[continued from previous message]   
      
   > great-grandfather - without him, there'd have been no EAP.   
      
   If the "one" in question is George Dance, then, yes.   
      
   I do not justify my life by any such sentimental tommyrot.   
      
      
   >>> That's a good (if downbeat) topic for a poem.  Unfortunately, your   
   >>> attempt to force it into triolet form at the sake of clarity undermines   
   >>> any possibilities ;-) it might have had.   
   >>   
   >> GD: It's sad that Michael's opinion of the poem (which, as noted, he   
   >> previously published in his "literary journal") has fallen so much since   
   >> he put me on his enemy's list. I'm sure that was just a coincidence,   
   >> though.   
   >   
   >> MMP: Again, Mr. Dance is confusing the purpose of The Sunday Sampler,   
   >> and A Year of Sundays which is its current incarnation.   
   >   
   >> A Year of Sundays was created to provide a showcase for the best poetry   
   >> of each of AAPC's members. My opinion regarding Mr. Dance's poem has not   
   >> changed: it is without doubt one of Mr. Dance's better works.   
   >   
   > Really? MMP claimed just days ago (in the post I'm replying to) that the   
   > poem was "illiterate". Now he's saying that he thought it was   
   > "illiterate" when he published it in AYOS? Why would he publish an   
   > "illiterate" poem? And why, FTM, what is holding him back from showing   
   > why he allegedly thought it was illiterate?   
      
   1) One of the (many) reasons why Will was ejected from "The Sunday   
   Sampler," was that several of the members (including Mr. Senetto, who   
   was running "The Sampler" at that time), stated that it was insulting to   
   have Mr. Donkey's illiterate swill appearing alongside of their own.   
      
   You may recall that I fought long and hard to keep Mr. Donkey in "The   
   Sammpler."  Of course, at that time, I was only posting video links to   
   "The Sampler," so my poetry was not in danger of being soiled by   
   appearing alongside of Will's.   
      
   2) I have repeatedly explained that your poem is illiterate because its   
   writer fails to understand the universal, totalitarian limits imposed by   
   the word "always," thereby negating his argument to an oxymoron.   
      
      
   > (Those are rhetorical questions, of course. I think MMP is bullshitting,   
   > and that his stated opinions did change, when he switched me from   
   > potential ally to open adversary. But he is free to prove me wrong by   
   > supplying credible answers.)   
      
      
   I never saw you as a potential ally, George.  Your attachment to Will   
   and his sock were known to be inseverable.   
      
   My oft-stated goal had been to achieve some semblance of peace in the   
   group, by getting you to interact in a mature, and civil, manner with   
   the other members.  That's all.   
      
   And, FYI, The Official AAPC (the FB group) currently has 95 members, and   
   19 visitors.   
      
   There have been *no* flame wars, no insults, no name-calling (unless   
   reminiscing about Mr. Donkey), and no drama whatsoever.  In fact, the   
   *only* member I have had to exclude from the group was... George J.   
   Dance (who used it as an excuse to spam post links to his blog).   
      
      
   >> Nor is Mr. Dance on my imaginary "enemies list."   
   >   
   > There is no need to even look for a quote. There is no other reason why   
   > MMP jumped into this discussion, two years ago or now, other than to   
   > protect Mr. Chimpfrom me? Or why his Mr. Chimp even started it? One   
   > that's better than this Team Monkey vs. Team Donkey thing you now claim   
   > to have no memory of?   
      
   You sound more than a bit... off-kilter, Mr. Dance.  I strongly   
   recommend that you seek therapy.   
      
