On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:57:08 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:39:18 AM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 3:06:44 AM UTC, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Dockery, I don't have an animal spirts. Is that some Shadowville New Age thing?
> > The Donkey is so illiterate that he doesn't recognize that he used the wrong word (in two different posts), even when he is called on it and laughed at. He just keeps on spirting.
> I saw the typo but forgot to correct it at the time.
>
> I'll fix it now, thanks for reminding me.
>
> For someone who doesn't even know that London isn't in Ireland, and thinks John Dunne and Robert Stillings are poets, you sure are a picky know-it-all, Nancy Gene.
>
> HTH and HAND.

Remember way back when you used to call me a picky know-it-all? Man, those were the daze.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 🌞
> > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> >
> > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> >
> > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> >
> > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> >
> > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> >
> > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> >
> > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> >
> > HTH and HAND.
> I’m not talking about that.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > >
> > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > >
> > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > >
> > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > >
> > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > >
> > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > >
> > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > >
> > > HTH and HAND.
> > I’m not talking about that.
> Okay.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > >
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > >
> > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > >
> > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > >
> > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > >
> > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > >
> > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > >
> > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > I’m not talking about that.
> > Okay.
> Do you have any idea what I am talking about?

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:14:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > > >
> > > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > > >
> > > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > > >
> > > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > > >
> > > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > > >
> > > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > > I’m not talking about that.
> > > Okay.
> > Do you have any idea what I am talking about?
> Most of the time.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:28:02 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:14:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting.. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > > > I’m not talking about that.
> > > > Okay.
> > > Do you have any idea what I am talking about?
> > Most of the time.
> That’s great, but doesn’t help advance this discussion.
> The question is, do you have any idea what I’m talking
> about now, relative to the discussion of familiar spirits?

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:56:32 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:28:02 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:14:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it..
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > > > > I’m not talking about that.
> > > > > Okay.
> > > > Do you have any idea what I am talking about?
> > > Most of the time.
> > That’s great, but doesn’t help advance this discussion.
> > The question is, do you have any idea what I’m talking
> > about now, relative to the discussion of familiar spirits?
> I'm familiar with it.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:02:40 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:56:32 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:28:02 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:14:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > > > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > > > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > > > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > > > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > > > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > > > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > > > > > I’m not talking about that.
> > > > > > Okay.
> > > > > Do you have any idea what I am talking about?
> > > > Most of the time.
> > > That’s great, but doesn’t help advance this discussion.
> > > The question is, do you have any idea what I’m talking
> > > about now, relative to the discussion of familiar spirits?
> > I'm familiar with it.
> I’m sorry, I don’t know what you mean. Further, that doesn’t give
> any indication that you understand what I mean by familiar spirits.
> So with respect to your understanding, I don’t have an animal spirit, but
> do have a “familiar spirit”, or so people in a position to know have said.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:33:51 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 8:02:40 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:56:32 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:28:02 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:14:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:03:13 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 7:01:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 6:30:39 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:18:04 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:07:16 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 7:58:01 AM UTC-4, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Ponder This
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> - George J. Dance
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I’m spamming a link to the subjected book,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > because Spam-I-Am, and spam is what I do:
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://www.amazon.com/Ponder-Awhile-Mohit-K-Misra/dp/1419646729
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks again for posting this, I don't remember these events.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > “Thanks again for posting this” doesn’t apply, since there was no prior thanks,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > but “Thanks for posting this again” does, since the link was posted previously.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > That's right, thanks.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Well of course it is,
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > and you're welcome.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Spam-I-Am
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Good morning, Corey.
> > > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> > > > 🌞
> > > > > > > > > >> > > Buenas noches, Donkey.
> > > > > > > > > >> > So, what's your spirit familiar?
> > > > > > > > > >> Yes, my spirit is familiar.
> > > > > > > > > I'm talking about animal spirits:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Animism (from Latin: anima, 'breath, spirit, life')[1][2] is the belief that objects, places, and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence.[3][4][5][6] Potentially, animism perceives all things—animals, plants, rocks, rivers, weather systems, human handiwork, and perhaps even words—as animated and alive. Animism is used in the anthropology of religion, as a term for the belief system of many Indigenous peoples,[7] especially in contrast to the relatively more recent development of organized religions.[8] Animism focuses on the metaphysical universe, with a specific focus on the concept of the immaterial soul.[9]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Although each culture has its own mythologies and rituals, animism is said to describe the most common, foundational thread of indigenous peoples' "spiritual" or "supernatural" perspectives. The animistic perspective is so widely held and inherent to most indigenous peoples, that they often do not even have a word in their languages that corresponds to "animism" (or even "religion");[10] the term is an anthropological construct.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Largely due to such ethnolinguistic and cultural discrepancies, opinions differ on whether animism refers to an ancestral mode of experience common to indigenous peoples around the world, or to a full-fledged religion in its own right. The currently accepted definition of animism was only developed in the late 19th century (1871) by Sir Edward Tylor. It is "one of anthropology's earliest concepts, if not the first".[11]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Animism encompasses the beliefs that all material phenomena have agency, that there exists no categorical distinction between the spiritual and physical (or material) world, and that soul, spirit, or sentience exists not only in humans, but also in other animals, plants, rocks, geographic features such as mountains or rivers, or other entities of the natural environment: water sprites, vegetation deities, tree spirits, etc. Animism may further attribute a life force to abstract concepts such as words, true names, or metaphors in mythology. Some members of the non-tribal world also consider themselves animists (such as author Daniel Quinn, sculptor Lawson Oyekan, and many contemporary Pagans)..."
> > > > > > > > > A witchy woman once told me mine was a wolf.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps mine is actually a donkey.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As I told Karen, I actually like donkeys fine, Eeyore was a favorite A. a. Milne character when I was a kid, after all.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > HTH and HAND.
> > > > > > > > I’m not talking about that.
> > > > > > > Okay.
> > > > > > Do you have any idea what I am talking about?
> > > > > Most of the time.
> > > > That’s great, but doesn’t help advance this discussion.
> > > > The question is, do you have any idea what I’m talking
> > > > about now, relative to the discussion of familiar spirits?
> > > I'm familiar with it.
> > I’m sorry, I don’t know what you mean. Further, that doesn’t give
> > any indication that you understand what I mean by familiar spirits.
> > So with respect to your understanding, I don’t have an animal spirit, but
> > do have a “familiar spirit”, or so people in a position to know have said.
> Okay, explain it and let's see.

