[continued from previous message]   
      
   >> If MMP shows up two years from now with a new sock, we might try the   
   >> same thing. But not probably with a different thread; the archives are   
   >> full of threads like this.   
   >   
   > At least Pendragon didn't try to pass himself off as George Dance again.   
   >   
   >>>> You really spend way too much   
   >>>> time interacting with   
   >   
   > 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_gCO   
   _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   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)