Spam-I-Am wrote:

> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 7:18:43 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> Spam-I-Am wrote:
>>
>> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 1:43:34 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> >> On 2022-11-04 12:58 p.m., Spam-I-Am wrote:
>> >> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 12:52:07 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> >
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
>> >> >>>>>>>>> vel
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> l’s
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
>> >> >>>>>>>>> 3."
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
>> >> >>>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
>> >> >>>>>> You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
>> >> >>>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
>> >> >>>>>> right there.
>> >> >>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
>> >> >>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
>> >> >>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Jesus fuck, George, wtf is your problem?
>> >> >>>> Why the personal attack, Corey? Are the facts too much for you to handle?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> (1) I believed this 'Jeopardy' thread of NG's was a propaganda attack on
>> >> >>>> "Team Donkey".
>> >> >>>> (2) Given NG's past 'Jeopardy' threads, I was justified in believing it
>> >> >>>> was an attack on "Team Donkey".
>> >> >>>> (3) In fact, NG's thread has turned out to be a propaganda attack on "Team
>> >> >>>> Donkey" -- so (1) is true.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Therefore,
>> >> >>>> (4) I knew this thread was a propaganda attack on Team Donkey.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Those are facts. Deal with them.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I’m not attacking you, George.
>> >> >> Wrong. You resorted to an ad hom attack.
>> >> >>> I’m making fun of you. See?
>> >> >> So you decided to act like a smug asshole, rather than deal with the
>> >> >> facts. No surprise there.
>> >> >
>> >> > Your facts aren’t factual.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > I’m sorry you perceive
>> >> > me as a smug asshole.
>> >> That's unfortunate. Learning how others perceive your behavior can be an
>> >> opportunity to change, not just to feel sorry for yourself.
>> >> > We could be having fun.
>> >> So let's have fun.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Why do you think you come across as a smug asshole?
>>
>> > You previously perceived me as a homophobe and anti-Semite
>>
>> I missed that, can you post a link to that thread?
>>
>>
>> TIA.

> https://web.archive.org/web/20180410161735/http://pennyspoetry.wikia.com/wiki/J._Corey_Connor