On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > >>>
> > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > >>>
> > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > >
> > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > >
> > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > >
> > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > >
> > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > >> believed.
> > >
> > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > >
> >
> > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > >
> > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > "libel verb
> > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> >
> > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > lame. Just a thought.
> > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > spelling lames.)
> > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > readily substantiated.
> > >
> > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> By the way, Pendragon is lying.
>
> I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.

Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.

List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 9:58:04 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that.. So,
> > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > >>>
> > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > >
> > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > >
> > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > >
> > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > >
> > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > >> believed.
> > > >
> > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > >
> > >
> > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > "libel verb
> > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > >
> > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > spelling lames.)
> > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > readily substantiated.
> > > >
> > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> >
> > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
>
> List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for a reply.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 9:58:04 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that.. So,
> > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > >>>
> > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > >
> > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > >
> > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > >
> > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > >
> > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > >> believed.
> > > >
> > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > >
> > >
> > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > "libel verb
> > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > >
> > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > spelling lames.)
> > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > readily substantiated.
> > > >
> > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> >
> > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
>
> List three Usenet groups that you've spammed

I didn't say anything about spamming.

Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?

your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:10:30 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 9:58:04 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > >
> > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > >> believed.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > "libel verb
> > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > >
> > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > >
> > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > >
> > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
> >
> > List three Usenet groups that you've spammed
> I didn't say anything about spamming.
>
> Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?
> your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Have you forgotten the topic of the discussion at hand... again?

All of the following quotes appear (above) in this thread:

MMP: The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.

DONKEY: I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.

MMP: List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Your forgetfulness is steadily increasing in frequency, Donkey. You *really* should have that checked.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:10:30 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 9:58:04 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > >
> > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > >> believed.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > "libel verb
> > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > >
> > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > >
> > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > >
> > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
> >
> > List three Usenet groups that you've spammed
> I didn't say anything about spamming.
>
> Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?
> your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Familiarity breeds contempt.

