jr wrote:


Parr sure knows how to put them on and yank their
chain. His foes always attack in packs.


Foe: comes after fie, but before fum; an enemy

Why do the Evans ratpackers always think they are at war
with somebody? And why do they show pride -- yes, pride --
in attracting so many critics in response to troll postings in
which ridiculous comments rule the day? Most people
would feel embarassment, not pride. In fact, the only
group I know of which similarly takes such pride in their,
ah, work, is the trolls -- and these are trained profesionals
in their field. You'll likely never measure up to their quality
standard, no matter how hard you try.



If g4 turned out to be fake Sam, it would be no surprise.


FYI: there appear to be multiple fake Sloans; one of the
many Sloans shows up in my browser as "Sam Sloan",
while another always lists as "sam sloan", no caps. Then
there are immitators of the imposters, and it is doubtful
that these could all be one and the same person.
Of course, any one of them could be g4, true enough.
In fact, the name "g4" seems to indicate that there is a
strong possibility Mr. Brennen (oops!) wants to ridicule
Sam Sloan under an anon. identity.


My late father once told me "You can't bitch if you don't vote."


And I'll bet you just swallowed it, *unthinkingly*.

Look, there are people like Larry Parr who proudly
boast of voting for candidates which they knew in
advance had zero chance of victory, which I interpret
as voting just to say you voted (like maybe your dad?).
Then there are some people who vote for the guy
they believe will win regardless of their meaningless
vote, which I interpret as voting just to say you "won".
There are some who vote for the underdog, out of pity
or spite. Emotion rules the day.
And there are those who vote automatically by party
affiliation, even if it means voting for a nincompoop
this time.
That leaves the precious few who make a rational
assessment of the possibilities, and then coldly
calculate the lesser evil, and I interpret this as trying
to influence the outcome of the election, which makes
little sense; everyone knows that elections are won, not
by a single vote, but by lobbies and special interests,
by those of means; it is just plain silly to believe that
your vote, for the first time ever, will decide anything
but the issue of who you personally voted for.

Oh, and there is one other group: those who vote
simply so that they may bitch and complain afterward,
believing this somehow "earns" them a special priviledge;
these are the very worst, for their minds are clouded
with silly nonsense. The right to bitch and complain is
granted by the Bill of Rights (which many of these
turkeys may well have voted against, just to have cast
some random vote to purportedly "earn" their wings).

I am trying to recall the name of the guy who was,
supposedly, "the worst U.S. President of all time". This
guy was so corrupt, that he even put all of our modern
Presidents to shame. My point is simply this: somebody
voted him in -- a LOT of somebodies, in fact. Now what
were they "thinking" about when they pulled that lever?
And what SHOULD they have been thinking about
instead? Heck, just freeing themselves from mindless
plattitudes like "you can't complain if you don't vote"
would be a start on the way to actually thinking.

-- help bot

The Historian wrote:
It seems 'you know who' is not the worst problem the town has:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/04/naked.town.ap/

http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=5374435&nav=4QcS

Amazing what neil thinks is chess news. It appears he finds the topics
of naked boys and vermont irrestible combinations?

Rob

help bot wrote:

In fact, the name "g4" seems to indicate that there is a
strong possibility Mr. Brennen (oops!) wants to ridicule
Sam Sloan under an anon. identity.

I don't see how it could be considered anything more than a faint
possibility even before I deny this suggestion - which I do now.

Duncan Oxley wrote:

He might have a point about the obsessing over Innes. Personally, you could
not
PAY me to read another of his silly posts. Why anyone would bother to carry
on
an argument with someone who appears to be one pawn shy of a full set is
beyond
me.

Just one pawn?

I have even seen Board members actually waste time on this serial
complainer
(and non-member!). Freaking amazing.

I wonder how much time they truly spend on Innes' drivel. For instance,
he claims to have provided an 'agenda' to Jerry Hanken for presentation
to the CJA meeting. The 'agenda' probably ended up in a circular file
at the airport.

My late father once told me "You can't bitch if you don't vote."

Your father, Duncan, was a wise man.

But I bet even Neil got a chuckle out of the breakfast bit. Heh

The "breakfast bit" might have had some slight humor to it when it was
new, back in 2002. It's decidedly stale now.

g4 wrote:
wrote in message oups.com...
FALLING OFF THE WAGON

Personally, I have nothing against Brattleboro. -- Taylor Kingston

The ratpackers are falling off the wagon.

The Innes Pledge appears broken.

Nonsense.

I do wish Mr. Parr would learn to read. The Innes Pledge states only
that the pledge-taker will not respond to the posts and emails of
Philip Keith Innes. I later extended it to cover the postings of the
pseudo-Innes Rob Mitchell. Alas, only Larry Tapper and I have taken the
pledge.

"The Historian" wrote

The "breakfast bit" might have had some slight humor to it when it was
new, back in 2002. It's decidedly stale now.


Opps, missed it. My bad.

--Duncan

"help bot" wrote in message
ps.com...

Larry Parr pretends not to read what The Nutty Professor
writes anymore, plus his ego will not allow for admission of
such errors. In sum, demanding Mr. Parr apologise is akin
to asking a scorpion not to sting a frog while crossing the
river on his back. It sounds reasonable enough in theory,
but....


Whether or not parr apologizes is not the main issue ... what's important
here is that parr made an accusation without any facts to back his statement
.... or is it a smear? ... Louis Blair counters parr's assertions admirably and
demands an apology ... we now have a written record (audit trail) documenting
parr's behavior on rgcp vis-a-vis Brattleboro and the Innes pledge.