Okay, thanks, I'll check it out.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:33:08 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:06:39 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > On 2022-11-04 4:45 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:36:08 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:19:22 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >>> On 2022-11-04 1:10 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > >>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 12:24:43 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4,
> > >>> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> > >>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> > >>> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it..
> > >>> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> > >>>>>>> You're lying again, NastyGene.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> > >>> just bitchiness.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > >>>>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > >>>>>>> right there.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> A blog is an information repository, George. Knowledge is stored in
> > >>> one's mind.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> You could have searched your blog for the answer, just as I had
> > >>> searched Google for the answer. Had you done so, it wouldn't have made
> > >>> you any more, or any less, knowledgeable than you already are.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > >>>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I
> > >>> knew
> > >>>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team
> > >>> Donkey."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This thread is a "Jeopardy" question regarding poetry. It also
> > >>> provides some interesting background information on HWL.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> That's all.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> If you think it has become so, it is of your own making.
> > >>>>> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo
> > >>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo
> > >>> DeSockpuppet
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> > >>>>>>>>>> vel
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> l’s
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> > >>>>>>>>>> 3."
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> > >>>>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> > >>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> > >>>>> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it.
> > >>>>> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.>>> You're lying
> > >>>>> again, NastyGene.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.>
> > >>>>>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> > >>>>> just bitchiness.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> I hope you have more than name-calling to back up your defense of NG.
> > >>>>> Let's see.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I didn't call you a name, George.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I described the nature of petty accusation.
> > >>>>
> > >>> I disagree. You specifically accused me of "bitchiness" and, now,
> > >>> "pettiness."
> > >>>>>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > >>>>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > >>>>>>> right there.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> A [wiki] is an information repository, George.
> > >>>>> I'm just going to automatically change 'blog' to 'wiki' when you
> > >>>>> mislabel PPP. I've tried other ways to deal with it, and they've all
> > >>>>> failed, so let's try that.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Deflection noted.
> > >>> No 'deflection'. I just explained why I have to change your text --
> > >>> because you continue to use the wrong word. Correcting your text is
> > >>> easier than writing, over and over, "You're incorrectly calling PPP a
> > >>> blog." That would probably lead to deflections, every time.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> Knowledge is stored in one's mind.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> I disagree. If knowledge was stored only in minds, then the only way it
> > >>>>> could be transmitted from one mind to another would be is telepathy.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Really? Are sentient beings somehow unable to express their
> > >>> knowledge through words?
> > >>>>
> > >>> Not according to you, since the words "aren't in their minds" -- meaning
> > >>> that can't contain any "knowledge", either. If they can't contain
> > >>> knowledge, they can't be used to transmit it.
> > >>>>> Knowledge is information that is (1) believed (2) with justification and
> > >>>>> (3) true. It doesn't matter whether it's 'stored'.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If it is "believed," it must necessarily be stored within one's mind.
> > >>> Don't be ridiculous. People can believe things other people say or
> > >>> write, which are not "stored in [a] mind" but in words and books.
> > >>>> Now, if you're done with your second attempt at deflection
> > >>> Are you going to call everything you disagree with, or can't understand,
> > >>> a "deflection"? I'd have thought you'd be bright enough to vary your ad
> > >>> homs.
> > >>>> , can we proceed to the issue at hand?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Since PPP's information in this case meets that definition, it's
> > >>>>> knowledge; and PPP is one of its repositories.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Nope. You're not done.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Knowledge is defined by Merriam-Webster as:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Definition of knowledge
> > >>>> 1a(1): the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity
> > >>> gained through experience or association
> > >>>> (2): acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique
> > >>>> b(1): the fact or condition of being aware of something
> > >>>> (2): the range of one's information or understanding
> > >>>> answered to the best of my knowledge
> > >>>> c: the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact
> > >>> through reasoning : COGNITION
> > >>>> d: the fact or condition of having information or of being learned
> > >>>> a person of unusual knowledge
> > >>>> 2a: the sum of what is known : the body of truth, information, and
> > >>> principles acquired by humankind
> > >>>> barchaic : a branch of learning
> > >>>> 3archaic : SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
> > >>>> 4obsolete : COGNIZANCE
> > >>>>
> > >>>> As you can see, "knowledge" entails "understanding," "cognizance,"
> > >>> and "awareness" -- all of which necessitate sentience.
> > >>> Well, yeah; 'knowledge' presupposes that someone or something able to
> > >>> know it.
> > >>>
> > >>> But let's stick to the definition of knowledge that those who study it
> > >>> (epistemologists) use.
> > >>>
> > >>> Knowledge consists of proposition that are (1) true, (2) believed, and
> > >>> (3) justified.
> > >>>> Penny's Plagiarized Pages (PPP) is not sentient, and, consequently,
> > >>> does not possess knowledge.
> > >>> So you're saying that no one can read PPP (or anything else) and acquire
> > >>> any knowledge from it -- because there's no knowledge there to acquire.
> > >>> That's what we're discussing.
> > >>>
> > >>> PPP's article on Longfellow says that "At age 13 he had his earliest
> > >>> publication – a patriotic and historical 4-stanza poem called "The
> > >>> Battle of Lovell's Pond" – in the Portland Gazette of November 17, 1820.[7]
> > >>>
> > >>> That's a proposition that's (1) true, (2) believed, and (3) justified.
> > >>>> Can we now proceed to the topic at hand, or do I have to embarrass
> > >>> you further?
> > >>>>
> > >>> If you think you're embarrassing me, and that gives you some pleasure,
> > >>> you go right ahead.
> > >>>>> NG lied about that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> You could have searched your [wiki] for the answer, just as I had
> > >>>>> searched Google for the answer.
> > >>>>> And of course that would have been allowed, since NG allowed searches
> > >>>>> except for Google.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You have just post-edited my statement, and in doing so, have altered
> > >>> its meaning. This is yet another example of your disingenuous practice
> > >>> of creating "strawman" arguments.
> > >>> I just explained why I was doing that -- because you keep incorrectly
> > >>> calling PPP a "blog". Didn't you even read my explanation before you
> > >>> called it a 'deflection'?
> > >>>> Here is what I actually said: "You could have searched your blog for
> > >>> the answer, just as I had searched Google for the answer. Had you done
> > >>> so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less, knowledgeable than
> > >>> you already are."
> > >>> That's identical to what I quoted, except for the correction to your
> > >>> incorrect description of PPP.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> As you can see (or, rather, as everyone else can see), I am not
> > >>> saying that it would have been okay for you to search your wiki for the
> > >>> answer.
> > >>> I didn't say you did, Mr. Strawman I told you that it would have been
> > >>> "okay" under NG's rule: "No Googling".
> > >>> I am saying that pulling information from an outside source has no
> > >>> bearing on the amount of knowledge that you possess.
> > >>> So you're saying no one could learn who wrote "The Battle of Lowell
> > >>> Pond" unless they already knew it? Not from PPP, not from the sources
> > >>> PPP quoted, not from "Jeopardy," and of course not from this thread..
> > >>>>> But, as I said, I didn't have to, as I not only knew the answer but
> > >>>>> remembered it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Strawman conclusion summarily dismissed.
> > >>> It's just a statement of fact. I knew the answer, and (unlike you)
> > >>> remembered that I knew it.
> > >>>>> I'd say that you knew the answer, too, but weren't sure since you
> > >>>>> couldn't remember all the details (when you learned it, and from whom).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I disagree. I have knowledge of enough basic facts about HWL to make
> > >>> an educated guess. Had I been a contestant on Jeopardy, I would have
> > >>> given the correct question. Had I been asked "Who wrote 'Battle of
> > >>> Lovell's Pond'?" I would probably have guessed Scott.
> > >>>>
> > >>> I'd say that's just because you couldn't remember it; not because you
> > >>> didn't know the answer at all. "Jeopardy" is a game involving knowlege
> > >>> *and* memory, not just the former.
> > >>>>>> Had you done so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less,
> > >>>>> knowledgeable than you already are.
> > >>> There's the rest of the statement you dishonestly claimed I post-edited.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>> In this case, since I (and I suspect you) already had that
> > >>> knowledge. But, once
> > >>>>> again, I didn't since (unlike you) I remembered that I knew it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> And, again, had you not post-edited my statement, your above
> > >>> observation would not apply.
> > >>>>
> > >>> Your claim of post-editing was dishonest, since I quoted your statement
> > >>> in full and only corrected one word you keep getting wrong.
> > >>>
> > >>> And my observation does apply: since I knew the answer, and remembered
> > >>> it (as I'd just read it again 3 days previously) I didn't have to search
> > >>> anything. You just went off on a tangent about something that didn't
> > >>> happen (all while accusing me of "deflecting").
> > >>>> I made a general observation that "You could have searched your blog
> > >>> for the answer, just as I had searched Google for the answer. Had you
> > >>> done so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less, knowledgeable
> > >>> than you already are" -- more specifically, that the amount of one's
> > >>> knowledge is not measured (or affected by) the amount of information one
> > >>> has access to.
> > >>> But, as I told you, that's only because I already knew the at answer. As
> > >>> did you, at least after you looked it up.
> > >>>
> > >>> OTOH, those who didn't know it, and read Cuckoo the Meatpuppet's
> > >>> statement, and independently verified it, would now
> > >>>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I
> > >>> knew
> > >>>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team
> > >>> Donkey."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This thread is a "Jeopardy" question regarding poetry. It also
> > >>>>> provides some interesting background information on HWL.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> That's all.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> No; as the backthread shows, it 'started' that way, but it had turned
> > >>>>> into an attack on the "gang of three" (your "Team Donkey") the same day.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The "gang of three" were not mentioned until after Cujo provided the
> > >>> correct response.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> And, as previously noted, NancyGene's observation was based upon said
> > >>> "gang's" lack of response.
> > >>> So you agree that NG did turn the thread into an attack on me, and just
> > >>> want to quibble about when they did that. You also admit they were
> > >>> trolling -- launching an attack on me in a thread I wasn't even
> > >>> participating in. And your excuse for NG's trolling and personal attacks
> > >>> was that was that I'd left their thread alone.
> > >> Typical scumbag move by the Voodoo Boy...!
> > >
> > > Soon, so soon, you'll be going off with your trademark "motherfucker"....
> > Why shouldn't he call MMP a motherfucker? What's your problem with that?
> He can, it's his right to expression just like it's my right to express my criticism of him for it. You guys are the ones crying bully, claiming to be the so called "good guys" and victims. thinking the rest of us will stupid enough to believe you and excuse you for doing exactly what is wrong. You know nothing of principles do you?
> > > As someone said, you have been made into a troll.
> > True: I said that, and I'll be glad to repeat it. Zod wasn't a troll
> > when he joined the group. Jim Senetto made him into one; just as he made
> > you into one.
> Actually I made myself a "troll"