On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > >>>
> > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > >>>
> > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > >
> > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > >
> > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > >
> > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > >
> > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > >> believed.
> > >
> > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > >
> >
> > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > >
> > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > "libel verb
> > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> >
> > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > lame. Just a thought.
> > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > spelling lames.)
> > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > readily substantiated.
> > >
> > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> By the way, Pendragon is lying.
>
> I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.

I wrote that I /post/ to three Usenet newsgroups.

Why do you lie and misrepresent so much Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?

🙂

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:35:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that.. So,
> > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > >>>
> > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > >
> > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > >
> > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > >
> > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > >
> > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > >> believed.
> > > >
> > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > >
> > >
> > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > "libel verb
> > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > >
> > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > spelling lames.)
> > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > readily substantiated.
> > > >
> > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> >
> > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> I wrote that I /post/ to three Usenet newsgroups.
>
> Why do you lie and misrepresent so much Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?

Have you forgotten the topic of the discussion at hand... again?

All of the following quotes appear (above) in this thread:

MMP: The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.

DONKEY: I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.

MMP: List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Your forgetfulness is steadily increasing in frequency, Donkey. You *really* should have that checked.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:10:30 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > >
> > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > >> believed.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > "libel verb
> > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > >
> > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > >
> > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > >
> > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
> >
> > List three Usenet groups that you've spammed

Wrong again, Pendragon.

I didn't say anything about spamming.

Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey?

🙂

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:44:52 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:35:09 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo..ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > >
> > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > >
> > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > >> believed.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > "libel verb
> > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > >
> > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > >
> > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > >
> > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > I wrote that I /post/ to three Usenet newsgroups.
> >
> > Why do you lie and misrepresent so much Pendragon, you shit spewing little monkey?
> Have you forgotten the topic of the discussion at hand... again?
>
> All of the following quotes appear (above) in this thread:
>
> MMP: The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming..
>
> DONKEY: I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
>
> MMP: List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.
>
> Your forgetfulness is steadily increasing in frequency, Donkey. You *really* should have that checked.

Are you familiar with the term “familiar nature”?
Would it bother you if someone told everybody
that you had a gentle spirit and a familiar nature,
or a gentle nature and a familiar spirit? I forget
exactly how they phrased it, but I know it pissed
me off when I heard about it. How dare they?!?

On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> >>> George J. Dance wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Ponder This
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> >>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> >>>
> >>>> I spent good money on a book
> >>>> of poems without a preview look
> >>>
> >>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> >>>> row after row of silly coup-
> >>>
> >>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> >>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> >>>
> >>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> >>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> >>>
> >>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> >>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> >>>
> >>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> >>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> >>>
> >>>> - George J. Dance
> >>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> >> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> >> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> >> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> >> begged and flamed to stop.
> >>
> >> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> >> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> >> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> >> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> >> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> >>
> >> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> >> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> >> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> >>
> >> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> >> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> >> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> >> that it's a comic poem.
> >
> > Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> >
> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> groups he was already posting on.

I only post on three Usenet newsgroups, currently.

> I doubt that you actually have any,
> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> believed.
> > Oh... that's right... you published it.
> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> me, because you're also libelling me.

And still going, shit spewing little monkey that he is.

🙂

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 12:05:06 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:10:30 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george....@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > > >> believed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > > "libel verb
> > > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > > >
> > > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > > >
> > > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > > Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
> > >
> > > List three Usenet groups that you've spammed
> Wrong again, Pendragon.
> I didn't say anything about spamming.
> Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey?
>
> 🙂

