humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

"Peter Farey" wrote in message
news:fqtejt$k9v$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> Tom Reedy wrote:
>>
>> For some strange reason I very rarely get any
>> responses to my observations on this newsgroup.
>
> This is the same feeling that had me quoting the "Mr
> Cellophane" song from *Chicago* a couple of days ago
> in the 'Letters from TLS' thread. My post, which IMO
> utterly demolished the 'woolsack' theory, had been
> completely ignored.

Why don't you two agree to make
favourable comments about each
other's posts?

(As ever, I am delighted to make
constuctive suggestions, for the
amelioration of world happiness.)

> Mind you, I'd much rather be ignored than suffer
> either the uninformed hostility of Paul Crowley or the
> inane prattle of Michael Martin which is all that I
> usually seem to get.

We are essentially discussing issues
of fact. If there are 100 views on the
authorship, then at least 99 of them
are wrong. Each of those views needs
to be attacked strongly, allowing only
one that is right to survive.

Marlite theories are so weak that they
fall over on the least pressure.


Paul.