasis].

I have virtually the same definition in my Webster's
New World Dictionary, but it reads in FULL (heh, heh,
heh): "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." To nail the point, the word "often" means "many times."

[[[[[Vinnie Hart's non-response: "As usual, when
Parr's lies are exposed, he insists the lies did not
constitute a significant part of his argument. The
'gravamen' lay elsewhere. Quelle absolute crap!"
Translation: Mr. Hart does not deny doctoring a
dictionary definition because it was damaging to Mr.
Bauer's case. Mr. Hart lied ex omissio.]]]]]

The Vinster left out the phrase, "but often
considerable," from the definition for an obvious
enough reason.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Liarry, if I had wanted to write
'the rest were crap' I would have. Obviously I did
not. Quit the lies." It is not for me to answer for
Mr. Bauer's intentions; I have merely analyzed what he
did write. What he wrote may be fairly construed to
read that a "considerable" number of GM Keene's books
are "absolute crap," and that this number is part of a
two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of over 130
books. The other division includes a "few" books,
perhaps between three to 10 books.]]]]]

The gravamen of my statement was that Randy Bauer
found it necessary to shift ground from an initial
position, which could fairly be understood as meaning
that GM Keene had written, oh, five or so good books
and over 120 bad ones.

Mr. Bauer never offered a third category of books in
his analysis -- never told us there were mediocre
books or rather good books or not so good books, etc.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: I wasn't writing a review of the
history of Keene, I was making a comment." Absolutely
true. Elsewhere he calls it just "a newsgroup post."
The truth is that Mr. Bauer casually and meanly damned
the oeuvre of a distinguished chess author, for which
he has been called to intellectual account.]]]]]

He just said there were a "few" good ones and "some"
that were "absolute crap." Those were the two
categories he initially offered. I read "some" to mean
what it means!

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "No, you read it to mean what you
want it to me [sic]. It is a fabrication, the usual
LIARRY fiction." Translation: Mr. Bauer does not
deny dividing GM Keene's work into two categories: a
"few" good books and "some" (which may mean a
"considerable" number) "absolute crap." If there are
only two categories of a body of work offered and if
one category contains a "few" books, the remainder
must be held as "absolute crap." Given, that is, what
Mr. Bauer actually wrote.]]]]]

It means an indeterminate number of books that is
often (or many times) "quite considerable." My
suggestion of over 120 books being damned by Mr. Bauer
would not be out of line.

[[[[[Mr. Bauer: "Only in your sick, twisted mind."
Mr. Bauer learned his politics well in state
government. Issue vicious personal attacks when
unable to dispute the definitions of words and the
logic of an argument.]]]]]

I did nothing more than apply commonly understood
meanings of words to Mr. Bauer's attempt to damn the
oeuvre of a major chess author.

Randy Bauer wrote:
I've generally found that there is an inverse relationship between the
number of words Parr writes to make a point and the validity of the
point.

To cut through all the pseudo-analysis, it all boils down to the fact
that Parr would have us believe the following two sentences have the
same meaning:

"The author wrote a few good books, and he wrote some absolute crap."

"The author wrote a few good books, and the rest were absolute crap."

There they are, in black and white. Now, with your reputation as a
reasonable, thoughtful person on the line, do you believe they mean the
same thing?

It isn't even close.

If books came in just two types: (1) good, and (2) absolute crap, the
way people come in just two sexes, then Parr would have a point. But
they don't, so he doesn't -- a book can be crap, or a work of genius,
or anything in between. It's a continuum, not a dichotomy.
Sometimes Parr's attempts at semantic obfuscation have a bit of
cleverness, but this one is just pathetic.

Larry Parr wrote (20 Apr 2006 04:12:52 -0700):
Randy Bauer posted as follows,
_
"Ray Keene wrote a few good books, and
he wrote some absolute crap. I wouldn't
hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I
would buy before some of Keene's later
efforts."
...

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

...
Mr. Bauer:
_
"The claim that I maintain that the rest
were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the
quote above and tell me when I say 'the
rest were crap.'"
_
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words
to that effect from him. ...

_
"Randy Bauer has gone from Ray
Keene writing a 'few' good books out
of 130 (what is few? my Webster's
gives 'a small number of') with 'the rest'
being crap (about 120 to 125) -- well,
he has gone from that initial smear to
..." - Larry Parr (17 Apr 2006
14:49:54 -0700)

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... In his statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided
GM Keene's work into ONLY TWO kinds of
books ...

