[continued from previous message]   
      
   While your best friend is senile Jim Senetto.   
      
   That's hilarious.   
      
      
   >> GD: It figures that you'd try to blame Will; but I don't see how you can   
   >> blame him for Edward's sloppy editing.   
      
   Anything for his slurp buddy Jim Senetto.   
      
      
   >> In this case, the presence of one illiterate member   
      
   You don't even know the definition of illiterate, little monkey boy   
   Pendragon.   
      
   > MMP repeatedly complains about me repeating this point, but it doesn't   
   > seem to have sunk in yet, so:   
   > The only examples of "illiteracy" that have been shown in this thread   
   > came from Jim. (Better yet, let's "settle" to MMP's level and start   
   > calling Jim Mr. Chimp again.)   
      
   He'd probably like that better than Senile Senetto.   
      
   😏   
      
      
   > I'd say the only reason for MMP to call Will an illiterate that's been   
   > shown in this thread is that he doesn't like Will. Will's also MMP's   
   > adversary. As he says: "When [someone] is seen as an adversary, you   
   > assign a childish name to him and claim he   
   > can't write."   
   > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/EA_gCO9   
   BDk/m/DWT2Fq0TBwAJ?hl=en   
      
      
   You've obviously nailed Pendragon there.   
      
   >>> How do the possibilities justify our lives if they are decreased to   
   >>> irrelevancy by years?   
   >>   
   >> GD: As I already explained: they're restored in the next generation.   
   >>   
   >> MMP: And as I've already explained, the next generation's possibilities   
   >> are as limited as those of their forebears.  Since time and circumstance   
   >> will *always* conspire to decrease their possibilities by the time they   
   >> reach adulthood, the seemingly unlimited possibilities at birth are   
   >> necessarily an illusion.   
   >   
   > Nonsense; people can and do realize possibilities in their lives,   
   > including those their ancestors never did. No one can do everything, of   
   > course, but plenty of people have done enough to justify their existence   
   > {many of whose ancestors did nothing to justify theirs, beyond - wait   
   > for it - having families).   
   >   
   >>> Roughly speaking (i.e., ignoring the incoherent pseudo-sentences),   
   >>   
   >> GD: I do hope we've spent enough time on Edward's pseudo-sentences.   
   >>   
   >> MMP: LOL! If Mr. Dance actually meant what he said, he wouldn't have   
   >> reopened a two-year old thread in order to bitch about Mr. Rochester's   
   >> "edits" to his poem a second time.   
   >   
   > LOL right back. I've already explained why I commented on the thread   
   > Will reopened. But I'm serious; we've advanced the debate. MMP has not   
   > disputed that all "illiteracy" he discovered was caused by Mr. Chimp,   
   > but he's sticking to his story that the poem is still "illiterate"   
   > anway, as per his editorial philosophy: "When [someone] is seen as an   
   > adversary, you assign a childish name to him and claim he can't write."   
      
   This statement probably deserves a quote of the day thread ^^^^   
      
   >>> your   
   >>> poem is saying that we are all born with unlimited potential, but that   
   >>> the years conspire (with circumstance) to undercut our ability to   
   >>> achieve it.   
   >   
   > What is "it"? No one realizes "unlimited" possibilites, but plenty of   
   > people realize some, including ones their parents failed to realize.   
   >   
   >>> As compensation for our wasted lives, we can always take   
   >>> solace in our families (ignoring the fact that our children's potential   
   >>> will be as unrealized as our own.   
   >>   
   >> GD: Nothing in the poem about "compensation" - the word I used was   
   >> "justification". A person who has children has not completely wasted his   
   >> or her own life, no matter how much he or she hasn't done.   
   >   
   >> MMP: Sentimental hogwash.   
   >   
   > Nothing sentimental about it. You or I have no idea what those children,   
   > or their children, or their children will do. That gives one a reason to   
   > value other people, to judge them to be at least worth not harming - but   
   > it's a reason based purely on self-interest, not sentiment.   
   >   
   >> I point to the example of "Joey"    
   > - and I'll snip it, because it looks like another attempt to flame Will   
   > and/or to change the subject. Instead, I'll give an example of my own.   
   >   
   > One justifies one's life by adding value to the world.   
   > Did Edgar Allan Poe add value to the world? I'd say yes, by his writing.   
   > Did John M. Poe add value to the world? I'm not aware of anything he   
   > did, but I'd say yes for him as well, because he was EAP's   
   > great-grandfather - without him, there'd have been no EAP.   
   >   
   >>> 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?   
   >   
   > (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.)   
   >   
   >> 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?   
   >   
   >> *****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.   
      
   Vanity press lives.   
      
   😏   
      
    Make that   
   > 20; I'll probably get one to see what Bruce Boston wrote.   
   >>   
   >> 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.   
   >   
   >>> 2) As previously noted, I don't like writing in pre-fabricated forms.   
   >>   
   >> See above.   
   >>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)