On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 12:00:22 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:22:16 AM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:11:38 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 9:09:53 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
> > > > Will Dockery wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 2:15:23 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 2:11:38 PM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > > > >> > On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 12:59:44 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > On Saturday, October 22, 2022 at 5:51:34 AM UTC, george....@yahoo.ca wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> postpoetry
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> although there's nothing left to say
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> we're gonna say it anyway
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> & if a reader doesn't read
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> we'll call him something we don't need
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> & if a critic calls it shit
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> we won't believe a word of it
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> & if a poet points that out
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> we'll just ignore it & we'll shout
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> about her frogs and trees and birds
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> so we won't have to read her words
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> or better yet let's write of war
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> and fill a page or two with gore
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> some reeking flesh a severed head
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> & maggots feasting on the dead
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> & if perchance that doesn't shock
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> let's add a line of fuck ass cock
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> motherfucker piss & shit
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> (who knows that just might pass for wit)
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> what else to do what else to say
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> when everything is mere cliche?
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> how else to make a reader feel
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> or think that what we say is real?
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> of course the whole idea is dumb
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> when we're as comfortably numb
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> but if we sweat through every motion
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> we may feel a real emotion –
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> at least it kills an hour or two
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> and we have nothing else to do.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> ~~
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> George J. Dance, 2007
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>>> from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2015
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>> George Dance don't need no stinkin' commas.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >> It isn't about what George Dance needs, "Professor"; it's about what the
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >> speaker of the poem needs.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > The speaker in your poem is not "a muse."
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> I never said he was. Where did you get the idea the speaker might be a
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> muse?
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > If poetry is meant to be read aloud, how does your lack of punctuation help your poem?
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> Use the line and stanza breaks. That's what they're there for.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > You did not address the visual demand for six ampersands..
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> It's just part of the style. "and" is replaced by &.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > Does the speaker say "ampersand" in each line?
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> No, "Professor,", an ampersand is pronounced "and.." I can understand you
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> not knowing that, but it's something you could have Googled.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >> Let me quote (from memory) from Karla, another wannabe online poetry
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >> teacher we once had here:
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> >> "Do not confuse the speaker of the poem with the writer of the poem.."
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > That saying has been used too much here.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> Not enough, considering how many tend to forget it so often.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> > The poem still represents your attempt at creativity.
> > > > >> > > > > >>> >> Oh, good; you haven't started calling it "plagiarized" yet..
> > > > >> > > > > >>> > Should she have?
> > > > >> > > > > >>>
> > > > >> > > > > >>> That would be a typical NancyGene troll stunt, yes.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >> I didn't ask if she would have (in your paranoid opinion), but *should* she have.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >> George Dance is known (with or without justification) for
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > That's just a smear from PJR, Pen, you know that....
> > > > >> > > > > Pendragon damned well knows it.
> > > > >> > > > That only accounts for one of the accusations.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Both Jim and I were victims of another form of literary theft when George Dance refused to remove our poetry from his website and posted out of context quotes by us in his wiki.
> > > > >> > > That's not plagiarism, though.
> > > > >> > What part of "another form" are you failing to comprehend?
> > > > >> George Dance did, otoh, plagiarize "Batty's Hat" from PJR. And you know that, as well.
> > > >
> > > > > No, it was a parody, satire of PJR.
> > > >
> > > > > Fair use.
> > > > Exactly, you nailed that onme, Doc...!
> > > Wrong, Stinky.
> > > It started as a satire, but quickly took on a life of its own... to such a point that George Dance considered it to be his own poem (albeit, co-authored). He also used a variation on its title for his blog "Betty's Hat," and after complaints by PJR, "Penny's Hat." The problem is that George's "satire" didn't significantly change, or comment on, PJR's poem (necessary criteria for it to have passed as satire). It simply took PJR's poem and added more lines to it, in which George and his co-author listed additional colors. The basic premise remained the same -- in spite of the addition of thousands of colors. George Dance is indisputably guilty on that count.
> > >
> > > George may not have intentionally stolen it -- but that is, nevertheless, what he did.
> > o.O Did he just confess that Doc nailed on him??? >.<
> No. Stink is merely repeating the Donkey's claim while ignoring (and post-editing) the evidence to the contrary.
>
> IOW: It's just business as usual.

Stink is also still stinking from last night's Halloween party on the banks of the Chattahoochee, and slurring his typewritten words as a result.