On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 1:32:28 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 1:30:13 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 1:16:55 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
> > > >>> Jordy C wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> >
> > > Here is ONE example for you Penhead, your many lies about Mike and myself being gay, which is simply an untruth...
> > >
> > > You have been corrected about this lie yet you continue to spread it....
> > >
> > > There you go.
> > As I said, that is based entirely
> Based entirely on YOUR sleazy fantasies about Mike and myself, Penhead, stop lying..!

How would I know anything about you or Dirty, Stinky?

I know about you both from 1) your poetry, 2) your photos, 3) your posts, and 4) Will's posts.

Based on both your and Will's posts, one gets the impression that you two are (metaphorically) joined at the hip. You appear to spend your days and nights together. You appear to spend your weekends together. You bathe together in the Chattahoochee (you call it "swimming"). And Will continually addresses you both as a single entity (a couple): "How are you and Dirty Mike tonight?" "What are you and Dirty Mike doing this weekend?" etc.

You deny that you're a couple, of course... but you could be "closeted" (or in your case, should one say "tarped"?).

Based on the above-cited posts, I sincerely believe that you and Dirty are a couple.

And, in the immortal words of George Costanza: "It isn't a lie if you believe it."

As always, HtH & HAND

Michael Pendragon
“In 1976-77 I was on the school newspaper and literary magazine staffs, so, not bragging, but I have paid my dues in this poetry game.”
-- Will Dockery, reminiscing on the apex of his poetic career

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:04:04 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 1:32:28 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> > >
> > > > Here is ONE example for you Penhead, your many lies about Mike and myself being gay, which is simply an untruth...
> > > >
> > > > You have been corrected about this lie yet you continue to spread it...
> > > >
> > > > There you go.
> > > As I said, that is based entirely
> > Based entirely on YOUR sleazy fantasies about Mike and myself, Penhead, stop lying..!
> How would I know anything

That's exactly right, you don't.

You make up lies about Mike and myself based on your weird fantasies...

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:06:09 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:04:04 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 1:32:28 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> > > >
> > > > > Here is ONE example for you Penhead, your many lies about Mike and myself being gay, which is simply an untruth...
> > > > >
> > > > > You have been corrected about this lie yet you continue to spread it...
> > > > >
> > > > > There you go.
> > > > As I said, that is based entirely
> > > Based entirely on YOUR sleazy fantasies about Mike and myself, Penhead, stop lying..!
> > How would I know anything
> That's exactly right, you don't.
>
> You make up lies about Mike and myself based on your weird fantasies...

Again:

How would I know anything about you or Dirty, Stinky?

I know about you both from 1) your poetry, 2) your photos, 3) your posts, and 4) Will's posts.

Based on both your and Will's posts, one gets the impression that you two are (metaphorically) joined at the hip. You appear to spend your days and nights together. You appear to spend your weekends together. You bathe together in the Chattahoochee (you call it "swimming"). And Will continually addresses you both as a single entity (a couple): "How are you and Dirty Mike tonight?" "What are you and Dirty Mike doing this weekend?" etc.

You deny that you're a couple, of course... but you could be "closeted" (or in your case, should one say "tarped"?).

Based on the above-cited posts, I sincerely believe that you and Dirty are a couple.

And, in the immortal words of George Costanza: "It isn't a lie if you believe it."

As always, HtH & HAND

Michael Pendragon
“In 1976-77 I was on the school newspaper and literary magazine staffs, so, not bragging, but I have paid my dues in this poetry game.”
-- Will Dockery, reminiscing on the apex of his poetic career

Stop lying, Pendragon.

Just because Zod and Mike live in the same hobo camp it doesn't mean they're a couple.

HTH and HAND.

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:20:41 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> Stop lying, Pendragon.
>
>
> Just because Zod and Mike live in the same hobo camp it doesn't mean they're a couple.

Then why do you address them as such?

Michael Pendragon
"A favorite movie.... I read it like a comic book....."
-- George "Stink" Sulzbach, career pissbum

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:23:10 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:20:41 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > Stop lying, Pendragon.
> >
> >
> > Just because Zod and Mike live in the same hobo camp it doesn't mean they're a couple.
> Then why do you address them as such

I never have, that's another of your lies, Pendragon.

😃

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:32:46 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:23:10 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:20:41 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >
> > > Stop lying, Pendragon.
> > >
> > >
> > > Just because Zod and Mike live in the same hobo camp it doesn't mean they're a couple.
> > Then why do you address them as such
> I never have, that's another of your lies, Pendragon.

DONKEY: Good morning my friend, hope you and Mike are having a nice day so far.

STINKY: Mike and I had a fabulous day on side of river...!!

DONKEY: Happy holiday to you two.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/OBg-auqlGUs/m/cyzh-95BAgAJ

Why do you lie so much, Donkey?

Michael Pendragon
"His trash will be composted."
-- The late, unlamented Stephen "Pickles" Pickering

Again, you're wrong, Pendragon.

Zod and Mike live in the same tent village so I often tell Zod to give Mike my regards.

Nothing sexual about it.

And so it goes.

