I do not imply, although I can understand your previous misconception upon the words I have spoken as per referencing your, as you perceive, knowledge of the fact that the member on this piano forum at this time known as "ibbar" is indeed the pianist Ian Pace, that you had prior understanding to this aforementioned point which I am now addressing concerning the identity of the member "ibbar," which I have previously insinuated to indeed be the pianist Ian Pace, although I feel it is imperative to mention that, having the knowledge that I do, it is a certainty that my previous statement is indeed factually accurate, therefor now enlightening you to this point thusly, although it is of no great concern to myself as to whether you take my statement with a grain of salt. Please take this remark as being in no way odious.
The opinion that I have ascertained from this and prior conversation both on the telephone device and through computer electronic mediums, I do believe that due to your pedantic nature you may indeed certainly wish to choose that it is in your best interest to find that you may wish to save your finger strength for any writing, and I assume you reference manual paper correspondence and notes to one's self, or would this be another miscommunication?
Best,
Fox
Ah - so we're "Fox", now, are we? "Jason", perhaps? Or just some other unidentifiable Renard not by Stravinsky? As if it matters....
Let's take your lack of points in order of - er - "presentation".
I am no more interested than I imagine most other forum members to be in whether the member of whom you appear to write is or is not the pianist Ian Pace than you appear to be in offering what could universally be interpreted as an unequivocal declaration of that member's actual identity; indeed, I referred to that matter at all only because you had chosen to refer to "Pace". Given our apparent mutual lack of interest (good grief! - something actually "mutual" - now there's a thing!) in the necessity of taking this any farther, I suggest that the matter of "ibbar"'s identity be dropped forthwith, since (a) it would not appear to be germane to any legitimate argument worthy of submission to this thread and (b) it's hardly "ibbar"'s fault if his/her identity encourages such commentary upon it as you have now taken it upon yourself to present.
In response to your alleged concern that I might take your remarks on this subject as "odious", let me inform you without further ado that I have, in due accordance with their "merits", not "taken" it anywhere or at all.
Whilst you fail, or otherwise omit, to identify what specific "opinion" you claim to "have ascertained" from what "conversation...on the telephone" with whom and/or when, it would seem that the sentence with which you open your paragraph on this non-subject was in any case intended to commence with the word "From" in order for it to make any kind of sense; I can no more be held responsible for that omission than I can for the fact that you likewise appear unaware that the word "therefore" ends in an "e", over here, at least.
As to your apparent assumption that we "reference manual paper correspondence and notes to one's self" (presumably meaning "myself") on such matters here, it is less a "miscommunication" as you appear to allege it to be than a misunderstanding, deliberate or otherwise, on your part as to what we spend some of our time doing here; since, however, we would expect you to have less than no interest in what we do here, we would counsel you not to worry your little head for as much as another millisecond about such alleged "miscommunications".
On the subject of finger strength, "more strength to your finger!" we say - provided, of course, that you do not abuse it (that's to say either the strength or the finger or both) and, even more so, provided that you employ it to type well-considered points on subjects which may actually be worth reading in this or other threads on this forum; any failure on your part to do this may be of little consequence to only a few people, but it may nevertheless at the same time risk rendering some of your own "miscommunications" as "soliloquies".
Now - back to the subject, anyone?
Best,
Alistair
Topic: World's hardest piece?