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:19:22 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-11-04 1:10 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 12:24:43 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> wrote:
> >> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4,
> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it.
> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> >>>> You're lying again, NastyGene.
> >>>
> >>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.
> >>>
> >>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> just bitchiness.
> >>>
> >>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> >>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> >>>> right there.
> >>>
> >>> A blog is an information repository, George. Knowledge is stored in
> one's mind.
> >>>
> >>> You could have searched your blog for the answer, just as I had
> searched Google for the answer. Had you done so, it wouldn't have made
> you any more, or any less, knowledgeable than you already are.
> >>>
> >>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> >>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I
> knew
> >>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team
> Donkey."
> >>>
> >>> This thread is a "Jeopardy" question regarding poetry. It also
> provides some interesting background information on HWL.
> >>>
> >>> That's all.
> >>>
> >>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> >>>
> >>> If you think it has become so, it is of your own making.
> >> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> >> wrote:
> >>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo
> >> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo
> DeSockpuppet
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> >>>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> >>>>>>> vel
> >>>>>>>>> l’s
> >>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> >>>>>>> 3."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> >>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> >> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> >> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it.
> >> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.>>> You're lying
> >> again, NastyGene.
> >>>
> >>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.>
> >>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> >> just bitchiness.
> >>>
> >> I hope you have more than name-calling to back up your defense of NG.
> >> Let's see.
> >
> > I didn't call you a name, George.
> >
> > I described the nature of petty accusation.
> >
> I disagree. You specifically accused me of "bitchiness" and, now,
> "pettiness."

Exactly. Those are descriptions of your perceived behavior -- not names.

I didn't, for example, address you a "George Bitch" or "Petty Dunce."

As I often tell your Donkey: words matter. Learn what they mean and use them correctly.

> >>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> >>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> >>>> right there.
> >>>
> >>> A [wiki] is an information repository, George.
> >> I'm just going to automatically change 'blog' to 'wiki' when you
> >> mislabel PPP. I've tried other ways to deal with it, and they've all
> >> failed, so let's try that.
> >
> > Deflection noted.
> No 'deflection'. I just explained why I have to change your text --
> because you continue to use the wrong word. Correcting your text is
> easier than writing, over and over, "You're incorrectly calling PPP a
> blog." That would probably lead to deflections, every time.

Yes 'deflection.'

The topic of discussion (at this place in the thread) was regarding whether an inanimate blog (or wiki) could have knowledge of anything.

As in the above "name-calling" exchange, you used the word "knowledge" incorrectly, and are attempting to deflect attention from your obviously embarrassing error.

And even that topic was the result of another deflection on your part (as an attempt to divert attention from your bitchy behavior regarding NancyGene).

> >>> Knowledge is stored in one's mind.
> >>>
> >> I disagree. If knowledge was stored only in minds, then the only way it
> >> could be transmitted from one mind to another would be is telepathy.
> >
> > Really? Are sentient beings somehow unable to express their
> knowledge through words?
> >
> Not according to you, since the words "aren't in their minds" -- meaning
> that can't contain any "knowledge", either. If they can't contain
> knowledge, they can't be used to transmit it.

I never said that the words weren't in their minds, George. You're projecting.

The knowledge regarding HWL's poem was in neither of our minds. But our lack of knowledge on a given subject has no bearing on the knowledge of sentient beings in general.

This is an example of the second type of "strawman" argument you're fond of: falsely claiming that someone made an easily disproved statement, and immediately proceeding to disprove it.

> >> Knowledge is information that is (1) believed (2) with justification and
> >> (3) true. It doesn't matter whether it's 'stored'.
> >
> > If it is "believed," it must necessarily be stored within one's mind.
> Don't be ridiculous. People can believe things other people say or
> write, which are not "stored in [a] mind" but in words and books.

First:

They could not believe it if it had not first been communicated to them.

If it had been communicated to them, they therefore possess a knowledge of it.

If they possess a knowledge of it, it is stored in their brain.

Second:

Information is recorded, and stored, in books. The inanimate books do not possess any knowledge of said information.

Third:

Words possess neither knowledge nor information. They are tools with which knowledge and information are passed on from one sentient being to the next.

> > Now, if you're done with your second attempt at deflection
> Are you going to call everything you disagree with, or can't understand,
> a "deflection"? I'd have thought you'd be bright enough to vary your ad
> homs.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:21:20 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-11-04 3:29 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:16:10 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> >>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> >>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> >>>>>> vel
> >>>>>>>> l’s
> >>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> >>>>>> 3."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> >>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> >>>>
> >>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> >>> You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> >>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> >>> right there.
> >>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> >>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
> >>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> >> Exactly.
> >>
> >> I stayed out of the thread myself until I noticed it was being used by NancyGene to attack me, and others.
> >>
> >> Typical example of the malicious agenda of NancyGene.
> >
> > You stayed out of the thread because Longfellow was never quoted by Batman, Popeye, or the Archies.
> Typical TM bullshit propaganda. You don't know whether Will knew the
> answer to the question or not.

I know more than enough about Will Donkey to know that he doesn't know jack about anything:

"I was influenced by the poetry of Edgar Allan Poland other poets but I don't consider that a topic to debate."
"You may be thinking of Henry David Theroux, who lived On Walden Pond."
"Jeeze, just my opinion, but Spencer's poetry definitely could improve by casting it with modern language and spelling."

