[continued from previous message]   
      
   >> "alleged poem") does not.   
   >   
   >>>> NG: "Mr. Dance posted one line, which was not the same as what we wrote   
   >>>> in our original poem. We have to assume..."   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Mr. Dance took the word "assume" and disingenuously put it into another   
   >>>> context.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> NG: "...that Mr. Dance was so jealous of our talents that he took the   
   >>>> first line   
   >>>> of our poem, changed it a bit, and claimed that we plagiarized it,   
   >>>> thinking that no one would challenge him."   
   >>>   
   >>> If you're "assuming" that I wrote the line in question, then you're   
   >>> "assuming" that Robert Creeley did not write it.   
   >>   
   >> How many times do you need to be told that NancyGene hasn't assumed   
   >> anything?   
   >   
   > How many times do you think you have to say that before it becomes true?   
   > As NG just said, they had to "assume" that Creeley didn't write the   
   > opening line of his poem. (They're "assuming that I wrote it instead.)   
   > As I just told them, it makes no sense to "assume" that Creeley didn't   
   > write the opening line, and deny you're not "assuming" that he didn't   
   > write the poem.   
      
   Why do you lie so much, George?   
      
   Here is what NancyGene originally stated in its entirety:   
      
   Thank you, Michael.  We have strong doubts that a poem titled "The Days   
   Pile Up" by Robert Creeley exists.  Mr. Dance posted one line, which was   
   not the same as what we wrote in our original poem. We have to assume   
   that Mr. Dance was so jealous of our talents that he took the first line   
   of our poem, changed it a bit, and claimed that we plagiarized it,   
   thinking that no one would challenge him.   
      
   As everyone can see, the only assumption they made is that you were   
   jealous of their talents.   
      
   And, if you did, in fact, modify their line and falsely attribute it to   
   Creeley, then their assumption would be the obvious one to have drawn.   
      
      
   >> She has expressly stated that she *doubted* the poem's existence.  While   
   >> a doubt may lead to an assumption, the two are very different things.   
   >   
   > Yes, a doubt may lead to an assumption; and in this case it took NG only   
   > one paragraph to go from doubt to assumption. (With you it usually takes   
   > at least one more post.)   
      
   That is not true, George.   
      
   As everyone can see, in the passage in question,   
      
   "We have to assume that Mr. Dance was so jealous of our talents...",   
      
   the word "assume" directly applies to "jealous."   
      
   They assumed you were jealous of their talents.  They did not assume   
   that the Creeley poem did not exist.   
      
      
   >> For the past 10 years or so, I have been urging your Donkey to enroll in   
   >> free online course in basic English.  I now urge you to do the same.   
   >   
   > If it's the course you took, Mr. Peabrain, I'll pass.   
      
   No, George.  I worked as an English tutor at my University.   
      
      
   >> If you're incapable of understanding the differences between words like   
   >> "doubt" and "assume," you have no business discussing anything in a   
   >> public forum -- much less one that's supposedly intended for writers.   
   >   
   > Since you like to toss the word "strawman" around so freely, let me   
   > point out that that is exactly what you're doing here. I did not say   
   > that the words had the same meaning. I said that NastyGoon started by   
   > "doubting" that Creeley wrote the poem, and ended by "assuming" that he   
   > didn't write its opening line - which is logically no different from   
   > claiming that he didn't write it.   
      
   Read it again, George.  They didn't assume that the poem didn't exist.   
   They assumed that you were jealous of their talents (an assumption with   
   which I unreservedly concur).   
      
      
   >>>> George Dance, if you are going to accuse us of plagiarizing a poem,   
   >>>> posting one "line" from a poem that does not seem to have been published   
   >>>> anywhere is not sufficient proof.   
   >>>   
   >>> Your failure to find the poem via a google search does not indicate that   
   >>> it was not published. After all, Creeley is a published poet who wrote   
   >>> the bulk of his poetry before the web existed.   
   >>   
   >> Which is precisely why we have both asked you to provide us with either   
   >> a link to the poem, or with information regarding the book/journal in   
   >> which it appeared.   
   >   
   > So you want me to do your research again; but we both know how that will   
   > turn out. If I gave you the name of the book, you'd "doubt" that the   
   > poem was really in it, and demand that I prove that. if I then gave you   
   > the table of contents, showing the poem title, you'd "doubt" that it   
   > contained the line and demand that I produce the entire poem. If I then   
   > gave you the entire poem, you'd go back to "doubting" that Creeley wrote   
   > it and "assuming" that I did (which, once again, come to the same   
   > thing.) You're simply trolling again, this time with your most faithful   
   > ally.   
      
   You had stated that the poem's first line *was* it's title.  If so, the   
   TOC would be sufficient proof of its existence.   
      
      
   > OTOH, if you're actually interested in reading Creeley's poem, not just   
   > simply trolling for once, there's no reason you can't look for it   
   > yourself. Get off your asses and do what we used to do before the   
   > internet existed. NG claims to use a local library; let them start   
   > there.   
      
   I'm not going to walk 3/4 of a mile through the snow to the local   
   library on the off chance that they have the Creeley book in question   
   (assuming that such a book exists).   
      
   You claimed that NancyGene plagiarized the line.   
      
   You know the Usenet rules: "Post Proof or Shut the Fuck Up."   
      
      
   >> Again, if you are, in fact, quoting from a real poem, you must have had   
   >> a copy of that poem in front of you.   
   >>   
   >>>> Perhaps you could supply the name of   
   >>>> the book in which the poem was published?   
   >>>   
   >>> Yes, in fact I could.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Or perhaps you could give us   
   >>>> the first four lines of the poem (which would not violate copyright   
   >>>> laws) so that we could compare our poem with that of Mr. Creeley.  Or   
   >>>> just give us the url where you found the poem.   
   >>>   
   >>> Perhaps I could do that, too; but why would I give you four lines of his   
   >>> poem when y'all have shared only two lines of your own?   
   >>   
   >> Since you have located NancyGene's poem in a google search, you should   
   >> be able to click on the links.   
   >   
   > I see you're back to playing the peabrain, HarryLiar. Of course I can   
   > click on the link to your facebook page, but I can't read NastyGoon's   
   > poem there because you blocked me from reading the poems there.   
      
   Oh well.  You'll just have to wait for the February issue of AYoS then.   
      
      
   >> If you have been blocked from them,   
   >> which well may be the case, you should be able to read her poem in full   
   >> when it appears in our online magazine next month.   
   >   
   >> Since her poem is scheduled for publication, you cannot expect her to   
   >> post it in this group.   
   >   
   > Frankly, I have no interest at all in reading their poetry. They have   
   > posted enough of it in this group to last for a month.   
      
   They haven't posted any poetry here in quite some time, George.  If   
   you're referring to their cumulative poetry posted over the past 8 (or   
   so) years, then I feel compelled to point out that your Donkey has   
   posted (and reposted) enough poetry to last for several lifetimes.   
      
   >>>> George Dance, you are not the only person who knows the names of poets.   
   >>>> We understand that you are jealous and perhaps even afraid of us, and   
   >>>> what you write reflects that insecurity.   
   >>>   
   >>> NastyGoon, a belief that other people are jealous and afraid of you   
   >>> sounds like a sign you may be suffering from narcissistic personality   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)