Why you are such an inarticulate niggler the world may never know.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 12:05:06 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 11:10:30 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 10:58:00 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george....@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > > >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Ponder This
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> > > > > >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> > > > > >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> > > > > >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> > > > > >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> > > > > >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> > > > > >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> > > > > >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> > > > > >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> > > > > >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> > > > > >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> > > > > >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> > > > > >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> > > > > >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> > > > > >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> > > > > >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> > > > > >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> > > > > >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> > > > > >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> > > > > >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> > > > > >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> > > > > >> groups he was already posting on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > > > > > begged and flamed to stop."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> > > > > Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> > > > > already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I doubt that you actually have any,
> > > > > >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> > > > > >> believed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> > > > > >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> > > > > >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> > > > > "libel verb
> > > > > li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> > > > > libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> > > > > https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> > > > >
> > > > > Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> > > > > lame. Just a thought.
> > > > > > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> > > > > No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet" just like
> > > > > the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> > > > > and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> > > > > You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> > > > > spelling lames.)
> > > > > 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> > > > > readily substantiated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> > > > By the way, Pendragon is lying.
> > > >
> > > > I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.
> > > Which three Usenet groups, Donkey.
> > >
> > > List three Usenet groups that you've spammed
> Wrong again, Pendragon.
> I didn't say anything about spamming.
> Why do you lie and misrepresent so much, Pendragon, you shit slinging little monkey?

Have you forgotten the topic of the discussion at hand... again?

Are you incapable of remembering the topic of a discussion from one thread to the next?

Have you officially become a senile old fart?

All of the following quotes appear (above) in this thread:

MMP: The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.

DONKEY: I only post to three Usenet groups, currently.

MMP: List three Usenet groups that you've spammed your book to and I'll provide links to two more.

Your forgetfulness is steadily increasing in frequency, Donkey. You *really* should have that checked.

On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>> On 2022-09-13 3:02 p.m., General-Zod wrote:
> >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ponder This
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Alas! Alack! Oh, woe is me!
> >>>>>> I am in Mohit Misery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I spent good money on a book
> >>>>>> of poems without a preview look
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> then found, when I had ope'd it up
> >>>>>> row after row of silly coup-
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> lets, half of which don't scan
> >>>>>> (though the poet gets a rhyme in whenever he can)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> while the other half make zero sense;
> >>>>>> a carpark often has a fence.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> In life there's many a tragedy,
> >>>>>> but none like Mohit Misery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I'll even pray to heaven, please
> >>>>>> relieve us from Mo' Miseries.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> - George J. Dance
> >>>>>> from Ponder This, 2015
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Quite interesting... would like to hear the back story...!
> >>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done that. So,
> >>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook and was
> >>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> >>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> >>>>
> >>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as a copy
> >>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam (in those
> >>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> >>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an end to
> >>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> >>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's been a bit
> >>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due to the
> >>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> >>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up front,
> >>>> that it's a comic poem.
> >>>
> >>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to Will Donkey's spam.
> >>>
> >> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other than
> >> groups he was already posting on.
> >
> > That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> >
> > You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he was being
> > begged and flamed to stop."
> >
> > That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> >
> > I doubt that you actually have any,
> >> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> >> believed.
> >
> > I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> >
>
> >>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> >> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> >> me, because you're also libelling me.
> >
> > Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact, the case.
> "libel verb
> li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
>
> Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> lame. Just a thought.
> > However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for his book, and that
> No, you were implying that Will was spamming "all over usenet"

Which, again, was a lie, to set the record straight.

> just like
> the kook who inspired my poem. If you were saying you didn't mean that,
> and you thought "all over usenet" meant to one group only, that's fine.
> You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> spelling lames.)
> 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> readily substantiated.
> >
> Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.

Pendragon stop whining?

Doubtful.

🙂

On 2022-09-14 10:29 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done
that. So,
>>>>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook
and was
>>>>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he
was being
>>>>>> begged and flamed to stop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as
a copy
>>>>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam
(in those
>>>>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
>>>>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an
end to
>>>>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
>>>>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's
been a bit
>>>>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due
to the
>>>>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
>>>>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up
front,
>>>>>> that it's a comic poem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to
Will Donkey's spam.
>>>>>
>>>> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other
than
>>>> groups he was already posting on.
>>>
>>> That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
>>>
>>> You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet,
including groups where he was being
>>> begged and flamed to stop."
>>>
>>> That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
>> Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
>> already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
>
> I don't know any such thing, George. You haven't defined what "all
over usenet" means. How many usenet groups constitute "all over"?>

Oh, you want to start (over) with definitions. Great idea. Let's start
with the definition of "spamming usenet". The Current Usenet spam
thresholds and guidelines (posted here in March define it as posting a
"substantively identical" message to an "excessive" number of groups.
The latter is measured by the Breidbart Index, or BI (the sum of the
square roots of the number of groups to which each post was made).
For example, 2 posts of the same message (one crossposted to 9 groups,
and one to 4) have a BI of 5, while posting it separately to the same 13
groups would have a BI of 13. A message with a BI of more than 20 in a
45-day period is cancellable spam.