😃

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 3:25:11 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> Again, you're wrong, Pendragon.
>
> Zod and Mike live in the same tent village so I often tell Zod to give Mike my regards.
>
> Nothing sexual about it.
>
> And so it goes.

Sexual or platonic, they still appear to be a couple:

DONKEY: Good morning my friend, hope you and Mike are having a nice day so far.

STINKY: Mike and I had a fabulous day on side of river...!!

DONKEY: Happy holiday to you two.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/OBg-auqlGUs/m/cyzh-95BAgAJ

That's couple talk.

HtH & HAND

Michael Pendragon
"Good evening my friend, thanks again for the fee."
-- Will Donkey-for-Hire, 1681 Forestside Dr, Columbus, GA 31907

Coco DeSockmonkey wrote:

> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 3:25:11 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>
>> Again, you're wrong, Pendragon.
>>
>> Zod and Mike live in the same tent village so I often tell Zod to give Mike my regards.
>>
>> Nothing sexual about it.
>>
>> And so it goes.

> Sexual or platonic, they still appear to be a couple

Again, more accurately, neighbors.

And so it goes.

Will Dockery wrote:

> Coco DeSockmonkey wrote:

>> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 3:25:11 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>>
>>> Again, you're wrong, Pendragon.
>>>
>>> Zod and Mike live in the same tent village so I often tell Zod to give Mike my regards.
>>>
>>> Nothing sexual about it.
>>>
>>> And so it goes.

>> Sexual or platonic, they still appear to be a couple

> Again, more accurately, neighbors.

> And so it goes.

Exactly, you nailked it Doc...!