Should parr fail to make an amende honorable, that says something about his
character ... his ethix ... his sense of fair play.


And why do you refer to Blair as the nutty professor? What do you find
nutty about him? If anything, his behavior on rgcp is way better than
most of us. When was the last time Blair use an ad hom? He may be
unemotional ala Mr. Spock ... but nutty? ... I don't think so.



Okay. I'm just saying that Mr. Parr was right about the
"transference" part, not that it was necessarily anger that
caused it. Mr. Parr has quite frequently done this same
thing in his posts, with regard to the numerous posters
he perceives as enemies or critics. Something associated
with those "enemies" is attacked or repeatedly mentioned,
when in fact it has nothing whatever to do with the issue
in question. If this is not transference (of whatever), then
what do you call it?

Us humans call it changing the subject. Why do you make things
sound more complicatied than they are?

Duncan Oxley wrote:
"The Historian" wrote

The "breakfast bit" might have had some slight humor to it when it was
new, back in 2002. It's decidedly stale now.

Opps, missed it. My bad.

I read Parr's latest recycling of his "breakfast bit" after reading
your post. It's about as amusing, and as truthful, as Innes' repeated
lies about my weight. Why do folks like Parr and Innes think they score
any sort of a point in a debate by making a fat joke?

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

Duncan Oxley wrote:
"The Historian" wrote

The "breakfast bit" might have had some slight humor to it when it was
new, back in 2002. It's decidedly stale now.

Opps, missed it. My bad.

I read Parr's latest recycling of his "breakfast bit" after reading
your post. It's about as amusing, and as truthful, as Innes' repeated
lies about my weight. Why do folks like Parr and Innes think they score
any sort of a point in a debate by making a fat joke?


Got no idear on that one. My point was I was betting you could laugh about
your foibles whereas *some people* here can't take it. When it come to
themselves their spine stiffens up like a New York toilet plunger handle.

--Duncan

Duncan Oxley wrote:
My point was I was betting you could laugh about
your foibles whereas *some people* here can't take it.

I agree.

When it come to
themselves their spine stiffens up like a New York toilet plunger handle.

Again agreed. Since you both enjoy humor and are from California, this
one is for you, Duncan:

PAWNSMOKE

Starring

Larry Parr as Marshall Matt Dillon

Phil Innes as Miss Kitty

"jr" as Festus

Sam Sloan as Doc Adams

Scene One:

(A peaceful afternoon in Brattleboro, Vermont. The stage to Crossville
is about to depart with Doc Adams on board, and Marshall Dillon is
seeing him off.)

Dillon: You take care of yourself, buckaroo. And remember what I said
about Thai soldiers on leave! Stick to your guns.

(As we see the stage pull away down the street we hear a woman's
scream. Voices in the gathering crowd ask "What was that?" "It
came from the saloon!" "It sounds like Miss Kitty!", etc.)

Dillon: Miss Kitty!

(Camera shifts to the Long Branch Saloon. We see Miss Kitty screaming
and crying hysterically. She runs to Dillon.)

Miss Kitty: Oh, helas Marshall Dillon! Helas! Helas heuch!

Dillon: What's the matter Miss Kitty!

Miss Kitty: Oh, the ratpacker gang has been through town again,
featuring chess histories written in blood!

Dillon: You don't say.

Miss Kitty: And they all favor drug testing, FIDE, book banning... they
won't talk about chess at all. And they insult my honor -

(The crowd laughs)

Miss Kitty: - by mocking my Nearly an IM title, my 2450 rating that I
earned working the saloons of Europe, and my knowledge of 27 different
languages, including Andean, British...

Dillon: Yes, I know, Miss Kitty, I know you are an ideal intellect.

Miss Kitty: And the 500 pound Hysterion ate an enormous breakfast!

Dillon: Oh my! The Hysterion! Is that the fellow named "Hoss?"

Miss Kitty: Sorry Matt, that's another Western.

(Dillon grows pale, and is genuinely in shock that he has made an
error. A little boy runs out of the Long Branch Saloon.)

Little Boy: Miz Kitti! Miz kitty!

Dillon: Who is this?

Miss Kitty: It's the boy I hired to clean out the spittoons each
night. (Whispers to Dillon) I think he's gone a little soft in the
head from sniffin' them. (To the boy) Rob, what's the matter?

Rob: You know the Hysterion spelled Chessville with one L!

Dillon: Miss Kitty, we need to do something about this. I must defend
Brattleboro, and chess! Come to my office, and bring the lad with you.

(They walk to the Marshall's office. As we see them cross the street,
we hear Rob say)

Rob: You know the Hysterion spelled Chessville with one L!

(Cut to interior of office. We see Festus licking an envelope as
Dillon, Kitty, and Rob enter.)

Festus: Did the stage leave for Reno yet? I need to get this here
report off to headquarters.

Dillon: No, my bucko, we have time enough for that. Festus, the
ratpacker gang was through town again. Once again, I intend to teach
them a lesson. (He sits down at a computer and begins typing.) Be sure
to back me up whenever I post.

Festus: (also sitting down at a computer) I can't help but do that,
since we post from the same ISP.

Miss Kitty: Oh please hurry Marshall! Heuch helas alack! They are
probably on their way to the hundred acre wood even while we speak!

(We hear the sounds of keys clicking while Miss Kitty half-sings,
half-recites an old Andean-language chess-song. After two beats, we
hear over the background)

Rob: You know the Hysterion spelled Chessville with one L!

(Commercial break)