As for "all over usenet", I'll stick with the standard usage:
"1: over the whole extent
decorated all over with a flower pattern
2: EVERYWHERE
looked all over for the book"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/allover

Here's the data:
https://groups.google.com/search/conversations?q=%22Ponder%20Awhile%22

If you have trouble with the definitions, you're of course welcome to
offer your own.

> How many usenet groups has Will Donkey spammed it to?

Since you haven't shown yet that Will has done any spamming (exceeded
the BI), you're begging the question.

> I fully suspect that he's spammed it to a dozen or more usenet groups.

> And whether he's spammed it to groups that he's already a member of
is irrelevant. You did not specify that Mohit spammed it to groups
where he wasn't already a member. You only said that he spammed it to
groups after they'd begged him to stop.

I don't think it's irrelevant to point it out at all. There's a
difference between promoting something on the groups you already post
to, and posting about it on groups you've never posted to before or
since. As I said, though, it is a side issue; once you've shown that
Will did any "spamming," we can talk about that.

> The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though
he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.

Oh, I'm sure Will has posted more than 25 OPs on his book to aapc in the
past 3 years. If he's posted the same message to aapc more than 20 times
in 45 days, that could be considered spamming, but I doubt he has. (You
cannot count different posts with the same message in the backthread, of
course; or different messages with the same sig line.)
>
>>> I doubt that you actually have any,
>>>> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
>>>> believed.
>>>
>>> I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
>>>
>>
>>>>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
>>>> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
>>>> me, because you're also libelling me.
>>>
>>> Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact,
the case.
>> "libel verb
>> li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
>> libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
>>
>> Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
>> lame. Just a thought.
>
> Doubling "l"s is tres passé.

>>> However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for
his book, and that
>> No, you "implied" that Will was "spamming all over usenet" just like
>> the kook who inspired my poem.

> As previously noted, I highly doubt that the Donkey has limited his
spam to one group.
> Let's see... an archive search for "selected poems 1976-2019" turns
up 6,576 results. That's a shipload of spam by anyone's standards.

Oh, indeed: 6,576 copies of the same post is a lot of posts. But you
haven't shown that all 6,000+ are substantively the same, or even looked
at the content. Some of them are replies by Will in threads where the
book is being discussed; some are replies by him where the book is
mentioned only in the backthread; in some he uses the book title and
url as a sig line; and some weren't even written by him.

> The archives also show that he's spammed it to alt.poetry,
alt.arts.poetry, rec.arts.poems, rec.music.beatles, -- and that's just
from the 240 most recent posts.

According to my own searches, since October 2019 (when the book came out):

- Will has made 7 posts to rec.arts.poems containing the phrase
"selected poems":
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.arts.poems/search?q=%22selected%20poems%22%20author%3Awill%20author%3Adockery&hl=en

- He made one post to alt.poetry containing the words "selected poems"
in that time:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.poetry/search?q=selected%20poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery

- He also made one post using those words on rec.music.beatles (not the
same post as the one to a.p):
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.music.beatles/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery

- and he has made zero posts to alt.arts.poetry that used that phrase
since 2015:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery
Your search probably captured the one post I made to aap that used the
phrase:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems )

>> You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
>> spelling lames.)
>> 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
>> readily substantiated.
>>>
>> Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
>
> Need I remind you that you are the one claiming to have been libeled
(i.e., whining).

