has/had

Roger wrote:
"has held", if she still holds it. Otherwise, "had".

I'm going to thumb this up, so everybody can have their chance to tell me I'm wrong.

Robert wrote:
Roger is right. If she holds the position she "has held it for x years". If she "vacated" the position she "had held it for x years".

Bush has held the position of governor.

I have held a position as a gravel truck driver.

Roger, JTT and Robert have replied to Tanguatlay.

All finished events, Robert, yet still, you can see that we can use the present perfect.

Quote:

You can think of the "past perfect" tense as "before a moment in the past". So if she "vacated" the position it puts this in the past, and would mean "she had held" the position before that point in the past where it was "vacated".

Here's some easier examples:

I saw roger on an English thread today, he had answered the question and I wanted to agree with his answer.

When I saw roger on the thread (in the past) he had already answered (before this moment in the past).

In this case, I'd have to say that Roger is wrong, Robert, at least in as much as Tanguatlay's question is involved. While what Roger described/has described and you described/you've described certainly is valid, you have to make note of the focus of the original.

Again, things that are finished do not have to be described with the past perfect. Note above, with the verb "described" and further above in red.

Most often, we use the simple past to describe finished events.

Your example,

"I saw roger on an English thread today, he had answered the question and I wanted to agree with his answer."

could be,

"I saw roger on an English thread today. He has answered the question and I wanted to agree with his answer."

OR

"I saw roger on an English thread today -- he has answered the question and I wanted to agree with his answer."

I've just shifted the focus from how you were envisioning it with the past perfect, to the present perfect of currentness/ importance.