On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> treatment.
> Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> his targets as well.
> It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> their districts.
> The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> victim').
> Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. .
>
> * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)

How very childish (and petty) of you, George!

FYI: the plural of "thief" is "thieves."

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > treatment.
> > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > his targets as well.
> > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > their districts.
> > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > victim').
> > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)

> > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. .
> >
> > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)

> How very childish (and petty) of you, George!

It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.

> FYI: the plural of "thief" is "thieves."

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy..
> > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > > treatment.
> > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > > his targets as well.
> > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > > their districts.
> > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > > victim').
> > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
>
> > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. .
> > >
> > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
>
> > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works. Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.

> > FYI: the plural of "thief" is "thieves."
That's very true

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > > > treatment.
> > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > > > his targets as well.
> > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > > > their districts.
> > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > > > victim').
> > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> >
> > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. ..
> > > >
> > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
> >
> > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.

No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).

Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.

> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.

Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.

<snip for focus>

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:30:40 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> > > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > > > > treatment.
> > > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > > > > his targets as well.
> > > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > > > > their districts.
> > > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > > > > victim').
> > > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> > >
> > > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though.. .
> > > > >
> > > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
> > >
> > > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> > > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
> > No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
> No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).

George Dance, we hate to say it, but what the intercourse is wrong with you? We located the lyrics of the original songs (aka "work") from the Pink Floyd album ("The Piper at the Gates of Dawn") and compared your lines with theirs. You took their lines, rearranged them a bit, and didn't indicate that they were written by anyone else but you:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/YcHKc6I7cKg/m/_wAzhGJqAAAJ

We found similar evidence of Pickering's plagiarism. Senora Esperanza twice posted poems without attribution. Mack A. Damia plagiarized at least part of his dissertation:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/rCtE_HEKMmc/m/tL2rHNy4BAAJ

To further define things for you, original "work" was plagiarized into another "work."
>
> Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work."
What? That was our research. You have either not reached or passed by The Age of Reason.

> But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
They are lines/lyrics from Syd Barrett's writings/songs. You did not originate them. You tried to pass them off as your own writing(s). You have done this before.

> > Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you used were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone. Your method of arguing off the point makes you appear to be daft.

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 11:54:29 AM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy..
> > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > > treatment.
> > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > > his targets as well.
> > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > > their districts.
> > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > > victim').
> > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
>
> > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. .
> > >
> > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
>
> > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
>

There's a pattern here, George. And the common element within that pattern is... wait for it... you.

> > FYI: the plural of "thief" is "thieves."

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 2:30:40 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> > > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> > > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> > > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> > > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> > > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> > > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> > > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> > > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> > > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> > > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> > > > > treatment.
> > > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> > > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> > > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> > > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> > > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> > > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> > > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> > > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> > > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> > > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> > > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> > > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> > > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> > > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> > > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> > > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> > > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> > > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> > > > > his targets as well.
> > > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> > > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> > > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> > > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> > > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> > > > > their districts.
> > > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> > > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> > > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> > > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> > > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> > > > > victim').
> > > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> > > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> > > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> > > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> > > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> > > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> > > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> > >
> > > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> > > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> > > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> > > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> > > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> > > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> > > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> > > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though.. .
> > > > >
> > > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> > > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> > > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
> > >
> > > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> > > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
> > No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
> No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
>
> Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> > Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
>

Wait a second... you can't be saying what I think you're saying...

Oh shit! You are.

You are actually trying to claim that NancyGene's list of lines you *stole* from the late Mr. Barrett somehow constitutes a plagiarized work on her part.

Have you gone entirely out of (what for lack of a better word is) you mind?

Do you actually expect anyone (Will Donkey excepted) to fall for this?

WTF is wrong with you, George Dance?

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 5:20:37 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 2:30:40 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > > No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
> > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
> >
> > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> > > Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
> >
> Wait a second... you can't be saying what I think you're saying...
> Oh shit! You are.
>
> You are actually trying to claim that NancyGene's list of lines you *stole* from the late Mr. Barrett somehow constitutes a plagiarized work on her part.

No, Michael; I called the list of sources that NG compiled their "work." You're the one who referred to it as "plagiarized".

Why do you lie so much, Michael Monkey?

> Have you gone entirely out of (what for lack of a better word is) you mind?
>
> Do you actually expect anyone (Will Donkey excepted) to fall for this?