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 10:44:06 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-14 10:29 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done
> that. So,
> >>>>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook
> and was
> >>>>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he
> was being
> >>>>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as
> a copy
> >>>>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam
> (in those
> >>>>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> >>>>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an
> end to
> >>>>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> >>>>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's
> been a bit
> >>>>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due
> to the
> >>>>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> >>>>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up
> front,
> >>>>>> that it's a comic poem.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to
> Will Donkey's spam.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other
> than
> >>>> groups he was already posting on.
> >>>
> >>> That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> >>>
> >>> You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet,
> including groups where he was being
> >>> begged and flamed to stop."
> >>>
> >>> That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> >> Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> >> already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> >
> > I don't know any such thing, George. You haven't defined what "all
> over usenet" means. How many usenet groups constitute "all over"?>
>
> Oh, you want to start (over) with definitions. Great idea. Let's start
> with the definition of "spamming usenet". The Current Usenet spam
> thresholds and guidelines (posted here in March define it as posting a
> "substantively identical" message to an "excessive" number of groups.
> The latter is measured by the Breidbart Index, or BI (the sum of the
> square roots of the number of groups to which each post was made).
> For example, 2 posts of the same message (one crossposted to 9 groups,
> and one to 4) have a BI of 5, while posting it separately to the same 13
> groups would have a BI of 13. A message with a BI of more than 20 in a
> 45-day period is cancellable spam.
>
> As for "all over usenet", I'll stick with the standard usage:
> "1: over the whole extent
> decorated all over with a flower pattern
> 2: EVERYWHERE
> looked all over for the book"
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/allover
>
> Here's the data:
> https://groups.google.com/search/conversations?q=%22Ponder%20Awhile%22
>
> If you have trouble with the definitions, you're of course welcome to
> offer your own.
>
> > How many usenet groups has Will Donkey spammed it to?
>
> Since you haven't shown yet that Will has done any spamming (exceeded
> the BI), you're begging the question.
>
> > I fully suspect that he's spammed it to a dozen or more usenet groups.
>
> > And whether he's spammed it to groups that he's already a member of
> is irrelevant. You did not specify that Mohit spammed it to groups
> where he wasn't already a member. You only said that he spammed it to
> groups after they'd begged him to stop.
>
> I don't think it's irrelevant to point it out at all. There's a
> difference between promoting something on the groups you already post
> to, and posting about it on groups you've never posted to before or
> since. As I said, though, it is a side issue; once you've shown that
> Will did any "spamming," we can talk about that.
> > The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though
> he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.
> Oh, I'm sure Will has posted more than 25 OPs on his book to aapc in the
> past 3 years. If he's posted the same message to aapc more than 20 times
> in 45 days, that could be considered spamming, but I doubt he has. (You
> cannot count different posts with the same message in the backthread, of
> course; or different messages with the same sig line.)
> >
> >>> I doubt that you actually have any,
> >>>> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> >>>> believed.
> >>>
> >>> I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>>>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> >>>> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> >>>> me, because you're also libelling me.
> >>>
> >>> Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact,
> the case.
> >> "libel verb
> >> li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> >> libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> >> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> >>
> >> Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> >> lame. Just a thought.
> >
> > Doubling "l"s is tres passé.
> >>> However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for
> his book, and that
> >> No, you "implied" that Will was "spamming all over usenet" just like
> >> the kook who inspired my poem.
> > As previously noted, I highly doubt that the Donkey has limited his
> spam to one group.
> > Let's see... an archive search for "selected poems 1976-2019" turns
> up 6,576 results. That's a shipload of spam by anyone's standards.
>
> Oh, indeed: 6,576 copies of the same post is a lot of posts. But you
> haven't shown that all 6,000+ are substantively the same, or even looked
> at the content. Some of them are replies by Will in threads where the
> book is being discussed; some are replies by him where the book is
> mentioned only in the backthread; in some he uses the book title and
> url as a sig line; and some weren't even written by him.
>
> > The archives also show that he's spammed it to alt.poetry,
> alt.arts.poetry, rec.arts.poems, rec.music.beatles, -- and that's just
> from the 240 most recent posts.
>
> According to my own searches, since October 2019 (when the book came out):
>
> - Will has made 7 posts to rec.arts.poems containing the phrase
> "selected poems":
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.arts.poems/search?q=%22selected%20poems%22%20author%3Awill%20author%3Adockery&hl=en
>
> - He made one post to alt.poetry containing the words "selected poems"
> in that time:
> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.poetry/search?q=selected%20poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery
>
> - He also made one post using those words on rec.music.beatles (not the
> same post as the one to a.p):
> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.music.beatles/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery
>
>
> - and he has made zero posts to alt.arts.poetry that used that phrase
> since 2015:
> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems%20author%3AWill%20author%3ADockery
> Your search probably captured the one post I made to aap that used the
> phrase:
> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry/search?q=Selected%20Poems )
> >> You may have learned something. (Two, counting my advice on making
> >> spelling lames.)
> >> 2) you were the schnook who published it for him, both of my claims are
> >> readily substantiated.
> >>>
> >> Of course I published Will's book. Stop whinging about it.
> >
> > Need I remind you that you are the one claiming to have been libeled
> (i.e., whining).
>
> You made a false accusation with malicious intent -- since we're on
> definitions today, I'll remind you that's the definition of libel.
>
> > You have yet to show any proof to back up your statement.
>
> Michael, we're not in court. We're on aapc (where, according to you, if
> you accuse someone of making a false accusation you don't have to prove
> it, remember?).
>
> > In fact, your *only* argument was that your original statement about
> Mohit (which I subsequently applied to Will) implied that he'd spam
> posted to an undisclosed number of usenet groups, whereas Will had only
> spammed a single group.
>
> No, I did not argue that Will had "only spammed a single group".
>
> > While that would hardly count for libel even if it were true, that
> simply is not the case. Will spammed it to at least 5 usenet groups (in
> a total of 6,576 posts).
>
> > You sir, stand corrected.
>
> You have shown that there have been a lot of posts about the book on
> aapc. That's all you've shown so far.

On Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 10:44:06 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-09-14 10:29 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 8:02:56 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >> On 2022-09-14 3:50 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 14, 2022 at 12:43:35 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>> On 2022-09-13 7:59 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>>>> I don't want to dox the guy, but I see Corey's already done
> that. So,
> >>>>>> first: it's about this "Mohit Mis--" who'd published a chapbook
> and was
> >>>>>> spamming ads for it all over usenet, including groups where he
> was being
> >>>>>> begged and flamed to stop.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So I spent a month doing some kook-busting. I wrote this poem as
> a copy
> >>>>>> of his style. Then I began daily searching usenet for his spam
> (in those
> >>>>>> days, it was possible to search usenet, not just one group, using
> >>>>>> google), and post my poem as a reply to his ads. It did put an
> end to
> >>>>>> them, and a few people thanked me for it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Second: it went into the April section of "Doggerel," which you may
> >>>>>> remember me talking about posting into aapc this year. That's
> been a bit
> >>>>>> derailed, and I welcome the chance to get back to it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Third: this was a good way to get back to the above project, due
> to the
> >>>>>> ongoing discussion of how and when to use the word "Alas" making it
> >>>>>> suddenly relevant. Notice how my use tells the reader, right up
> front,
> >>>>>> that it's a comic poem.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pity you couldn't have a adopted a similar tack with regard to
> Will Donkey's spam.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I've never seen any evidence of Will advertising his book on other
> than
> >>>> groups he was already posting on.
> >>>
> >>> That's good, because I was referring to *this* group.
> >>>
> >>> You'll note that you'd said: "spamming ads for it all over usenet,
> including groups where he was being
> >>> begged and flamed to stop."
> >>>
> >>> That fits Will Donkey and AAPC to a "T".
> >> Like hell it does. Posting, or even "spamming", to one group (that one's
> >> already on) is not spamming "all over Usenet", and you know it.
> >
> > I don't know any such thing, George. You haven't defined what "all
> over usenet" means. How many usenet groups constitute "all over"?>
>
> Oh, you want to start (over) with definitions. Great idea. Let's start
> with the definition of "spamming usenet". The Current Usenet spam
> thresholds and guidelines (posted here in March define it as posting a
> "substantively identical" message to an "excessive" number of groups.
> The latter is measured by the Breidbart Index, or BI (the sum of the
> square roots of the number of groups to which each post was made).
> For example, 2 posts of the same message (one crossposted to 9 groups,
> and one to 4) have a BI of 5, while posting it separately to the same 13
> groups would have a BI of 13. A message with a BI of more than 20 in a
> 45-day period is cancellable spam.

