Re: About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- From: "Chess One" <innes8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:40:22 GMT
"The Historian" <Spamscone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146007163.362717.318020@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Chess One wrote:
At most he
is saying that it would have been nice if more analysis were added.
'Nice' actually means precise in the English language.
I do wish you'd buy a dictionary. That may be a usage, but it's hardly
a primary one.
Who am I to argue the niceties of words with such a blowen strat, who, as
usual, argues without fact?
Phil Innes
.
- References:
- About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- From: Skeptic
- Re: About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- From: Chess One
- Re: About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- From: The Historian
- About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- Prev by Date: The not-so-famous defender
- Next by Date: Re: How many points would this piece rank?
- Previous by thread: Re: About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- Next by thread: Re: About the "Criticism" of Kingston's review of Soltis...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|