On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 5:45:13 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 5:42:08 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 3:54:01 PM UTC-4, Faraway Star wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 3:49:24 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 2:56:45 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 11:36:04 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 6:14:32 PM UTC, George J. Dance wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Today's poem on Penny's Poetry Blog:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the slant sunlight of the young October, by Alfred Austin
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the slant sunlight of the young October,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dew-dashed lay meadow, upland, wood, and pool;
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mid-time delicious, when all hues are sober
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2023/10/in-slant-sunlight-of-young-october.html
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #pennyspoems
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > George Dance, you have the wrong version here of the lines from Mr. Austin's play ("The Human Tragedy"). You are claiming it is the 1862 version, but what you have copied is actually the 1876 version in the play.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I checked the edition I'd copied it from, and decided to use that date (1891) instead. Much better.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That may be, but you have 1862 on your blaarrrgg.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the interest of accuracy, please stop saying that. I just told you that i'd changed the date on PPB to 1891 - which you're capable of verifying for yourself.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > We wanted to spare ourselves the experience of revisiting your blaarrrgg.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you changed the date, please give us credit for correcting your information.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Even if I felt like giving you unearned credit for my change, I am certainly not going to use your "name" on my blog. For all I know, you'll just use that as an excuse to whine here (and complain to google) that I'm using it "without permission" like your Monkey and Chimp chums have done.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What's with the name-calling, George?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I've been addressing (and referring to) you as "George Dance," and Jim hasn't posted here in two months (approx.).
> > > > > > > > > > > Both you and your Asstroll began name-calling in this thread the previous day. (Oct. 23). Did you forget that?
> > > > > > > > > > This thread appears to have forgotten it as well. I just checked my Oct. 23 posts, and cannot find any trace of the alleged offense.
> > > > > > > > > The archives never forget, Michael. Here's you:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > <quote>
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 12:40:29 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Divisions in long poems are usually called "cantos." But a poet can call the divisions in his poem whatever he wants: acts (as in a play), chapters (as in a novel), scenes (as in a movie) or whatever.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We're not talking about Will Donkey-type poets, George.
> > > > > > > > > </q>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - and here's your Asstroll:
> > > > > > > > > <quote>
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 11:38:20 AM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Don't be so full of yourself Donkey :)
> > > > > > > > > </q>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Which allows me to ask another perennial question: Why do you lie so much, Michael Monkey?
> > > > > > > > > > > Your friend made an incorrect statement (that Austin's /Human Tragedy/ was a "play") and I corrected them.
> > > > > > > > > > I don't believe that her statement was incorrect, George. As previously noted, there is ample reason to believe that Mr. Austin wished his poem to be considered "Dramatic Verse."
> > > > > > > > > I've read some of Austin's poetics, and don't remember him ever using the term "Dramatic Verse." Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
> > > > > > > > > > "Dramatic Verse" is, as the name suggests, both a play and a poem (as per "Manfred" or "Night Magick"). As such, it can be referred to as either a play or a poem.
> > > > > > > > > As I've previously noted, Manfred is a play. I don't know anything about that other one.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Was you ego threatened by her correction?
> > > > > > > > > > > Let's see: your friend attempted to correct the poem, and (though it was correct) got a thank you. I corrected your friend's misuse of the language, and got post after post ranting that "George Dance was wrong." Whose ego can't handle being corrected?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Yours, apparently... since you're unable to admit that NancyGene was correct.
> > > > > > > > > No, NG was not correct. Despite the name and the "Acts" /The Human Tragedy/ is not a play.
> > > > > > > > > > > No, Lying Michael; NG did not correct any date in this thread. NG did not even claim that a date needed to be corrected. I had to discover all that on my own.
> > > > > > > > > > I didn't say that your error was in this thread, George.. We are all aware that it was made in your blog.
> > > > > > > > > NG's purported *correction* was in this thread, Dishonest Michael. But, as I said, it was not a "correction" but a claim that something was wrong on the blog. That something was *not* the date. NG did not "correct' any dates, Lying Michael; please stop spreading that lie.
> > > > > > > > > > > Once again: I corrected your friend when they incorrectly called /The Human Tragedy/ a "play". Apparently they don't like being corrected, nor do you. That's not my problem.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > And, once again, I believe that Mr. Austin considered it to be an example of "Dramatic Verse." And since "Dramatic Verse" is a term he applied to "Romeo & Juliet," one can conclude that his use of it included plays.
> > > > > > > > > And once again, I don't remember Austin ever using the term, "Dramatic Verse."
> > > > > > > > > > > As noted; you and your Asstroll ("Jim's" replacement) had begun the name-calling on my thread here the previous day. Stop crying when others follow your lead. As I've told you guys before: if you can't stand the heat, stop starting fires.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That never happened, George.
> > > > > > > > > Wow! Earlier in your message, you were claiming only that you couldn't find the quotes; now you're claiming that they never existed. You've crossed the line into lying again, Lying Michael.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Once again, here's you:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > <quote>
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 12:40:29 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Divisions in long poems are usually called "cantos." But a poet can call the divisions in his poem whatever he wants: acts (as in a play), chapters (as in a novel), scenes (as in a movie) or whatever.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We're not talking about Will Donkey-type poets, George.
> > > > > > > > > </q>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > - and here's your Asstroll:
> > > > > > > > > <quote>
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 11:38:20 AM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Don't be so full of yourself Donkey :)
> > > > > > > > > </q>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We're back to name-calling, by your choice.
> > > > > > > > > > > Are you pretending that you haven't seen the troll-threads NG has opened on each of those poems? Or that you forgot them? Do I really have to find the urls for your?
> > > > > > > > > > I have seen NancyGene offer corrections to several of the poems on your blog. I don't see how offering corrections to someone can be considered trolling.
> > > > > > > > > Sounds to me like you just haven't thought about it. To give you one example: "Offering corrections" when there's nothing to correct (like NG did in this thread, when they claimed there I'd used "the wrong version here of the lines from Mr. Austin's play") is obvious trolling; just meant to waste one's time.
> > > > > > > > > > > > As a casual reader of "Penny's [Poetry Blog]," it is clear that you don't research the poems you post any further than their copyright status. You also don't check the copy/pasted text for errors.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Previously you've claimed that you never go to the blog at all, which is more likely: After all, it's a blog for poetry readers, not for those who claim to have already read everything.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I used to go to your blog (although I cannot access it from my work computer). These days, I only visit Penny's pages when NancyGene brings them to your attention.
> > > > > > > > > > > It's likely that you're just "choosing to believe your colleague" (NG) again. You realize that, if so, your opinion of the blog isn't worth much.
> > > > > > > > > > Grant me some credit, George.
> > > > > > > > > It's what you do, Michael. Not just that one time, but repeatedly.
> > > > > > > > > "I am happy to accept NancyGene's statement -- and, barring evidence to the contrary, shall continue to do so."
> > > > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/U2vSKjlqTS8/m/fWQJLOzIAAAJ?hl=en
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The only reason you think /The Human Tragedy/ was a play, for instance, is because your buffoon colleague called it one.
> > > > > > > > > > If NancyGene points out an error on your blog, you can be certain that I visit your blog to check it prior to responding.