I doubt Will will believe any claims you make. The less intelligent of your flunkies might believe it, or pretend to anyway.
> WTF is wrong with you, George Dance?

George Dance wrote:

> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
>> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
>> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
>> > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
>> > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
>> > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
>> > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
>> > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
>> > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
>> > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
>> > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
>> > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
>> > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
>> > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
>> > > > treatment.
>> > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
>> > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
>> > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
>> > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
>> > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
>> > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
>> > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
>> > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
>> > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
>> > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
>> > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
>> > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
>> > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
>> > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
>> > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
>> > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
>> > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
>> > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
>> > > > his targets as well.
>> > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
>> > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
>> > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
>> > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
>> > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
>> > > > their districts.
>> > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
>> > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
>> > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
>> > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
>> > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
>> > > > victim').
>> > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
>> > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
>> > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
>> > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
>> > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
>> > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
>> > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
>> >
>> > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
>> > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
>> > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
>> > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
>> > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
>> > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
>> > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
>> > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. ..
>> > > >
>> > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
>> > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
>> > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
>> >
>> > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
>> > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
>> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.

> No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).

> Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.

>> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.

> Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.

> <snip for focus>

True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:35:15 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
> George Dance wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> >> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
> >> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> >> > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
> >> > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> >> > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> >> > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> >> > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> >> > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
> >> > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
> >> > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> >> > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> >> > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> >> > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> >> > > > treatment.
> >> > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> >> > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> >> > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> >> > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> >> > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> >> > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> >> > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> >> > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> >> > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> >> > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> >> > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> >> > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> >> > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> >> > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> >> > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> >> > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> >> > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> >> > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> >> > > > his targets as well.
> >> > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> >> > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> >> > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> >> > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> >> > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> >> > > > their districts.
> >> > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> >> > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> >> > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> >> > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> >> > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> >> > > > victim').
> >> > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> >> > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> >> > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> >> > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> >> > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> >> > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> >> > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> >> >
> >> > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> >> > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> >> > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> >> > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
> >> > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
> >> > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
> >> > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
> >> > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. ..
> >> > > >
> >> > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> >> > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> >> > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
> >> >
> >> > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
> >> > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
> >> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
>
> > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
>
> > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
>
> >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
>
> > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
>
> > <snip for focus>
> True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.

Unfortunately not in George's poem.

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:35:15 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
> > George Dance wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > >> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
> >
> > > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
> >
> > > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> >
> > >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> >
> > > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
> >
> > > <snip for focus>
> > True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.
> Unfortunately not in George's poem.

He's credited in a note to the poem.
https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html

WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:35:15 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
>> George Dance wrote:
>>
>> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
>> >> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 3:54:29 PM UTC, George Dance wrote:
>> >> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
>> >> > > On Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, George Dance wrote:
>> >> > > > AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
>> >> > > > ~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
>> >> > > > from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
>> >> > > > and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
>> >> > > > course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy.
>> >> > > > ("George, like Sarah Palin,
>> >> > > > failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
>> >> > > > Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
>> >> > > > ~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
>> >> > > > sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
>> >> > > > treatment.
>> >> > > > Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
>> >> > > > A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
>> >> > > > Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
>> >> > > > Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
>> >> > > > Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
>> >> > > > after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
>> >> > > > Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
>> >> > > > proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
>> >> > > > kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
>> >> > > > March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
>> >> > > > the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
>> >> > > > Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
>> >> > > > inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
>> >> > > > NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
>> >> > > > implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
>> >> > > > It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
>> >> > > > Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
>> >> > > > putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
>> >> > > > his targets as well.
>> >> > > > It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
>> >> > > > March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
>> >> > > > Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
>> >> > > > someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
>> >> > > > also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
>> >> > > > their districts.
>> >> > > > The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
>> >> > > > or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
>> >> > > > gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
>> >> > > > same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
>> >> > > > stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
>> >> > > > victim').
>> >> > > > Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
>> >> > > > from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
>> >> > > > much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
>> >> > > > Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
>> >> > > > while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
>> >> > > > (Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
>> >> > > > being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
>> >> >
>> >> > > > Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
>> >> > > > she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
>> >> > > > poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
>> >> > > > the ~poets~. Yet anyone else who does the same thing is a plagiarist
>> >> > > > and a thief. Over the years they have chased away many writers of
>> >> > > > poetry by labelling them plagiarists and thiefs, using just this type
>> >> > > > of hypocritical reasoning. (And of course if anyone complains, then
>> >> > > > they're 'adopting the role of the victim'.) Not this time, though. ..
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > * (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
>> >> > > > the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
>> >> > > > given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
>> >> >
>> >> > > How very childish (and petty) of you, George!
>> >> > It's not surprising that this is all that Michael would get from reading the above. Considering that his own clique, Team Monkey, does the same thing as ~the poets~ were doing here -- falsely calling others on the group plagiarists just to personally attack them -- one would expect him to blank out all of that.
>> >> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
>>
>> > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
>>
>> > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
>>
>> >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
>>
>> > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
>>
>> > <snip for focus>
>> True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.