Case closed.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:35:48 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:29:38 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:16:10 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > > > >> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > > >> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> > > > >>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > > >>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> > > > >>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> > > > >>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > > >>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> > > > >>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> > > > >>> vel
> > > > >>>>> l’s
> > > > >>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> > > > >>> 3."
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> > > > >> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I iz teh shockiest.
> > > > >
> > > > > Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> > > > You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > > > repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > > > right there.
> > > > > Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > > > In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
> > > > the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> > > Exactly.
> > >
> > > I stayed out of the thread myself until I noticed it was being used by NancyGene to attack me, and others.
> > >
> > > Typical example of the malicious agenda of NancyGene.
> > You stayed out of the thread because Longfellow was never quoted by Batman, Popeye, or the Archies.
> Actually, some of the first poems I heard recited to me were Longfellow poems.
Did these include his "Battle of Lovell's Pond"?

[That's a rhetorical question -- don't strain yourself.]

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 7:04:36 PM UTC-4, ME wrote:
> On Wednesday, 2 November 2022 at 08:33:34 UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lovell’s Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 13."
> >
> > None of the contestants guessed the correct "answer." Guesses were: Who is Pendragon, who is NancyGene, and who is Benders.
> >
> > No Googling! We will know and you will be disqualified.
>
>
> Good morning NG.
> I didn’t chime in on this one. I wanted to give the others a chance to win.
> But I see rhat it turned into a goat rodeo.
> Sorry about that. But it happens when you’ve got paranoia running rampant here.
> Please keep up the good work.

Goat rodeo-- I like that!

My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":

https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:35:48 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:29:38 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 3:16:10 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> > > > On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
>> > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
>> > > > >> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> > > > >> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
>> > > > >>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet
>> > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > >>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> > > > >>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
>> > > > >>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
>> > > > >>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
>> > > > >>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> > > > >>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
>> > > > >>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
>> > > > >>> vel
>> > > > >>>>> l’s
>> > > > >>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
>> > > > >>> 3."
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
>> > > > >> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> I iz teh shockiest.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
>> > > > You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
>> > > > repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
>> > > > right there.
>> > > > > Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
>> > > > In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
>> > > > the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
>> > > >
>> > > > Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
>> > > Exactly.
>> > >
>> > > I stayed out of the thread myself until I noticed it was being used by NancyGene to attack me, and others.
>> > >
>> > > Typical example of the malicious agenda of NancyGene.
>> > You stayed out of the thread because Longfellow was never quoted by Batman, Popeye, or the Archies.
>> Actually, some of the first poems I heard recited to me were Longfellow poems.

> Did these include his "Battle of Lovell's Pond"?

No, but, again, my favorite poem was Paul Revere's Ride":