> > > > > > > > > No, I cannot. You've made too many contradictory statements about whether you visit the blog or not. Last month (when NG tried to make screenshot of an alleged "error on the blog" but copied something else instead) you were claiming that you didn't even know what the blog looked like!
> > > > > > > > > > > > NancyGene doesn't have a "case," George.
> > > > > > > > > > > Not much of one, admittedly. There's no indication Austin thought he'd written a "play" and no evidence in the text itself that he'd written one in fact.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I have presented what I believe to be a compelling argument for his thinking it a play (or, at least, an example of "Dramatic Verse") based on the Preface to the 1889 ed. of his poem, and his bio on AllPoetry.com
> > > > > > > > > There you go again. Whether or not Austin thought /The Human Tragedy/ was a play is a question of historical fact, and questions of fact cannot be answered by 'argument'. They're answered by research: by discovering the facts. Let's review them:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > (1) fact: Austin wrote plays, both staged dramas and closet dramas
> > > > > > > > > (2) inference: Austin knew what a play was and how to write one.
> > > > > > > > > (3) fact: Austin did not write /The Human Tragedy/ as a play. He wrote it as an epic poem (divided into Cantos).
> > > > > > > > > (4) fact: Austin later retitled his cantos "Acts" and added "Protagonists" (and even later, "Personages").
> > > > > > > > > (5) inference: Austin did not think that turned his epic into a play (from 2).
> > > > > > > > > (6) inference: Austin did not think /The Human Tragedy/ was a play.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ; so he certainly knew what a play was, and how to write one. Another fact is that he did not write one when he wrote /The Human Tragedy/; he wrote an epic poem divided into cantos.
> > > > > > > > > > > And, despite their claims, I thanked them and we moved on. Then I corrected an error of theirs, and have since got uninterrupted whining about how I'd "attacked" them.
> > > > > > > > > > As previously noted, your "thank you" was back-handed at best, and coupled with a false claim that NancyGene is unfamiliar with the literary meaning of "tragedy."
> > > > > > > > > No, Lying Michael. I said that NG used the term "play" incorrectly, when they called /The Human Tragedy/ (1862 version) a play. Please don't misstate what I said.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Your attempt to turn this into an attack on her is disgraceful.
> > > > > > > > > > > Your friend's inability to handle a simple correction makes them deservedly a figure of ridicule.
> > > > > > > > > > NancyGene is able to handle corrections -- on those extremely rare occasions where she's actually mistaken, however, such was not the case here.
> > > > > > > > > The fact is that NG is "handling" this particular correction by playing victim and pretending it was an "attack" -- and the fact that NG's "colleague" is doing and saying the same thing doesn't change that fact.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Austin's" Dramatic Verse" could be referred to as a "play" or a "poem." That's what "Dramatic Verse" is.
> > > > > > > > > > > I think you're mixing up "Dramatic verse" with "Verse drama". The latter are plays in verse; the former are verse, but not plays.. I have an article on the subject on PPP; as you don't read that either, and it's essentially the Wikipedia article, here's a link to that site instead:
> > > > > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verse_drama_and_dramatic_verse
> > > > > > > > > > No, George, I'm not.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This is the same mistake you made regarding NancyGene. We both choose our words very carefully, and check our sources to make sure that our use of them applies.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am using "Dramatic Verse" precisely as Mr. Austin uses it in the Preface to his poem, where he cites "Romeo and Juliet" as an example.
> > > > > > > > > Once again, I don't remember Austin ever using that phrase, "Dramatic Verse." It looks to me as if you can't even quote him correctly; why should anyone think you're interpreting his thoughts correctly?
> > > > > > > > > > Your article on PPP does not take precedence over Mr. Austin's use of the term when discussing Mr. Austin's poem.
> > > > > > > > > I believe I shall have explain Austin's theory (that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest form of poetry) over on PPP. It's an interesting theory, which obviously needs to be explained..
> > > > > > > > > > > > She is correct. Mr. Austin's poem falls under the same category as Shelley's "Prometheus Unbound" (as NancyGene has noted) and Byron's "Manfred."
> > > > > > > > > > > No. /Prometheus Unbound/ and /Manfred/ are both verse dramas: plays written in verse. /The Human Tragedy/ is not.
> > > > > > > > > > Wrong.
> > > > > > > > > No, Michael. Your "colleague" is wrong and (whether you really think /The Human Tragedy/ is a play or whether you're just backing up your "colleague" regardless) so are you.
> > > > > > > > > > They are not Verse Dramas, because they were never intended to be staged.
> > > > > > > > > I've heard (just on aapc) that /Manfred/ has been staged. But that doesn't matter, as I've previously said. They're written as plays, and that's how reader should read them.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > snip
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > George Dance, it would greatly help if you used complete quotations instead of using just what suits your argument. For instance, Michael actually said, "We're not talking about Will Donkey-type poets, George. If a real poet chooses to divide his poems into "Acts," you can be sure that he has a legitimate reason for doing so."
> > > > > > > I quoted enough to show the refute his lie that his name-calling, and the Asstroll's, "never happened" in this thread. The rest of the quote was irrelevant to that part of the discussion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Except that in the quoted passage, the only name that I called you was "George."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As PJR used to repeatedly ask, Why do you lie so much, Dunce?
> > > > > > > > If Mr. Austin was a real poet (although evidently not a very good one),
> > > > > > > Show your evidence, NastyGoon. Catty remarks like that don't say anything about Austin (though they do say a good deal about you).
> > > > > > The evidence was posted earlier in this thread, Dunce (courtesy of myself):
> > > > > > Mr. Austin's reputation as a poet is exceptionally bad -- especially when one considers that he was Tennyson's successor as Poet Laureate. He also appears to have been a bit pretentions: "Wilfred Scawen Blunt wrote of him, 'He is an acute and ready reasoner, and is well read in theology and science. It is strange his poetry should be such poor stuff, and stranger still that he should imagine it immortal.'”
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Austin
> > > > > > If you are unable to remember the previous posts in this discussion, it would be advantageous to you to review them prior to posting.
> > > > > > > > what was his reason for using "Acts?"
> > > > > > > You've already been given two answers. Michael's was that Austin added the "Acts" as a homage to Shakespeare, even though (according to MIT's Electronic Shakespeare Edition) "It is very doubtful that Shakespeare thought of his plays as having a five-act structure, or composed them in acts."
> > > > > > > https://shea.mit.edu/ramparts/commentaryguides/what_is_a_folio/actscene/act-scene.htm#:~:text=Though%20modern%20editions%20nearly%20always,or%20composed%20them%20in%20acts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Are you denying that Shakespeare's plays were performed on stage?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shakespeare didn't publish his plays, Dunce. They were collected and published 7 years after his death. Whether Shakespeare thought of his plays as having Acts is entirely unknown.
> > > > > > > Mine was that he added them to suggest that his characters or personages were players in what he saw as /The Human Tragedy/ of his title.. He was extending his metaphor.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > And would not his extended the metaphor to pertain to the *entire poem* necessarily render it a "closet drama"?
> > > > > > > Definitely not because years after he'd written the original poem, he suddenly thought he'd written a play instead. Austin knew what plays were and how to write them.
> > > > > > Again, he wished his poem to be regarded as a "closet drama."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One does not re-cast a poem in dramatic form extend a metaphor. Re-casting a poem in dramatic form *changes* the form from that of a poem to that of a drama.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Austin wished his poem to be considered a "closet drama" like Byron's "Manfred" and Shelley's "Prometheus Unbound."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As per PoemHunter, he was heavily influenced by Byron: "Although his writing was inspired and shaped by the works of Byron and Scott, Austin was actually a mediocre poet, and was the target of much derision."
> > > > > > > > By truncating quotations, you are arguing to something that isn't there, which is dishonest.
> > > > > > > OTC, NG, I was arguing to something that was there in the discussion and is still here in this thread: Michael Monkey's disingenuous complaint about my "name-calling" and his lie that his and his (and your) Asstroll's previous name-calling "never happened."
> > > >
> > > > > So much of this strife is caused by the viciousness of the self perpetuating flaming cycle
> > > Which could all end if we all simply decided to exist peacefully here...!
> > But you didn't demonstrate any peaceful intent
> Zod has always been a man of peace, even when he was in the Navy.

