On 2022-11-14 3:48 p.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Monday, November 14, 2022 at 2:19:36 PM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-11-12 11:19 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>> On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 5:20:09 AM UTC-5, Robert Burrows wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 4:34:08 AM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-11-12 2:08 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, November 12, 2022 at 1:48:57 AM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-11-09 10:19 a.m., Spam-I-Am wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 9:38:00 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 8:52:31 AM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-05 10:57 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 6:42:04 AM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-11-01 4:05 p.m., Ash Wurthing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, October 31, 2022 at 5:30:18 PM UTC-4, Zod wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 5:24:38 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 3:54:28 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:13:28 PM UTC-4, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To October, by William Curtis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How bright, loved month, upon the fading brow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of yonder hill, with melancholy air
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spreads thy sweet smile! How bright the hectic glow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of dying beauty on thy cheek so fair!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2022/10/to-october-william-curtis.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, George... apart from their being unenforced "rules," what part's of the GLs/FAQs do you disagree with?
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have to ask you the same thing, Michael, as your behavior in
>>>>> three PPB threads tells us which parts of the GLs you disagree with:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) Don’t hijack other people’s threads. If a thread’s topic is “Walt Whitman,” you should only make a comment pertaining to Walt Whitman. If you wish to discuss a poem you’ve written that was inspired by Mr. Whitman, start your own thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Over the past two weeks, you've hijacked every PPB thread to post and to
>>>>> post about these "GLs" of yours. Please stop.
>>>>>> 5) Flame wars happen – especially in unmoderated groups like this one. However, there are certain lines that no one should ever cross. Don’t attack your opponent’s family members (unless he/she introduces them into the discussion). And remember that what happens on AAPC stays at AAPC. Don’t threaten to contact your opponent’s spouse, employer, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6) Don’t repeat or bump posts. If you post an original poem and no one comments on it… tough cookies. Lack of response means that no one found it interesting enough to warrant one. If you must repost it, at least have the decency to wait a year or seven. While you’re waiting you can write something new and try posting it instead. Similarly, if you must bump, please limit yourself to one bump per poem or post.
>>>>>> *Seasonal poems, however, can be bumped/reposted each year.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 7) Don’t respond to a post unless you have something of value to contribute to the thread. One word replies, and generic responses such as "I agree" and "yep" and "You nailed it" and "having another read" should be avoided. Comments mean comments, not clichés.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8) Don’t post and run. If you post a famous poem, make an original comment on it. We all have, or are capable of subscribing to, Poem a Day. We don’t need to read (or reread) every single poem that you do. If you like a poem, but can’t think of anything to say about it, don’t post it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 9) Don’t feed the trolls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FAQs:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. WHAT IS AAPC?
>>>>>> Alt.arts.poetry.comments is a Usenet group of poets who share their work
>>>>>> for comments or critiques. Some poets use the group as a sounding board
>>>>>> before submitting their poem(s) to literary magazines. Most are looking
>>>>>> for advice or help in fine-tuning their writing, developing better
>>>>>> images, improving their use of language, and making sure their writing
>>>>>> is clear and enjoyable to the reader.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. WHAT DOES C&C MEAN?
>>>>>> Generally, Comments & Critiques (or Criticism). Some writers put this
>>>>>> in the header of their post (i.e. "Lazy Day Poem - C&C Please") to
>>>>>> indicate that they want comments on their poem. However, since the
>>>>>> group is devoted to comments, most posts will receive a reply of some
>>>>>> kind even without the C&C designation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. HOW SHOULD I POST MY POETRY?
>>>>>> There are no cut-and-dried rules for posting poetry to AAPC. However,
>>>>>> there are a few "don'ts" that are fairly broadly agreed upon:
>>>>>> -- Do not post your poem as an attachment to your message. Most
>>>>>> internet users are aware that dangerous computer viruses can be
>>>>>> contained in Microsoft Word documents, and will ignore .doc
>>>>>> attachments. In general, it is easier on the reader to include the poem
>>>>>> in the body of the post; downloading and opening attachments usually
>>>>>> takes too much time.