https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride

HTH and HAND.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:17:58 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:33:08 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 6:06:39 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > On 2022-11-04 4:45 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:36:08 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > > >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 4:19:22 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >>> On 2022-11-04 1:10 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 12:24:43 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4,
> > > >>> george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> > > >>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> > > >>> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it.
> > > >>> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> > > >>>>>>> You're lying again, NastyGene.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> > > >>> just bitchiness.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > > >>>>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > > >>>>>>> right there.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> A blog is an information repository, George. Knowledge is stored in
> > > >>> one's mind.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> You could have searched your blog for the answer, just as I had
> > > >>> searched Google for the answer. Had you done so, it wouldn't have made
> > > >>> you any more, or any less, knowledgeable than you already are.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > > >>>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I
> > > >>> knew
> > > >>>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team
> > > >>> Donkey."
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> This thread is a "Jeopardy" question regarding poetry. It also
> > > >>> provides some interesting background information on HWL.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> That's all.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> If you think it has become so, it is of your own making.
> > > >>>>> On 2022-11-04 11:16 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo
> > > >>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > >>>>>>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo
> > > >>> DeSockpuppet
> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> > > >>>>>>>>>> vel
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> l’s
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> > > >>>>>>>>>> 3."
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> > > >>>>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance,
> > > >>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless
> > > >>>>> they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it.
> > > >>>>> There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.>>> You're lying
> > > >>>>> again, NastyGene.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Wrong. She's basing her statement on your lack of response.>
> > > >>>>>> You can disagree with her conclusion, but to accuse her of lying is
> > > >>>>> just bitchiness.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> I hope you have more than name-calling to back up your defense of NG.
> > > >>>>> Let's see.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I didn't call you a name, George.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I described the nature of petty accusation.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> I disagree. You specifically accused me of "bitchiness" and, now,
> > > >>> "pettiness."
> > > >>>>>>> In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > > >>>>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > > >>>>>>> right there.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> A [wiki] is an information repository, George.
> > > >>>>> I'm just going to automatically change 'blog' to 'wiki' when you
> > > >>>>> mislabel PPP. I've tried other ways to deal with it, and they've all
> > > >>>>> failed, so let's try that.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Deflection noted.
> > > >>> No 'deflection'. I just explained why I have to change your text --
> > > >>> because you continue to use the wrong word. Correcting your text is
> > > >>> easier than writing, over and over, "You're incorrectly calling PPP a
> > > >>> blog." That would probably lead to deflections, every time.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>> Knowledge is stored in one's mind.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> I disagree. If knowledge was stored only in minds, then the only way it
> > > >>>>> could be transmitted from one mind to another would be is telepathy.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Really? Are sentient beings somehow unable to express their
> > > >>> knowledge through words?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> Not according to you, since the words "aren't in their minds" -- meaning
> > > >>> that can't contain any "knowledge", either. If they can't contain
> > > >>> knowledge, they can't be used to transmit it.
> > > >>>>> Knowledge is information that is (1) believed (2) with justification and
> > > >>>>> (3) true. It doesn't matter whether it's 'stored'.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> If it is "believed," it must necessarily be stored within one's mind.
> > > >>> Don't be ridiculous. People can believe things other people say or
> > > >>> write, which are not "stored in [a] mind" but in words and books.
> > > >>>> Now, if you're done with your second attempt at deflection
> > > >>> Are you going to call everything you disagree with, or can't understand,
> > > >>> a "deflection"? I'd have thought you'd be bright enough to vary your ad
> > > >>> homs.
> > > >>>> , can we proceed to the issue at hand?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Since PPP's information in this case meets that definition, it's
> > > >>>>> knowledge; and PPP is one of its repositories.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Nope. You're not done.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Knowledge is defined by Merriam-Webster as:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Definition of knowledge
> > > >>>> 1a(1): the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity
> > > >>> gained through experience or association
> > > >>>> (2): acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique
> > > >>>> b(1): the fact or condition of being aware of something
> > > >>>> (2): the range of one's information or understanding
> > > >>>> answered to the best of my knowledge
> > > >>>> c: the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact
> > > >>> through reasoning : COGNITION
> > > >>>> d: the fact or condition of having information or of being learned
> > > >>>> a person of unusual knowledge
> > > >>>> 2a: the sum of what is known : the body of truth, information, and
> > > >>> principles acquired by humankind
> > > >>>> barchaic : a branch of learning
> > > >>>> 3archaic : SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
> > > >>>> 4obsolete : COGNIZANCE
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> As you can see, "knowledge" entails "understanding," "cognizance,"
> > > >>> and "awareness" -- all of which necessitate sentience.
> > > >>> Well, yeah; 'knowledge' presupposes that someone or something able to
> > > >>> know it.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> But let's stick to the definition of knowledge that those who study it
> > > >>> (epistemologists) use.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Knowledge consists of proposition that are (1) true, (2) believed, and
> > > >>> (3) justified.
> > > >>>> Penny's Plagiarized Pages (PPP) is not sentient, and, consequently,
> > > >>> does not possess knowledge.
> > > >>> So you're saying that no one can read PPP (or anything else) and acquire
> > > >>> any knowledge from it -- because there's no knowledge there to acquire.
> > > >>> That's what we're discussing.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> PPP's article on Longfellow says that "At age 13 he had his earliest
> > > >>> publication – a patriotic and historical 4-stanza poem called "The
> > > >>> Battle of Lovell's Pond" – in the Portland Gazette of November 17, 1820.[7]
> > > >>>
> > > >>> That's a proposition that's (1) true, (2) believed, and (3) justified.
> > > >>>> Can we now proceed to the topic at hand, or do I have to embarrass
> > > >>> you further?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> If you think you're embarrassing me, and that gives you some pleasure,
> > > >>> you go right ahead.
> > > >>>>> NG lied about that.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> You could have searched your [wiki] for the answer, just as I had
> > > >>>>> searched Google for the answer.
> > > >>>>> And of course that would have been allowed, since NG allowed searches
> > > >>>>> except for Google.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> You have just post-edited my statement, and in doing so, have altered
> > > >>> its meaning. This is yet another example of your disingenuous practice
> > > >>> of creating "strawman" arguments.
> > > >>> I just explained why I was doing that -- because you keep incorrectly
> > > >>> calling PPP a "blog". Didn't you even read my explanation before you
> > > >>> called it a 'deflection'?
> > > >>>> Here is what I actually said: "You could have searched your blog for
> > > >>> the answer, just as I had searched Google for the answer. Had you done
> > > >>> so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less, knowledgeable than
> > > >>> you already are."
> > > >>> That's identical to what I quoted, except for the correction to your
> > > >>> incorrect description of PPP.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> As you can see (or, rather, as everyone else can see), I am not
> > > >>> saying that it would have been okay for you to search your wiki for the
> > > >>> answer.
> > > >>> I didn't say you did, Mr. Strawman I told you that it would have been
> > > >>> "okay" under NG's rule: "No Googling".
> > > >>> I am saying that pulling information from an outside source has no
> > > >>> bearing on the amount of knowledge that you possess.
> > > >>> So you're saying no one could learn who wrote "The Battle of Lowell
> > > >>> Pond" unless they already knew it? Not from PPP, not from the sources
> > > >>> PPP quoted, not from "Jeopardy," and of course not from this thread.
> > > >>>>> But, as I said, I didn't have to, as I not only knew the answer but
> > > >>>>> remembered it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Strawman conclusion summarily dismissed.
> > > >>> It's just a statement of fact. I knew the answer, and (unlike you)
> > > >>> remembered that I knew it.
> > > >>>>> I'd say that you knew the answer, too, but weren't sure since you
> > > >>>>> couldn't remember all the details (when you learned it, and from whom).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I disagree. I have knowledge of enough basic facts about HWL to make
> > > >>> an educated guess. Had I been a contestant on Jeopardy, I would have
> > > >>> given the correct question. Had I been asked "Who wrote 'Battle of
> > > >>> Lovell's Pond'?" I would probably have guessed Scott.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> I'd say that's just because you couldn't remember it; not because you
> > > >>> didn't know the answer at all. "Jeopardy" is a game involving knowlege
> > > >>> *and* memory, not just the former.
> > > >>>>>> Had you done so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less,
> > > >>>>> knowledgeable than you already are.
> > > >>> There's the rest of the statement you dishonestly claimed I post-edited.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>> In this case, since I (and I suspect you) already had that
> > > >>> knowledge. But, once
> > > >>>>> again, I didn't since (unlike you) I remembered that I knew it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> And, again, had you not post-edited my statement, your above
> > > >>> observation would not apply.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> Your claim of post-editing was dishonest, since I quoted your statement
> > > >>> in full and only corrected one word you keep getting wrong.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> And my observation does apply: since I knew the answer, and remembered
> > > >>> it (as I'd just read it again 3 days previously) I didn't have to search
> > > >>> anything. You just went off on a tangent about something that didn't
> > > >>> happen (all while accusing me of "deflecting").
> > > >>>> I made a general observation that "You could have searched your blog
> > > >>> for the answer, just as I had searched Google for the answer. Had you
> > > >>> done so, it wouldn't have made you any more, or any less, knowledgeable
> > > >>> than you already are" -- more specifically, that the amount of one's
> > > >>> knowledge is not measured (or affected by) the amount of information one
> > > >>> has access to.
> > > >>> But, as I told you, that's only because I already knew the at answer. As
> > > >>> did you, at least after you looked it up.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> OTOH, those who didn't know it, and read Cuckoo the Meatpuppet's
> > > >>> statement, and independently verified it, would now
> > > >>>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I
> > > >>> knew
> > > >>>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team
> > > >>> Donkey."
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> This thread is a "Jeopardy" question regarding poetry. It also
> > > >>>>> provides some interesting background information on HWL.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> That's all.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> No; as the backthread shows, it 'started' that way, but it had turned
> > > >>>>> into an attack on the "gang of three" (your "Team Donkey") the same day.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The "gang of three" were not mentioned until after Cujo provided the
> > > >>> correct response.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> And, as previously noted, NancyGene's observation was based upon said
> > > >>> "gang's" lack of response.
> > > >>> So you agree that NG did turn the thread into an attack on me, and just
> > > >>> want to quibble about when they did that. You also admit they were
> > > >>> trolling -- launching an attack on me in a thread I wasn't even
> > > >>> participating in. And your excuse for NG's trolling and personal attacks
> > > >>> was that was that I'd left their thread alone.
> > > >> Typical scumbag move by the Voodoo Boy...!
> > > >
> > > > Soon, so soon, you'll be going off with your trademark "motherfucker"...
> > > Why shouldn't he call MMP a motherfucker? What's your problem with that?
> > He can, it's his right to expression just like it's my right to express my criticism of him for it. You guys are the ones crying bully, claiming to be the so called "good guys" and victims. thinking the rest of us will stupid enough to believe you and excuse you for doing exactly what is wrong. You know nothing of principles do you?
> > > > As someone said, you have been made into a troll.
> > > True: I said that, and I'll be glad to repeat it. Zod wasn't a troll
> > > when he joined the group. Jim Senetto made him into one; just as he made
> > > you into one.
> > Actually I made myself a "troll"
> No shit, Sherlock.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:02:02 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> George J. Dance wrote:
>
> > On 2022-11-04 11:42 a.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:30:10 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>> On 2022-11-04 11:09 a.m., Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> >>>>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> >>>>>>>> vel
> >>>>>>>>>> l’s
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> >>>>>>>> 3."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> >>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> >>>>> You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> >>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> >>>>> right there.
> >>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> >>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
> >>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jesus fuck, George, wtf is your problem?
> >>> Why the personal attack, Corey? Are the facts too much for you to handle?
> >>>
> >>> (1) I believed this 'Jeopardy' thread of NG's was a propaganda attack on
> >>> "Team Donkey".
> >>> (2) Given NG's past 'Jeopardy' threads, I was justified in believing it
> >>> was an attack on "Team Donkey".
> >>> (3) In fact, NG's has turned out to be a propaganda attack on "Team
> >>> Donkey" -- so (1) is true.
> >>>
> >>> Therefore,
> >>> (4) I knew this thread was a propaganda attack on Team Donkey.
> >>>
> >>> Those are facts. Deal with them.
> >>
> >> Propaganda attack?
> >> ROFLMAO!1!
> >> WTF!?! George, lay off the bleach, I think you huffed too much!
> > Poor Ashtroll. Team Monkey wants to gaslight, the Ashtroll has to gaslight.
>
> Ash is a Usenet troll, that's what Usenet trolls do.