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:39:20 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:21:23 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:16:28 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:10:10 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > >> Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > >> Jordy C wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > >> > > > Let us agree that our resident Dunce has as yet to reveal a single attribute
> > > > > >> > > Look who's talking, Michael Pendragon, the delusional little shit slinging monkey.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > I have openly admitted, time and again, to being evil, wicked, mean, and nasty... and egotistical and sadistic to boot.
> > > > > >> Not to mention a liar and a delusional little fuckwit monkey.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't lie
> > > > Like I said, that's another lie right there.
> > > You're repeating yourself
> > You asked for an example of your lying, and that's the most recent example.
> No, Donkey, it isn't. It's a denial of your unsupported accusation.
>
> For it to become an example, you would first need to provide evidence that I had lied.
>
> So, again: post an example of a supposed "lie" that I've made, and I shall show that it was derived from your own words and/or photographs.
>
> Michael Pendragon
>
> WILL DONKEY: As always, thanks again for helping bring these almost forgotten poets out of obscurity, George Dance.
> GENERAL ZOD: Seconded...
> WILL DONKEY: Good morning, Zod, agreed.*
>
> *Will Donkey agreeing with himself.

That was just too hilarious!

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 4:30:18 PM UTC-4, General-Zod wrote:
> Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > Coco DeSockmonkey wrote:
>
> >> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 3:25:11 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> >>
> >>> Again, you're wrong, Pendragon.
> >>>
> >>> Zod and Mike live in the same tent village so I often tell Zod to give Mike my regards.
> >>>
> >>> Nothing sexual about it.
> >>>
> >>> And so it goes.
>
>
>
> >> Sexual or platonic, they still appear to be a couple
>
> > Again, more accurately, neighbors.
>
> > And so it goes.
> Exactly, you nailked it Doc...!

"I thank."

😃

On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 4:03:01 PM UTC-5, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:39:20 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:21:23 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:16:28 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 10:10:10 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > >> Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > > > >> Jordy C wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > Let us agree that our resident Dunce has as yet to reveal a single attribute
> > > > > > >> > > Look who's talking, Michael Pendragon, the delusional little shit slinging monkey.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > I have openly admitted, time and again, to being evil, wicked, mean, and nasty... and egotistical and sadistic to boot.
> > > > > > >> Not to mention a liar and a delusional little fuckwit monkey..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't lie
> > > > > Like I said, that's another lie right there.
> > > > You're repeating yourself
> > > You asked for an example of your lying, and that's the most recent example.
> > No, Donkey, it isn't. It's a denial of your unsupported accusation.
> >
> > For it to become an example, you would first need to provide evidence that I had lied.
> >
> > So, again: post an example of a supposed "lie" that I've made, and I shall show that it was derived from your own words and/or photographs.
> >
> > Michael Pendragon
> >
> > WILL DONKEY: As always, thanks again for helping bring these almost forgotten poets out of obscurity, George Dance.
> > GENERAL ZOD: Seconded...
> > WILL DONKEY: Good morning, Zod, agreed.*
> >
> > *Will Donkey agreeing with himself.
> That was just too hilarious!

Donkeys are funny that way. They also have big donkeytits.

Faraway Star wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > Faraway Star wrote:
> >> Jordy C wrote:
>
> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!
> >
> > > Here is ONE example for you Penhead, your many lies about Mike and myself being gay, which is simply an untruth...
> > >
> > > You have been corrected about this lie yet you continue to spread it....
> > >
> > > There you go.
> > As I said, that is based entirely
> Based entirely on YOUR sleazy fantasies about Mike and myself, Penhead, stop lying..!

Pendragon is a delusional fuckwit, what else would you expect?