_
Where is there a reference to "GM Keene's work"
in the Randy Bauer quote?

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... My reading of Mr. Bauer's statement followed
logically from mainstream definitions of the words
in his statement. ...

_
Does "some" mean "the others"?
_
"Mr. Bauer spoke of the English grandmaster
writing a 'few' (a small number of') good books
whilst the others were 'crap.'" - Larry Parr
(17 Apr 2006 20:40:11 -0700)

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... a two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of
over 130 books. ...

_
Where is there a reference to "GM Keene's oeuvre
of over 130 books" in what Randy Bauer wrote?

_
Starting with a quote of Larry Parr,
Randy Bauer wrote (Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:41:26 GMT):
He just said there were a "few" good ones and
"some" that were "absolute crap." Those were
the two categories he initially offered. I read
"some" to mean what it means!
_
No, you read it to mean what you want it to me.
It is a fabrication, the usual LIARRY fiction.

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

Translation: Mr. Bauer does not deny dividing
GM Keene's work into two categories: ...

_
"saying Keene wrote a few good books
and some absolute crap does NOT
mean those are the only two categories."
- Randy Bauer (21 Apr 2006 08:32:34 -0700)
_
"I recall a song from the mid-1960s with
the line 'Sometimes I laugh, sometimes
I cry.' I guess Larry Parr would claim that
means the singer had only two emotional
states: laughing and crying. No calm, no
quiet joy or sadness, no fear, no anger,
no mild bemusement, etc." - Taylor
Kingston (21 Apr 2006 07:06:31 -0700)

Larry Parr wrote (20 Apr 2006 04:12:52 -0700):
Randy Bauer posted as follows,
_
"Ray Keene wrote a few good books, and
he wrote some absolute crap. I wouldn't
hold him up as a paragon of chess writing
virtue. There are some Schiller books I
would buy before some of Keene's later
efforts."
...

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

...
Mr. Bauer:
_
"The claim that I maintain that the rest
were crap is a LIE, LIARRY. Re-read the
quote above and tell me when I say 'the
rest were crap.'"
_
Mr. Bauer dishonestly implies I quoted words
to that effect from him. ...

_
"Randy Bauer has gone from Ray
Keene writing a 'few' good books out
of 130 (what is few? my Webster's
gives 'a small number of') with 'the rest'
being crap (about 120 to 125) -- well,
he has gone from that initial smear to
..." - Larry Parr (17 Apr 2006
14:49:54 -0700)

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... In his statement as written, Mr. Bauer divided
GM Keene's work into ONLY TWO kinds of
books ...

_
Where is there a reference to GM Keene's work
in the Randy Bauer quote?

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... My reading of Mr. Bauer's statement followed
logically from mainstream definitions of the words
in his statement. ...

_
Does "some" mean "the others"?
_
"Mr. Bauer spoke of the English grandmaster
writing a 'few' (a small number of') good books
whilst the others were 'crap.'" - Larry Parr
(17 Apr 2006 20:40:11 -0700)

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

... a two-fold division of GM Keene's oeuvre of
over 130 books. ...

_
Where is there a reference to GM Keene's oeuvre
of over 130 books in what Randy Bauer wrote?

_
Starting with a quote of Larry Parr,
Randy Bauer wrote (Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:41:26 GMT):
He just said there were a "few" good ones and
"some" that were "absolute crap." Those were
the two categories he initially offered. I read
"some" to mean what it means!
_
No, you read it to mean what you want it to me.
It is a fabrication, the usual LIARRY fiction.

_
Larry Parr wrote (21 Apr 2006 06:10:08 -0700):

Translation: Mr. Bauer does not deny dividing
GM Keene's work into two categories: ...

_
"saying Keene wrote a few good books
and some absolute crap does NOT
mean those are the only two categories."
- Randy Bauer (21 Apr 2006 08:32:34 -0700)
_
"I recall a song from the mid-1960s with
the line 'Sometimes I laugh, sometimes
I cry.' I guess Larry Parr would claim that
means the singer had only two emotional
states: laughing and crying. No calm, no
quiet joy or sadness, no fear, no anger,
no mild bemusement, etc." - Taylor
Kingston (21 Apr 2006 07:06:31 -0700)

TWO ISSUES AT STAKE

If books came in just two types: (1) good, and (2) absolute crap, the
way people come in just two sexes, then Parr would have a point. But
they don't, so he doesn't -- a book can be crap, or a work of genius,
or anything in between. It's a continuum, not a dichotomy. Sometimes
Parr's attempts at semantic obfuscation have a bit of cleverness,
but this one is just pathetic. -- Taylor Kingston

There were two issues in the dispute between
Randy Bauer and myself. The first was whether Mr.
Bauer shifted ground when attacking GM Keene's chess
writing. He evidently did, and even the ratpackers
don't discuss that question any longer.

