[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>> contain the poem in question.  But unless you're purchasing a used copy   
   >>>> with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence   
   >>>> (not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the   
   >>>> poem.   
   >>> We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>> \the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to   
   >>>>>>> complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was   
   >>>>>>> told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --   
   >>>>>> especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those   
   >>>>>> of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument   
   >>>>>> (and still end up losing it).   
   >>> Very similar to what Pickles used to do, with elaborate explanations for   
   >>> why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter   
   >>>>> than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As   
   >>>>> a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"   
   >>>>> no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When I'm wrong, I always admit it.  I have conceded several points to   
   >>>> PJR and others in the past.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And no.  Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.   
   >>> We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've   
   >>>> done?  You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll   
   >>>> post.   
   >>> The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for a   
   >>> significant portion of Creeley's writings.  They could sue Mr. Dance's   
   >>> source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end   
   >>>> up having their work boycotted.  Who wants to publish a poem if it's   
   >>>> going to turn out to have been stolen?  Not only do you look like a fool   
   >>>> for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.   
   >>> We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers and   
   >>> newspaper jobs because of plagiarism.  It is a serious charge.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here,   
   or   
   >>>>>>>> provide a link.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.   
   >>>>>>> If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly   
   >>>>>>> won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me   
   >>>>>>> better than that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'll   
   >>>>>> have to.  At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene   
   >>>>>> or me via email.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations of   
   >>>>> forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.   
   >>>>> Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's   
   >>>>> a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.   
   >>>   
   >>> We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.   
   >>> We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print   
   >>> copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after   
   >>>> you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem   
   >>>> could be found.   
   >>> Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read   
   >>>> (nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the   
   >>>> receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your   
   >>>> refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.   
   >>> Highly suspicious and needlessly obtuse.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the   
   >>>> title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked   
   >>>> for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.   
   >>> We think you are being too generous to Mr. Dance, but we have access to   
   >>> all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we   
   >>> will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).   
   >>   
   >> It isn't that I'm generous to a fault or anything.  I just can't imagine   
   >> anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism   
   >> based on a non-existent poem.  I think that George acted under the   
   >> belief that the line in question exists.   
   >   
   > You see that George Dance is trying to do a dance around what he   
   > actually posted.  Who would be so malicious as to feed George Dance a   
   > false quote?   
      
   My guess is that George consulted a search engine.  Even AI is out to   
   get the poor man.   
      
      
   >> Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.   
   >> I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.   
   > Is "not quite" like "a bit" or "just a bit?"   
      
   It's more of an "as big as a."   
      
   On a dunce scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being "a little bit duncy" and 10   
   being "the biggest dunce who ever lived," George is somewhere around a   
   6.5 -- as opposed to his reputation which places him at a 9 or a 10.   
      
      
      
   >>   
   >>>>>> The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there   
   >>>>>> is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each   
   >>>>>> (although they are describing very different things).   
   >>>   
   >>> According to the indices of the books, the first line starting with   
   >>> "The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his   
   >>> source claim was written by Creeley.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You   
   >>>>> claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague   
   >>>>> claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your   
   >>>>> colleague.   
   >>>   
   >>> We never said "only a bit."  "A bit" is not measurable.  The   
   >>> lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a   
   >>> different meaning.   
   >>   
   >> Once again, George Dance falls back on his old high school debating team   
   >> tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.   
   > "He can't handle the truth!"   
   >>   
   >>>> Let NancyGene speak for herself, George.  I only see two lines that   
   >>>> contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears   
   >>>> in poetry by your Donkey and myself).   
   >>> Newspapers stack or pile.  However, our poem was inspired by   
   >>> decluttering our (large) house.  We came upon saved Christmas and   
   >>> birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and   
   >>> more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those   
   >>> memories were unhappy.   
   >>>   
   >>> However, to speak on newspapers:  We subscribe to the print edition of a   
   >>> "major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which   
   >>> subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.   
   >>> We would not waste the money by not reading them.  Once they are read,   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)