:)

NancyGene wrote:

> On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:

> We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."

Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".

On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> NancyGene wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>
> > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
>
> Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".
>

Hmm... Lying Dunce. On Nov 3, 2023, 5:16:13 PM, NancyGene posted the following:

George Dance thinks we are catty by saying that Mr. Austin wasn't held in high esteem as a poet. He should also take that up with Britannica.
"His [Alfred Austin's] acerbic criticism and jingoistic verse in the 1870s led Robert Browning to dismiss him as a 'Banjo-Byron,' and his appointment to the laureateship in 1896 was much mocked. He also published a series of stiff verse dramas, some novels, and a good deal of lyrical but very minor nature poetry."
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-Austin

Hmm, verse dramas! "These plays contain poetic elements, like rhyming lines, and more commonly, lines that are written in blank verse. They might also be structured in a way that makes them appear more like stanzas than paragraphs or individual lines of dialogue."
https://poemanalysis.com/genre/poetic-drama/#:~:text=These%20plays%20contain%20poetic%20elements,or%20individual%20lines%20of%20dialogue.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/-Gaq3wjWZjY/m/ErVQpFI5BgAJ

Why do you lie so much, Dunce?

Why do you think that you won't be caught in your lies, whey you always are?

Are you delusional, dense, or both?

Michael Pendragon
“don't you ever get tired of being wrong?”
-- J.R. Sherman (to Will Dockery)

On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> NancyGene wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
>
> > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
>
> Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".

Obsessed, you are, George Dance! The sources also do not say that "The Human Tragedy" was a floor wax or a delicious dessert topping. And, actually, we have not been looking for other citations. It is a play. As Michael points out in the message just posted, Austin wrote "verse dramas."

We think that Michael Pendragon was right when he said that you use Debating Techniques 101.* How would you know if we were or were not looking for "people" who said it was a play? After 125 years, not many people have thought of "The Human Tragedy" at all. It is only thanks to our bringing it to AAPC's attention that it is being discussed in 2023. Mr. Austin thanks us--cannot you do that too?

*We also took Debating in college. We got an A.

On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 4:54:30 PM UTC-5, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> > NancyGene wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> >
> > > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
> >
> > Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".
> >
> Hmm... Lying Dunce. On Nov 3, 2023, 5:16:13 PM, NancyGene posted the following:
>
> George Dance thinks we are catty by saying that Mr. Austin wasn't held in high esteem as a poet. He should also take that up with Britannica.

Sounds like NastyGoon is trying, and failing, to read my mind again. In fact, I said their claim that Austin wasn't a good poet was catty.

> "His [Alfred Austin's] acerbic criticism and jingoistic verse in the 1870s led Robert Browning to dismiss him as a 'Banjo-Byron,' and his appointment to the laureateship in 1896 was much mocked. He also published a series of stiff verse dramas, some novels, and a good deal of lyrical but very minor nature poetry."
> https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-Austin

> Hmm, verse dramas! "These plays contain poetic elements, like rhyming lines, and more commonly, lines that are written in blank verse. They might also be structured in a way that makes them appear more like stanzas than paragraphs or individual lines of dialogue."
> https://poemanalysis.com/genre/poetic-drama/#:~:text=These%20plays%20contain%20poetic%20elements,or%20individual%20lines%20of%20dialogue.

Michael, I already told you two that Austin wrote verse dramas. He published 8 verse dramas; /The Human Tragedy/ wasn't one of them.

> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/-Gaq3wjWZjY/m/ErVQpFI5BgAJ
> Why do you lie so much, Dunce?

What are you claiming is a "lie", Lying Michael? Are you saying it's a lie that NG found "two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play" when it turns out they found a third source that doesn't say it's a play?

> Why do you think that you won't be caught in your lies, whey you always are?
Why do you think that if you stamp your little foot and scream "YOU'RE LYING!" in a thread, anyone besides your Goon and your Asstroll will believe you?

> Are you delusional, dense, or both?
Are you still pretending that you three aren't in this thread just to troll?

Jordy C wrote:

> “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!

Yes, Jordy, you're right that Michael Monkey's clattering was neither nice nor fair; but you cannot expect either fairness or niceness from Michael Monkey. Michael's problem is that when someone claims he's wrong, he does not think they're not asking him to correct his mistake (like a normal person would think). Rather, he sees the criticism as an "attack" on his very identity (his belief that he's someone who never makes mistakes). He reacts (as you say) emotionally, like an animal; he has to choose between fight and flight, and (since he's actually perfectly safe hiding behind his keyboard) he'll always choose to fight.

Which is why, even though Michael Monkey cries "peace" a lot, when he's not crying "peace" he's picking fights. Unlike Zod, I don't think he's consciously being hypocritical or duplicitous in that. I think it's more likely that when he goes into a meltdown like this he can't remember what he thought or felt in his right mind, and when he's in his right mind he can't remember what he thought or felt when he was melting down. Whether Zod's right or I am, though, the effect is the same: our resident Monkey comes across as thoroughly hypocritical and/or duplicitous.