      
   >> *****Speaking of A Year of Sundays... I'm currently compiling our 2024   
   >> print volume, which features the work of such (usenet) AAPC favorites as   
   >> J.D. Senetto, NancyGene, Ash Wurthing, Kevin Fries, Bob Burrows,   
   >> Hieronymous Corey, Karen Tellefsen, Richard Oakley, Wenceslas Kabeba,   
   >> and my oh-so-humble self; along with FB AAPC favorites, Louise Charlton   
   >> Webster, Scott Thomas, Bruce Boston, Robert Payne Cabeen, Paul Cordeiro,   
   >> ruth housman, Trinity-memyandi Venter, Jefferson Carter, Joseph Danoski,   
   >> Stephen Brooke, & Devin Anderson.*****   
   >   
   > Congratulations; that's at least 19 people who'll buy a copy. Make that   
   > 20; I'll probably get one to see what Bruce Boston wrote.   
      
   I sincerely hope you will.  I've been working on selection and layout   
   most of this month, and am very excited about the quality of the work   
   we'll be showcasing.   
      
      
   >> But I digress   
   >>   
   >> (backthread snipped)   
   >>   
   >>> 1) There is nothing particularly difficult about writing a poem in any   
   >>> given form.  One doesn't even have to memorize the structure of a   
   >>> triolet.  All one has to do is use a triolet for a model and copy the   
   >>> format.   
   >>   
   >> GD: It certainly seems to be too hard for some people.   
   >>   
   >> MMP: What a childish and petty thing to say!   
   >   
   > MMP and his Mr. Chimp may believe they can write really wonderful   
   > triolets if they felt like it. There is absolutely no reason for me to   
   > humor them, of course.   
      
   Why should we believe that when we've both repeatedly told you that we   
   don't write triolets?   
      
      
   >>> 2) As previously noted, I don't like writing in pre-fabricated forms.   
   >>   
   >> See above.   
   >>   
   >>> If I write a sonnet, it's because my Muse dictated a 14-line poem to me.   
   >>>  Poets who write from inspiration rather than formula don't limit   
   >>> themselves to someone else's rules.   
   >>   
   >> GD: The "Muse" is a charming idea, which I've heard of; but I don't   
   >> remember ever seeing Her invoked to evade responsibility for one's   
   >> writing until   
   >> now.   
   >>   
   >> MMP: Why do you lie so much, Mr. Dance?   
   >>   
   >> There is not even a hint of evading poetic responsibility in my   
   >> statement.   
   >   
   > It's clear here that MMP is saying no one can blame him or Mr. Chimp for   
   > what they write, because it's not their choice; their "muses" made them   
   > write it that way. You just take dictation.   
      
   You know perfectly well, that is not what I'm saying.   
      
   There are many ways for one to categorize poets, one of which is to   
   divide them into the following two groups: poets whose works are the   
   product of subsonscious inspiration, and poets whose works are the   
   product of their intellect.   
      
   I consider myself to be a member of the first group, and you to be a   
   member of the second.   
      
   Neither group is automatically superior to the other, nor are the poetic   
   creations of one more valuable.  (I prefer the works of inspiration over   
   those of intellect, but that's purely a personal call.)   
      
   I stated this in response to your challenge to compose a triolet.  It is   
   not an "excuse" for the quality of my poetry.  It is a very real, and   
   very valid excuse for my not taking you up on your challenge,   
      
      
      
      
   >> Quite the contrary, it stresses the importance of *not*   
   >> sacrificing inspiration by forcing it into a preconceived format.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>> 3) Jim is a far better poet than you.  Jim's poems strike the reader as   
   >>> being real -- powerfully, emotionally raw, unadulterated reality.   
   >   
   > This is the other side of MMP's editorial philosophy: "When Jim is seen   
   > as a potential ally, you request his poetry." That's raw, unadulterated   
   > reality.   
      
      
   LOL!  I've never had to request Jim's poetry.  Jim created the forum,   
   and is one of our regular contributors.   
      
   >>> Your   
   >>> poems, otoh, express time-worn, mundane thoughts in imitative formats.   
   >>   
   >> GD: Interestingly, MMP concludes by once again praising the work of   
   >> an   
   >> ally Jim ("Edward") while insulting the work of an adversary. If he were   
   >> still here, I'm sure he'd shrug that off as just a coincidence.   
   >>   
   >> MMP: J.D. Senetto is an exceptionally talented poet.  In fact, my   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)