The second issue was whether I told a lie. I
explained my position, which was based precisely on
what Mr. Bauer wrote. The response from NM Taylor
Kingston, the man who claims to be a 2300+ ELO
bobcat but who is nonetheless an 1800 pussycat, is to
compare an argument about a chess oeuvre with a
popular song.

NM Kingston is trying to shift the ground away
from what NM Bauer actually wrote to suggest other
situations in which the word "some" would not
reasonably be construed as it may be construed in the
Bauer statement.

Here is the precise trick that Mr. Kingston
uses: "some", as the reader will recollect, may be
defined as "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." In the case of the Bauer quotation, we are
dealing with number.

In the case of Mr. Kingston's popular song, we are dealing
with a range of human emotions which are understood to exist
in ALL HUMAN BEINGS. There is no NECESSARY UNDERSTANDING
that there is a wide range of quality in a given author's euvre.
One may reasonably conclude that someone may divide books
into two types within a given author's oeuvre, which is precisely
what Mr. Bauer did.


NM Kingston likely understood the intellectual
trick that he was trying to play. Which is to say, he
deliberately offered a false argument.

Our faux NM is now adopting argument by
derision. We have made progress.

wrote in message
ups.com...
TWO ISSUES AT STAKE

If books came in just two types: (1) good, and (2) absolute crap, the
way people come in just two sexes, then Parr would have a point. But
they don't, so he doesn't -- a book can be crap, or a work of genius,
or anything in between. It's a continuum, not a dichotomy. Sometimes
Parr's attempts at semantic obfuscation have a bit of cleverness,
but this one is just pathetic. -- Taylor Kingston

There were two issues in the dispute between
Randy Bauer and myself.

Being the grammatical stickler that you are, isn't the correct phrasing
"between Randy Bauer and me." Between myself sounds rather vulgar.

The first was whether Mr.
Bauer shifted ground when attacking GM Keene's chess
writing. He evidently did, and even the ratpackers
don't discuss that question any longer.

If this is some big deal to you, I will stipulate it as true. I first said
he wrote a few good books, then said several. The difference, to be precise
(this is an Innes thing) is that I first thought of 3 and then thought of 4
or 5.


The second issue was whether I told a lie. I
explained my position, which was based precisely on
what Mr. Bauer wrote. The response from NM Taylor
Kingston, the man who claims to be a 2300+ ELO
bobcat but who is nonetheless an 1800 pussycat, is to
compare an argument about a chess oeuvre with a
popular song.

What is your definition of a lie?

I'll go with the "false witness" thing -- it seems to come up a lot. Now
then, even if you manufacture some strange method for arguing I said "x"
when in fact I have made it clear I did not say "x" -- it sounds like false
witness to me.

I have posted a dictionary definition that doesn't come anywhere close to
Parr's strange conclusion that "some" means "the rest." Given my denials of
this strange interpretation, to consider to suggest I said it is a
preposterous lie.

Randy Bauer

NM Kingston is trying to shift the ground away
from what NM Bauer actually wrote to suggest other
situations in which the word "some" would not
reasonably be construed as it may be construed in the
Bauer statement.

Here is the precise trick that Mr. Kingston
uses: "some", as the reader will recollect, may be
defined as "being of a certain unspecified (BUT OFTEN
CONSIDERABLE) [my emphasis] number, quantity, degree,
etc." In the case of the Bauer quotation, we are
dealing with number.

In the case of Mr. Kingston's popular song, we are dealing
with a range of human emotions which are understood to exist
in ALL HUMAN BEINGS. There is no NECESSARY UNDERSTANDING
that there is a wide range of quality in a given author's euvre.
One may reasonably conclude that someone may divide books
into two types within a given author's oeuvre, which is precisely
what Mr. Bauer did.


NM Kingston likely understood the intellectual
trick that he was trying to play. Which is to say, he
deliberately offered a false argument.

Our faux NM is now adopting argument by
derision. We have made progress.

Being the grammatical stickler that you are, isn't the correct
phrasing "between Randy Bauer and me."

Dangling participle.