Oh yeah, I forgot Dance can't do no wrong, everything he says is the gospel truth, including attacking people expressing shock over the murder of 19 school children...

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
>
> https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride

That's not the poem in question, Donkey.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:09:00 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:02:02 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > George J. Dance wrote:
> >
> > > On 2022-11-04 11:42 a.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:30:10 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >>> On 2022-11-04 11:09 a.m., Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > >>>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 11:05:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > >>>>> On 2022-11-02 7:44 p.m., NancyGene wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:35:27 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > >>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>> news:b2e76db2-49e5-4209...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 11:24:10 PM UTC, Cujo DeSockpuppet
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>> news:26de32ca-3d06-408f...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 10:13:32 PM UTC, Cujo
> > >>>>>>>>>> DeSockpuppet wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> NancyGene <nancygene...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>>>> news:5e52f80a-d653-429b...@googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle of Lo
> > >>>>>>>> vel
> > >>>>>>>>>> l’s
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1
> > >>>>>>>> 3."
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like Dance,
> > >>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Spam-I-Am could have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no knowledge repository in the gang of three.
> > >>>>> You're lying again, NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge
> > >>>>> repository' in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is
> > >>>>> right there.
> > >>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was George Dance.
> > >>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't comment because I knew
> > >>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey."
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thank you for confirming that I was right about that, too.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Jesus fuck, George, wtf is your problem?
> > >>> Why the personal attack, Corey? Are the facts too much for you to handle?
> > >>>
> > >>> (1) I believed this 'Jeopardy' thread of NG's was a propaganda attack on
> > >>> "Team Donkey".
> > >>> (2) Given NG's past 'Jeopardy' threads, I was justified in believing it
> > >>> was an attack on "Team Donkey".
> > >>> (3) In fact, NG's has turned out to be a propaganda attack on "Team
> > >>> Donkey" -- so (1) is true.
> > >>>
> > >>> Therefore,
> > >>> (4) I knew this thread was a propaganda attack on Team Donkey.
> > >>>
> > >>> Those are facts. Deal with them.
> > >>
> > >> Propaganda attack?
> > >> ROFLMAO!1!
> > >> WTF!?! George, lay off the bleach, I think you huffed too much!
> > > Poor Ashtroll. Team Monkey wants to gaslight, the Ashtroll has to gaslight.
> >
> > Ash is a Usenet troll, that's what Usenet trolls do.
> Oh yeah, I forgot Dance can't do no wrong, everything he says is the gospel truth, including attacking people expressing shock over the murder of 19 school children...

We didn't forget that you're a lying, misrepresenting troll, Ash.