On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 1:25:16 AM UTC+10, George J. wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 4:54:30 PM UTC-5, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> > > NancyGene wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> > >
> > > > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
> > >
> > > Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".
> > >
> > Hmm... Lying Dunce. On Nov 3, 2023, 5:16:13 PM, NancyGene posted the following:
> >
> > George Dance thinks we are catty by saying that Mr. Austin wasn't held in high esteem as a poet. He should also take that up with Britannica.
> Sounds like NastyGoon is trying, and failing, to read my mind again. In fact, I said their claim that Austin wasn't a good poet was catty.
(Us): "If Mr. Austin was a real poet (although evidently not a very good one), what was his reason for using "Acts?"
(George Dance): "Show your evidence, NastyGoon. Catty remarks like that don't say anything about Austin (though they do say a good deal about you)."

We posted contemporary critiques of Mr. Austin's works. They were not favorable. What does our saying that Mr. Austin was not a very good poet, backed up by written commentary on his poetry, by people who read his poetry during his lifetime, say about us? That we are good researchers? That we know that Mr. Austin was not a very good poet? That he used "Acts" because he wanted to make his "poem" into dramatic verse?

> > "His [Alfred Austin's] acerbic criticism and jingoistic verse in the 1870s led Robert Browning to dismiss him as a 'Banjo-Byron,' and his appointment to the laureateship in 1896 was much mocked. He also published a series of stiff verse dramas, some novels, and a good deal of lyrical but very minor nature poetry."
> > https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-Austin
>
> > Hmm, verse dramas! "These plays contain poetic elements, like rhyming lines, and more commonly, lines that are written in blank verse. They might also be structured in a way that makes them appear more like stanzas than paragraphs or individual lines of dialogue."
> > https://poemanalysis.com/genre/poetic-drama/#:~:text=These%20plays%20contain%20poetic%20elements,or%20individual%20lines%20of%20dialogue.
> Michael, I already told you two that Austin wrote verse dramas. He published 8 verse dramas; /The Human Tragedy/ wasn't one of them.
> > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/-Gaq3wjWZjY/m/ErVQpFI5BgAJ
> > Why do you lie so much, Dunce?
> What are you claiming is a "lie", Lying Michael? Are you saying it's a lie that NG found "two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play" when it turns out they found a third source that doesn't say it's a play?
> > Why do you think that you won't be caught in your lies, whey you always are?
> Why do you think that if you stamp your little foot and scream "YOU'RE LYING!" in a thread, anyone besides your Goon and your Asstroll will believe you?
> > Are you delusional, dense, or both?
> Are you still pretending that you three aren't in this thread just to troll?

We are discussing poetry. You, George Dance, are covering your ass.

George J. Dance wrote:

> Jordy C wrote:
>

>> “Not a single worthy attribute to be regardless highly”? Please, my friend. That is not nice, and that is not fair… granted, I do tend to much prefer over complicating to oversimplifying, but that is still a statement that can only be stated in extreme anger… people are so very complicated that is is exceedingly difficult to know all there is to know about even our *closest friends and relatives* over a period of many years… yet, you believe it is possible to know whether or not someone has a “single worthy attribute” based on highly selective past from *strangers* over a short time on the internet??? Your letting your *emotiona* override your very fine, intellect here!

> Yes, Jordy, you're right that Michael Monkey's clattering was neither nice nor fair; but you cannot expect either fairness or niceness from Michael Monkey. Michael's problem is that when someone claims he's wrong, he does not think they're not asking him to correct his mistake (like a normal person would think). Rather, he sees the criticism as an "attack" on his very identity (his belief that he's someone who never makes mistakes). He reacts (as you say) emotionally, like an animal; he has to choose between fight and flight, and (since he's actually perfectly safe hiding behind his keyboard) he'll always choose to fight.

> Which is why, even though Michael Monkey cries "peace" a lot, when he's not crying "peace" he's picking fights. Unlike Zod, I don't think he's consciously being hypocritical or duplicitous in that. I think it's more likely that when he goes into a meltdown like this he can't remember what he thought or felt in his right mind, and when he's in his right mind he can't remember what he thought or felt when he was melting down. Whether Zod's right or I am, though, the effect is the same: our resident Monkey comes across as thoroughly hypocritical and/or duplicitous.

Yes, you nailed it again, George.

On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:25:16 AM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 4:54:30 PM UTC-5, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> > > NancyGene wrote:
>
> > > > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
> > >
> > > Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".
> > >
> > Hmm... Lying Dunce. On Nov 3, 2023, 5:16:13 PM, NancyGene posted the following:
> >
> > George Dance thinks we are catty by saying that Mr. Austin wasn't held in high esteem as a poet. He should also take that up with Britannica.
> Sounds like NastyGoon is trying, and failing, to read my mind again. In fact, I said their claim that Austin wasn't a good poet was catty.
> > "His [Alfred Austin's] acerbic criticism and jingoistic verse in the 1870s led Robert Browning to dismiss him as a 'Banjo-Byron,' and his appointment to the laureateship in 1896 was much mocked. He also published a series of stiff verse dramas, some novels, and a good deal of lyrical but very minor nature poetry."
> > https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-Austin
>
> > Hmm, verse dramas! "These plays contain poetic elements, like rhyming lines, and more commonly, lines that are written in blank verse. They might also be structured in a way that makes them appear more like stanzas than paragraphs or individual lines of dialogue."
> > https://poemanalysis.com/genre/poetic-drama/#:~:text=These%20plays%20contain%20poetic%20elements,or%20individual%20lines%20of%20dialogue.
> Michael, I already told you two that Austin wrote verse dramas. He published 8 verse dramas; /The Human Tragedy/ wasn't one of them.
> > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/-Gaq3wjWZjY/m/ErVQpFI5BgAJ
> > Why do you lie so much, Dunce?
> What are you claiming is a "lie", Lying Michael? Are you saying it's a lie that NG found "two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play" when it turns out they found a third source that doesn't say it's a play?
> > Why do you think that you won't be caught in your lies, whey you always are?
> Why do you think that if you stamp your little foot and scream "YOU'RE LYING!" in a thread, anyone besides your Goon and your Asstroll will believe you?
> > Are you delusional, dense, or both?
> Are you still pretending that you three aren't in this thread just to troll?