> Unfortunately not in George's poem.

George does credit Syd Barrett:

https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 9:50:27 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:35:15 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
> > > George Dance wrote:
> > > > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 12:24:19 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > > >> No, we call people plagiarists if they have committed plagiarism. In the instances we have pointed out (yours, Pickering's), we have given clear comparisons to the original poems or works.
> > >
> > > > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
> > >
> > > > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> > >
> > > >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> > >
> > > > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
> > >
> > > > <snip for focus>
> > > True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.
> > Unfortunately not in George's poem.
> He's credited in a note to the poem.
> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance..html
>
> WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?

He wasn't when you posted it here, plagiarist.

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 9:50:27 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
>> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
>> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 6:35:15 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
>
>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance..html
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?

> He wasn't

It is now. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

George Dance wrote:

> On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
>> Will Dockery wrote:
>> > George Dance wrote:
>
>> > > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
>> >
>> > > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
>> >
>> > >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
>> >
>> > > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
>> >
>> > > <snip for focus>
>> > True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.
>> Unfortunately not in George's poem.

> He's credited in a note to the poem.
> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html

> WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?

He's a delusional little fuckwit monkey boy?

🙂

On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 11:10:11 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
> George Dance wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> >> Will Dockery wrote:
> >> > George Dance wrote:
> >
> >> > > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
> >> >
> >> > > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> >> >
> >> > >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work..
> >> >
> >> > > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
> >> >
> >> > > <snip for focus>
> >> > True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.
> >> Unfortunately not in George's poem.
>
> > He's credited in a note to the poem.
> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html
>
> > WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?
> He's a delusional little fuckwit monkey boy?
>
> 🙂

I'm starting to concur with that diagnosis, dear colleague. He insists that he never lies -- that he believes everything he says -- and if he's telling the truth about them, then "delusion" is the obvious explanation.

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 3:50:42 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 11:10:11 PM UTC-4, W-Dockery wrote:
> > George Dance wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 7:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > >> Will Dockery wrote:
> > >> > George Dance wrote:
> > >
> > >> > > No, NancyGene. You did not find any original "work" to support your own false allegation of plagiarism. What you found, and "compared" my poem to, was a laundry list of lines, phrases, and single words from the source I'd told you that I'd taken them from: Syd Barrett's lyrics for /The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/).
> > >> >
> > >> > > Your list of source lines for my poem was very thorough and reflected much effort on your part, so one could call that your "work." But calling it a "work" by Syd Barrett is simply wrong; it's nothing but a random list of lines that you put together from his actual work.
> > >> >
> > >> > >> Pink Floyd unattributed or plagiarized is still Pink Floyd's work.
> > >> >
> > >> > > Even to accept that your list of sources was anyone's work but your own, it would be misleading to call it "Pink Floyd's work". All of the lines, etc. that you quoted were Barrett's, and Barrett's alone.
> > >> >
> > >> > > <snip for focus>
> > >> > True, the song is credited to Syd Barrett.
> > >> Unfortunately not in George's poem.
> >
> > > He's credited in a note to the poem.
> > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html
> >
> > > WTF is wrong with you, Michael Monkey?
> > He's a delusional little fuckwit monkey boy?
> >
>
> I'm starting to concur with that diagnosis, dear colleague. He insists that he never lies -- that he believes everything he says -- and if he's telling the truth about them, then "delusion" is the obvious explanation.

Pendragon is delusional on multiple levels.