HTH and HAND.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
> >
> > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
> That's not the poem in question,

My point is that I've been familiar with the poetry of Longfellow for most of my life

HTH and HAND.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:13:04 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> Spam-I-Am wrote:
>
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 5:13:08 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >> >
> >> > You may think that I’m not funny, and that I look like Groucho Marx,
> >> > but I can’t “look like an unfunny Groucho Marx”, because there is no
> >> > such thing as an unfunny Groucho Marx. Groucho Marx is funny.
> >> But you rarely are.
> >>
> >> :)
>
> > Okay, so say I look like Groucho Marx without the sense of humor.
> > That makes more sense. Express yourself clearly and meaningfully.
> Is it true you used to look like a character from M*A*S*H...?
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yqx0VrbOhI
>
> M*A*S*H (1970)
>
> *********** Starring: Donald Sutherland, Elliott Gould, Tom Skerritt
> Directed By: Robert Altman
> Synopsis: The staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war. ***************

Klinger wasn't in the film, you dipshit.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:19:33 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:13:04 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 5:13:08 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > >> Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > You may think that I’m not funny, and that I look like Groucho Marx,
> > >> > but I can’t “look like an unfunny Groucho Marx”, because there is no
> > >> > such thing as an unfunny Groucho Marx. Groucho Marx is funny.
> > >> But you rarely are.
> > >>
> > >> :)
> >
> > > Okay, so say I look like Groucho Marx without the sense of humor.
> > > That makes more sense. Express yourself clearly and meaningfully.
> > Is it true you used to look like a character from M*A*S*H...?
> >
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yqx0VrbOhI
> >
> > M*A*S*H (1970)
> >
> > *********** Starring: Donald Sutherland, Elliott Gould, Tom Skerritt
> > Directed By: Robert Altman
> > Synopsis: The staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war. ***************
> Klinger wasn't in the film

Zod didn't mention a specific character.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:13:04 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> Spam-I-Am wrote:
>
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 5:13:08 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >> Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >> >
> >> > You may think that I’m not funny, and that I look like Groucho Marx,
> >> > but I can’t “look like an unfunny Groucho Marx”, because there is no
> >> > such thing as an unfunny Groucho Marx. Groucho Marx is funny.
> >> But you rarely are.
> >>
> >> :)
>
> > Okay, so say I look like Groucho Marx without the sense of humor.
> > That makes more sense. Express yourself clearly and meaningfully.
> Is it true you used to look like a character from M*A*S*H...?
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yqx0VrbOhI
>
> M*A*S*H (1970)
>
> *********** Starring: Donald Sutherland, Elliott Gould, Tom Skerritt
> Directed By: Robert Altman
> Synopsis: The staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war. ***************

Max Klinger, from the television series.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:16:55 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >
> > > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
> > >
> > > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
> > That's not the poem in question,
> My point is that I've been familiar with the poetry of Longfellow for most of my life

No. You've been familiar with a handful of his poems... and those most likely incomplete. Most people only memorize the first two stanzas of "Paul Revere's Ride."

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:22:50 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:19:33 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:13:04 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 5:13:08 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > >> Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > You may think that I’m not funny, and that I look like Groucho Marx,
> > > >> > but I can’t “look like an unfunny Groucho Marx”, because there is no
> > > >> > such thing as an unfunny Groucho Marx. Groucho Marx is funny.
> > > >> But you rarely are.
> > > >>
> > > >> :)
> > >
> > > > Okay, so say I look like Groucho Marx without the sense of humor.
> > > > That makes more sense. Express yourself clearly and meaningfully.
> > > Is it true you used to look like a character from M*A*S*H...?
> > >
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yqx0VrbOhI
> > >
> > > M*A*S*H (1970)
> > >
> > > *********** Starring: Donald Sutherland, Elliott Gould, Tom Skerritt
> > > Directed By: Robert Altman
> > > Synopsis: The staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war. ***************
> > Klinger wasn't in the film
> Zod didn't mention a specific character.

Are you claiming that he meant Hawkeye Pierce?

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:25:17 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:16:55 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > >
> > > > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
> > > >
> > > > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
> > > That's not the poem in question,
> > My point is that I've been familiar with the poetry of Longfellow for most of my life
> No. You've been familiar with a handful of his poems... and those most likely incomplete. Most people only memorize the first two stanzas of "Paul Revere's Ride."

I also know poetry by John Donne.

🙂

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:26:10 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:22:50 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:19:33 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:13:04 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 5:13:08 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > >> Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > You may think that I’m not funny, and that I look like Groucho Marx,
> > > > >> > but I can’t “look like an unfunny Groucho Marx”, because there is no
> > > > >> > such thing as an unfunny Groucho Marx. Groucho Marx is funny.
> > > > >> But you rarely are.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> :)
> > > >
> > > > > Okay, so say I look like Groucho Marx without the sense of humor.
> > > > > That makes more sense. Express yourself clearly and meaningfully.
> > > > Is it true you used to look like a character from M*A*S*H...?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yqx0VrbOhI
> > > >
> > > > M*A*S*H (1970)
> > > >
> > > > *********** Starring: Donald Sutherland, Elliott Gould, Tom Skerritt
> > > > Directed By: Robert Altman
> > > > Synopsis: The staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war. ***************
> > > Klinger wasn't in the film
> > Zod didn't mention a specific character.
> Are you claiming that he meant Hawkeye Pierce?

Zod wasn't here during the Max Klinger discussion.

HTH and HAND.

On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
> >
> > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
> That's not the poem in question,

It doesn't matter, I didn't enter the contest.

On Friday, 4 November 2022 at 21:33:57 UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >
> > > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
> > >
> > > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
> > That's not the poem in question,
> It doesn't matter, I didn't enter the contest.

So will, what you’re saying is you can’t be wrong…. But you can be but hurt and a victim.

Just so we got the record straight here.

HTH and HAND

ME wrote:

> On Friday, 4 November 2022 at 21:33:57 UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 9:11:40 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> >
>> > > My grandmother would recite poems and sing songs for me, including "Paul Revere's Ride":
>> > >
>> > > https://poets.org/poem/paul-reveres-ride
>> > That's not the poem in question,
>> It doesn't matter, I didn't enter the contest.

> So will, what you’re saying is you can’t be wrong…. But you can be but hurt and a victim.

Not at all, ME, there's nothing here to get "hurt" about.