Why should he bother to deny it..???

Ha ha.

On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:25:16 AM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 4:54:30 PM UTC-5, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2023 at 1:55:15 PM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> > > NancyGene wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:23:56 PM UTC, NancyGene wrote:
> > >
> > > > We also see in “The Argus,” Friday, January 8, 1896, “The New Poet Laureate:” “His most ambitious work, The Human Tragedy, appeared in the year following [1862], but was afterwards withdrawn from circulation, and reissued in a revised form some years later. It attracted scarcely any attention in England, and the unmerited indifference exhibited towards it by the writer's own countrymen was reprehended at the time by the Revue des Deux Mondes. Mr. Austin developed in this poem the human tragedy in Its religious, romantic, ethnical, and humanitarian aspects; and the disappointment occasioned by its failure served to infuse a good deal of bitterness into his next work, The Golden Age, a satire […]."
> > >
> > > Hmmm ... that's two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play. After three weeks, the only people you've found claiming it is one are yourself and your Bandar-Log "colleague".
> > >
> > Hmm... Lying Dunce. On Nov 3, 2023, 5:16:13 PM, NancyGene posted the following:
> >
> > George Dance thinks we are catty by saying that Mr. Austin wasn't held in high esteem as a poet. He should also take that up with Britannica.
> Sounds like NastyGoon is trying, and failing, to read my mind again. In fact, I said their claim that Austin wasn't a good poet was catty.
> > "His [Alfred Austin's] acerbic criticism and jingoistic verse in the 1870s led Robert Browning to dismiss him as a 'Banjo-Byron,' and his appointment to the laureateship in 1896 was much mocked. He also published a series of stiff verse dramas, some novels, and a good deal of lyrical but very minor nature poetry."
> > https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alfred-Austin
>
> > Hmm, verse dramas! "These plays contain poetic elements, like rhyming lines, and more commonly, lines that are written in blank verse. They might also be structured in a way that makes them appear more like stanzas than paragraphs or individual lines of dialogue."
> > https://poemanalysis.com/genre/poetic-drama/#:~:text=These%20plays%20contain%20poetic%20elements,or%20individual%20lines%20of%20dialogue.
> Michael, I already told you two that Austin wrote verse dramas. He published 8 verse dramas; /The Human Tragedy/ wasn't one of them.

Based on what evidence?

> > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/-Gaq3wjWZjY/m/ErVQpFI5BgAJ
> > Why do you lie so much, Dunce?
> What are you claiming is a "lie", Lying Michael? Are you saying it's a lie that NG found "two more sources that don't say /The Human Tragedy/ is a play" when it turns out they found a third source that doesn't say it's a play?
>

I'm saying that NancyGene posted corroborative evidence that it is a play. I'm also accusing you of intentionally ignoring said evidence.

> > Why do you think that you won't be caught in your lies, whey you always are?
> Why do you think that if you stamp your little foot and scream "YOU'RE LYING!" in a thread, anyone besides your Goon and your Asstroll will believe you?

I think that you were caught dead to rights, Dunce. I reposted NancyGene's evidence, which you're still pretending doesn't exist.

If you can *refute* NancyGene's evidence with *evidence from reputable* sources, go ahead. If not, you're the one who's stomping his feet.

> > Are you delusional, dense, or both?
> Are you still pretending that you three aren't in this thread just to troll?

No one wants to troll you, Dunce.

I was not familiar with Mr. Austin, and based on the reviews (provided by NancyGene), "The Human Tragedy" looks worthy of my attention.

NancyGene magnanimously corrected your errors, and has provided additional information regarding both the poet and the play. Yet you insist on pettily attacking her over semantics -- when her referring to it as a "play" is perfectly acceptable (and most likely in keeping with the author's intent).

In short, you're a petty, ungrateful Dunce, who launches childish attacks against anyone who corrects his mistakes.

I'm here both to support NancyGene, and to learn more about Mr. Austin and his play.

You're the asshole who brought the childish name-calling into play. As expected.

Michael Pendragon
“Yes, Pendragon is showing a good bit of restaurant, given he's losing the argument.”
-- Will Donkey explaining how once the restaurant makes an appearance, the argument is done.
https://imgur.com/gallery/dpR2ESh
https://imgur.com/gallery/rtvGMMt