Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old January 16th 06, 10:35 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
Say No To g4
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Challlenge to Larry Parr

----- Original Message -----
From: "Louis Blair"
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 4:13 AM
Subject: The Challenge to Larry Parr


Speaking of SayNoTog4, wasn't that quite a
coincidence? About a year after Larry Parr's
"cash crunch" note, SayNoTog4 turns up
asking about what happened, and, just five
days later, Larry Parr has an "I TOLD YOU SO"
announcement.


I posed questions to this newsgroup on Jan 2, and on Jan 4
Larry Parr responded with some details. That's 2 days, not
the 5 days that our GM (Google master) claims.

Why does GM Louis Blair consider it 'quite a coincidence'
that my questions were answered within 5 days?

Hey Louie, in your estimation, how many days, weeks, or
months should Parr have waited in order for his answers
to my questions to NOT be 'quite a coincidence' ? Do you
fail to see a logical connection between a question asked
and its direct answer?

(Try to keep your response short, like a maximum of 8 snips
from postings of 6 or fewer people.)


  #2   Report Post  
Old January 17th 06, 05:33 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
Louis Blair
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Challlenge to Larry Parr

I wrote (16 Jan 2006 01:13:14 -0800):
Speaking of SayNoTog4, wasn't that quite a
coincidence? About a year after Larry Parr's
"cash crunch" note, SayNoTog4 turns up
asking about what happened, and, just five
days later, Larry Parr has an "I TOLD YOU SO"
announcement.


_
SayNoTog4 wrote (Mon, 16 Jan 2006
17:35:27 -0500):

I posed questions to this newsgroup on Jan 2, and
on Jan 4 Larry Parr responded with some details.
That's 2 days, not the 5 days that our GM (Google
master) claims.


_
I did not write, "just five days later, Larry Parr responded
with some details." I wrote, "just five days later, Larry
Parr has an 'I TOLD YOU SO' announcement." The
NNTP-Posting-Date for SayNoTog4's financial question
was 02 Jan. The NNTP-Posting-Date for Larry Parr's
"I TOLD YOU SO" note was 7 Jan. But I have no
quarrel with "Larry Parr responded with some details
about the cash crunch after 2 days" if that is what
SayNoTog4 prefers.

_
SayNoTog4 wrote (Mon, 16 Jan 2006
17:35:27 -0500):

Why does GM Louis Blair consider it 'quite a
coincidence' that my questions were answered
within 5 days?


_
The original Parr crunch note was about a
year in the past. When two events related
to something a year ago, happen to take
place within a few days of each other, it
strikes me as a coincidence.

_
SayNoTog4 wrote (Mon, 16 Jan 2006
17:35:27 -0500):

Hey Louie, in your estimation, how many days,
weeks, or months should Parr have waited in
order for his answers to my questions to NOT
be 'quite a coincidence' ?


_
Obviously there is no cut-off for the number of
days in order to qualify as a coincidence, just
as there is no cut-off in the number of inches
required to be tall.

_
SayNoTog4 wrote (Mon, 16 Jan 2006
17:35:27 -0500):

Do you fail to see a logical connection between
a question asked and its direct answer?


_
Larry Parr responded to SayNoTog4 within a
few hours and wrote nothing about having a
confirmation of his year old claim. But within
a few days, he had the announcement.

_
SayNoTog4 wrote (Mon, 16 Jan 2006
17:35:27 -0500):

Try to keep your response short, like a
maximum of 8 snips from postings of 6
or fewer people.


_
Here is something SayNoTog4 chose to
snip:
_
"Does Larry Parr think that SayNoTog4
had a sincere interest in "what specifically
[Larry Parr makes] up" (Wed, 11 Jan 2006
19:32:57 -0500)? If so, why did he avoid
considering examples of false Larry Parr
statements that were posted for him?
_
And how about that nonsense SayNoTog4
posted?
_
'I ask a question of [Louis Blair] and
he won't respond because I'm an
anonymouse. All of a sudden I'm not
important enough to give a response
to! Such intellectual dishonesty.'
- SayNoTog4 (Sat, 14 Jan 2006
09:35:21 -0500)
_
Was that irresponsible, or does Larry Parr
think an attack without evidence was okay
in this case?" - Louis Blair (16 Jan 2006
01:13:14 -0800)
_
Does SayNoTog4 claim a sincere interest in
"what specifically [Larry Parr makes] up"? If
so, why does he refuse to consider examples
of false statements that have been provided
for him?
_
Also, is attacking without evidence representative
of his moral standard?

  #3   Report Post  
Old January 17th 06, 11:12 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
Say No To g4
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Challlenge to Larry Parr

Louie:

My post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. And yet you dissected
every sentence in my post like a graduate student working on his
thesis. LOL.

You know what your problem is? You're too dry. I'll bet in real life
you're as tasteless and unexciting as cardboard pizza. Do yourself
a favor - turn off your computer and spend some time outdoors.
Enjoy the sunshine and breathe the fresh air. Watch little children
play (but don't touch them.) Buy a pet. Go to a comedy show, or
watch one on HBO. Laugh a little. Draw a funny Sam Sloan picture
and post it on Wikipedia. Let your hair down.

Life is short, Louie. Try to enjoy it.



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Checking Kingston's claim [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 99 January 23rd 06 05:08 AM
Parr challenges Blair [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 201 January 3rd 06 01:19 PM
Parr challenges Blair [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 217 January 3rd 06 01:19 PM
Larry Parr biography on Wikipedia Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 7 December 23rd 05 01:42 AM
Larry Parr biography on Wikipedia Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 7 December 23rd 05 01:42 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017