> Just so we got the record straight here.

> HTH and HAND

On 2022-11-04 4:12 p.m., W-Dockery wrote:
> Spam-I-Am wrote:
>
>> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 1:43:34 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
>> wrote:
>>> On 2022-11-04 12:58 p.m., Spam-I-Am wrote: > On Friday, November 4,
>>> 2022 at 12:52:07 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle
>>> of Lo >>>>>>>>> vel >>>>>>>>>>> l’s >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in
>>> the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1 >>>>>>>>> 3." >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like
>>> Dance, >>>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could
>>> have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The
>>> Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or
>>> Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no
>>> knowledge repository in the gang of three. >>>>>> You're lying again,
>>> NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge >>>>>> repository'
>>> in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is >>>>>> right
>>> there. >>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was
>>> George Dance. >>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't
>>> comment because I knew >>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a
>>> Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey." >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for
>>> confirming that I was right about that, too. >>>>> >>>>> Jesus fuck,
>>> George, wtf is your problem? >>>> Why the personal attack, Corey? Are
>>> the facts too much for you to handle? >>>> >>>> (1) I believed this
>>> 'Jeopardy' thread of NG's was a propaganda attack on >>>> "Team
>>> Donkey". >>>> (2) Given NG's past 'Jeopardy' threads, I was justified
>>> in believing it >>>> was an attack on "Team Donkey".
>>> >>>> (3) In fact, NG's thread has turned out to be a propaganda
>>> attack on "Team
>>> >>>> Donkey" -- so (1) is true. >>>> >>>> Therefore, >>>> (4) I knew
>>> this thread was a propaganda attack on Team Donkey. >>>> >>>> Those
>>> are facts. Deal with them. >>> >>> I’m not attacking you, George. >>
>>> Wrong. You resorted to an ad hom attack. >>> I’m making fun of you.
>>> See? >> So you decided to act like a smug asshole, rather than deal
>>> with the >> facts. No surprise there. > > Your facts aren’t factual.
>>>
>>> > I’m sorry you perceive > me as a smug asshole.
>>> That's unfortunate. Learning how others perceive your behavior can be
>>> an opportunity to change, not just to feel sorry for yourself.
>>> > We could be having fun.
>>> So let's have fun.
>>>
>>> Why do you think you come across as a smug asshole?
>
>> You previously perceived me as a homophobe and anti-Semite
>
> I missed that, can you post a link to that thread?

Years ago, when Corey was writing and posting "poetry" about my having
gay sex with you and a Jew, I told him that posting that stuff made him
look homophobic and antisemitic. That seemed to have the right effect
because, even if he's kept writing that shit, he hasn't posted any more
of it.

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 12:31:30 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-11-04 4:12 p.m., W-Dockery wrote:
> > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 1:43:34 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 2022-11-04 12:58 p.m., Spam-I-Am wrote: > On Friday, November 4,
> >>> 2022 at 12:52:07 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> >>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Inspired by stories from his grandfather, his “Battle
> >>> of Lo >>>>>>>>> vel >>>>>>>>>>> l’s >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pond” appeared in
> >>> the Portland Gazette in 1820 when he was 1 >>>>>>>>> 3." >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>> You mean to tell me that of all the distinguished poets like
> >>> Dance, >>>>>>>> Dreckweasel and The Drunk hadn't gotten the answer?
> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I iz teh shockiest. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Spam-I-Am could
> >>> have won but he dared not say the name. Dance, Dreckweasel and The
> >>> Drunk would not be able to answer anything unless they Wikipediaed or
> >>> Googled the answer, so they could then quote it. There is no
> >>> knowledge repository in the gang of three. >>>>>> You're lying again,
> >>> NastyGene. In fact I have an excellent 'knowledge >>>>>> repository'
> >>> in the form of Penny's Poetry Pages, and the "answer" is >>>>>> right
> >>> there. >>>>>>> Dance would not have known unless the answer was
> >>> George Dance. >>>>>> In fact, I knew the correct answer, but I didn't
> >>> comment because I knew >>>>>> the thread was just an excuse for a
> >>> Team Monkey attack on "Team Donkey." >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for
> >>> confirming that I was right about that, too. >>>>> >>>>> Jesus fuck,
> >>> George, wtf is your problem? >>>> Why the personal attack, Corey? Are
> >>> the facts too much for you to handle? >>>> >>>> (1) I believed this
> >>> 'Jeopardy' thread of NG's was a propaganda attack on >>>> "Team
> >>> Donkey". >>>> (2) Given NG's past 'Jeopardy' threads, I was justified
> >>> in believing it >>>> was an attack on "Team Donkey".
> >>> >>>> (3) In fact, NG's thread has turned out to be a propaganda
> >>> attack on "Team
> >>> >>>> Donkey" -- so (1) is true. >>>> >>>> Therefore, >>>> (4) I knew
> >>> this thread was a propaganda attack on Team Donkey. >>>> >>>> Those
> >>> are facts. Deal with them. >>> >>> I’m not attacking you, George. >>
> >>> Wrong. You resorted to an ad hom attack. >>> I’m making fun of you.
> >>> See? >> So you decided to act like a smug asshole, rather than deal
> >>> with the >> facts. No surprise there. > > Your facts aren’t factual.
> >>>
> >>> > I’m sorry you perceive > me as a smug asshole.
> >>> That's unfortunate. Learning how others perceive your behavior can be
> >>> an opportunity to change, not just to feel sorry for yourself.
> >>> > We could be having fun.
> >>> So let's have fun.
> >>>
> >>> Why do you think you come across as a smug asshole?
> >
> >> You previously perceived me as a homophobe and anti-Semite
> >
> > I missed that, can you post a link to that thread?
>
>
> Years ago, when Corey was writing and posting "poetry" about my having
> gay sex with you and a Jew, I told him that posting that stuff made him
> look homophobic and antisemitic. That seemed to have the right effect
> because, even if he's kept writing that shit, he hasn't posted any more
> of it.

Actually, you never told me that. You went outside the group,
and posted that to a friend’s blog as well as your own, because
that’s the type of person everyone knows you are, George.