Thank you, PJR Jr.

> As for "all over usenet", I'll stick with the standard usage:
> "1: over the whole extent
> decorated all over with a flower pattern
> 2: EVERYWHERE
> looked all over for the book"
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/allover
>
> Here's the data:
> https://groups.google.com/search/conversations?q=%22Ponder%20Awhile%22
>
> If you have trouble with the definitions, you're of course welcome to
> offer your own.

None of which answers the question I'd asked in regards to said definition (quoted below).

> > How many usenet groups has Will Donkey spammed it to?

For the sake of brevity, I'll restate my question in more general terms:

How many Usenet group has Will made posts regarding his book to?

> Since you haven't shown yet that Will has done any spamming (exceeded
> the BI), you're begging the question.
>
> > I fully suspect that he's spammed it to a dozen or more usenet groups.
>
> > And whether he's spammed it to groups that he's already a member of
> is irrelevant. You did not specify that Mohit spammed it to groups
> where he wasn't already a member. You only said that he spammed it to
> groups after they'd begged him to stop.
>
> I don't think it's irrelevant to point it out at all. There's a
> difference between promoting something on the groups you already post
> to, and posting about it on groups you've never posted to before or
> since. As I said, though, it is a side issue; once you've shown that
> Will did any "spamming," we can talk about that.

My definition of "spam" is unsolicited advertisements or similar junk mail. In a Usenet group, "Spam" would include any off-topic post, any link to a non-poetry-related site, any links to poetry-related websites where to which the poster is attempting go generate "hits" (ahem...), advertisements, personal messages, etc.

Regarding AAPC, "spam" would be any post that does not either post an original poem for comments, or comment on a poem written by someone else.

"Spamming" (verb tense) AAPC would be mass-posting unsolicited advertisement or making numerous off-topic posts.

> > The Donkey has spammed his book to AAPC dozens of times, even though
> > he's been asked to stop, told to stop, and reported to Google for spamming.

> Oh, I'm sure Will has posted more than 25 OPs on his book to aapc in the
> past 3 years. If he's posted the same message to aapc more than 20 times
> in 45 days, that could be considered spamming, but I doubt he has. (You
> cannot count different posts with the same message in the backthread, of
> course; or different messages with the same sig line.)

I consider it spamming if he posts it once.

I currently have 14 books available at Amazon. How often do you see me posting links for them?

> >>> I doubt that you actually have any,
> >>>> but I'll point out the onus is on you to show some if you expect to be
> >>>> believed.
> >>>
> >>> I have ample proof to support what I'd actually claimed.
> >>>
> >>
> >>>>> Oh... that's right... you published it.
> >>>> I sure did. That's why your libelling of Will in this respect concerns
> >>>> me, because you're also libelling me.
> >>>
> >>> Actually, I would be "libeling" you (sp) -- if such were, in fact,
> the case.
> >> "libel verb
> >> li·​bel | \ ˈlī-bəl \
> >> libeled or libelled; libeling or libelling\ ˈlī-​b(ə-​)liŋ \"
> >> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libelling
> >>
> >> Next time check it out the spelling of a word before trying a spelling
> >> lame. Just a thought.
> >
> > Doubling "l"s is tres passé.
> >>> However since I'd only implied that 1) Will spams AAPC with ads for
> his book, and that
> >> No, you "implied" that Will was "spamming all over usenet" just like
> >> the kook who inspired my poem.
> > As previously noted, I highly doubt that the Donkey has limited his
> spam to one group.
> > Let's see... an archive search for "selected poems 1976-2019" turns
> up 6,576 results. That's a shipload of spam by anyone's standards.
>
> Oh, indeed: 6,576 copies of the same post is a lot of posts. But you
> haven't shown that all 6,000+ are substantively the same, or even looked
> at the content. Some of them are replies by Will in threads where the
> book is being discussed; some are replies by him where the book is
> mentioned only in the backthread; in some he uses the book title and
> url as a sig line; and some weren't even written by him.