[continued from previous message]   
      
   >> AYoS is a sampler. It was created to show  off the poetry of *all* of   
   >> AAPC's members.   
   >   
   > I know that's what it was created for, and what it's sold as. It's a   
   > direct copy of /April/ magazine that I've told you about (except I   
   > didn't sell mine).   
   >   
   >> It has nothing to do with my definition of poetry.  It   
   >> has nothing to do with my personal likes and dislikes.  It merely shows   
   >> off the poetry of our group's members.   
   >   
   > AYOS is being marketed as a sampler to show off the poetry of *all* of   
   > aapc's members,   
   > but as I've told you it's turned into a vanity project for Team Monkey   
   > and assorted   
   > trolls, none of which are writing anything on aapc. Except you, of   
   > course, under   
   > a new sock, but I don't think you'd publish any of that on aapc.   
   >   
   >> PJR used to post a link to a web page that described each of AAPC's   
   >> members (nearly all of whom were long gone by the time I joined).   
   >   
   > I don't think it was his list, or that it was specifically aapc.   
   >   
   >> Jim   
   >> created the "Sampler" (among other reasons) to show readers who the   
   >> current members were.  "A Year of Sundays" is merely picking up where   
   >> the "Sunday Sampler" left off.   
   >   
   > The big difference with AYOS, of course, is that it has nothing to do   
   > with aapc.   
   >   
   >> I like both Jim and NancyGene's poetry, and am glad that I'm able to   
   >> include it in AYoS.  But I don't publish it because I like it.  I   
   >> publish it because they are members of AAPC and AYoS is a "sampler" for   
   >> AAPC poets to display their work in.   
   >   
   > No, lying Michael. Neither have participated in AAPC since google   
   > stopped   
   > carrying it, except for one possible troll post each. they're members of   
   > your Facebook group; you just use the name of the usenet group for   
   > advertising purposes.   
   >   
   >>> Which brings us back to where we began this digression, so it's a good   
   >>> place to end it, too.   
   >>>   
   >>> snip   
   >>   
   >> You are obviously jealous of Jim and NancyGene.  Your jealousy of them   
   >> has been obvious for many years.   
   >   
   > Now, that is funny. What am I supposed to be jealous of? That you're   
   > their   
   > online "friend" (ie, their ally)? That you praise and publish their   
   > "writings"?   
   > I'm afraid that's all I can think of.   
      
   You have always been jealous of Jim's popularity among AAPC members.   
   Jim was universally liked.  Everyone liked Jim the person.  And everyone   
   liked Jim's poetry.  Even the hypercritical PJR occasionally   
   complimented Jim on his work.   
      
   As to NancyGene, you have been jealous of her skills as a writer and her   
   knowledge regarding grammar.  Back when NancyGene first came here, I   
   considered her a troll -- as she had come here specifically to troll   
   Pickles (with good cause) and anyone supporting him.  But I quickly   
   became aware of the fact that her posts were always exceptionally well   
   written, and realized that she possessed a high level of education.   
      
   I still don't know any personal details about NancyGene's life --   
   including her legal name -- but she is a highly skilled writer who has   
   developed as a poet at an amazingly fast rate.  Her poems have become   
   increasingly metrical, symbolic, and complex -- and always very witty.   
   You'll see this for yourself when the latest issue of AYoS comes out.   
      
   I think you're jealous because she possesses both skill and talent...   
   and the fact that she often offered corrections to your poems made you a   
   bit resentful in an embarrassingly childish way.   
      
   >> I'm sorry that you feel that way; but it is to your continued discredit   
   >> that you insist on belittling their poetry here, long after they have   
   >> been regular participating members.   
   >   
   > Interesting. So it's "obvious" to you that anyone who belittles a poet's   
   > work is jealous of that poet? Or does that depend on "context," too?   
      
   Neither.  It depends on what I actually said vs what you've restated it   
   to be.  The operative words in my original statement were "long after   
   they have been regularly participating members."  That sort of petty,   
   obsessive behavior is generally indicative of jealousy.   
      
   --   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)