>>>>>> -- Do not post using HTML. Some newsgroup-reading software cannot
>>>>>> handle HTML posts, and some automatically reject them, so not everyone
>>>>>> will see your post. They also are larger in size and take up more space
>>>>>> on the computer and more bandwidth in transmission. Most software used
>>>>>> to read and post newsgroups allows you to choose between posting as
>>>>>> plain text or HTML; choose the plain text option.
>>>>>> -- Do not attach pictures (binaries, gifs, jpegs, etc.) or sound files
>>>>>> (wavs, midis, mpegs, etc.) to your posts. Again, some news servers will
>>>>>> automatically reject them, so not everyone will see your post.
>>>>>> -- Do not type your poem or message in all capital letters. Using all
>>>>>> caps is universally considered "shouting" in newsgroups and chat rooms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. HOW MANY POEMS SHOULD I POST AT A TIME?
>>>>>> While there is no limit to the number of poems you can post at a
>>>>>> sitting, people are most likely to read and respond to your poem if you
>>>>>> post no more than two or three at a time. And as mentioned above, since
>>>>>> there are many poems posted each day, a shorter work is more likely to
>>>>>> receive comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5. WHAT KIND OF HEADER SHOULD I USE?
>>>>>> Use the title of the poem, if it has one. If you can't decide on a
>>>>>> title, try a header like: "Need a Title..." to let the reader know you'd
>>>>>> appreciate comments on that subject. If it is your first poem-post, it
>>>>>> is fine to use the header "First Poem" or "First Post". Do not use
>>>>>> headers designed strictly to get attention, and it is preferable not to
>>>>>> use headers that have nothing to do with your poem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6. DO I HAVE TO HAVE A TITLE FOR MY POEM?
>>>>>> Not necessarily - see #5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 7. DO I HAVE TO WRITE A CERTAIN KIND OF POETRY?
>>>>>> AAPC has poets who use all forms and styles of poetry. The group
>>>>>> includes but is not limited to free verse, tanka, haiku, sonnet,
>>>>>> sestina.... Feel free to use the poetic form you are most comfortable
>>>>>> with, or to post experiments in forms. There are several poets who are
>>>>>> quite knowledgeable and can help you with the rules of certain poetic
>>>>>> forms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 8. WHAT IF I DON'T GET ANY COMMENTS?
>>>>>> There could be several reasons for the lack of comments. Most likely it
>>>>>> is because the group is following the old rule: "If you can't say
>>>>>> nothin' nice, don't say nothin' at all." The readers might not have
>>>>>> understood your poem or liked it. Sometimes posts are ignored because
>>>>>> of too much bad spelling, grammar or punctuation, which can distract the
>>>>>> reader from the content of the poem and make it frustrating to get
>>>>>> through.
>>>>>> Check your post again; look for typos, correct any errors that you find,
>>>>>> and repost it in a few days with the note that it has been revised.
>>>>>> It is an (until now) unspoken rule, though, that it is best to read the
>>>>>> group for a few days, contribute some comments of your own, then post
>>>>>> your poem once people have noticed you and gotten to know you. Many
>>>>>> readers are more comfortable commenting when they've seen you around for
>>>>>> awhile and know that you are interested in what they have to say.
>>>>>> Also, consider the length of your post. Since there are many poems
>>>>>> posted every day, a shorter work is more likely to receive comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 9. SHOULD I RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS I RECEIVE?
>>>>>> Definitely! Even if you don't agree with the comment, it is a courtesy
>>>>>> to make a brief response to show you appreciated the time taken to read
>>>>>> and reply to your poem. If you repeatedly do not respond to comments on
>>>>>> your work, you may find that readers stop commenting altogether.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10. WHEN AND HOW SHOULD I COMMENT ON OTHER PEOPLE'S POSTS?
>>>>>> All posts are open to comments. Feel free to point out what
>>>>>> specifically you liked about the poem: what lines, images, words did you
>>>>>> find particularly interesting or captivating? At the same time, you can
>>>>>> also point out any changes you feel might enhance the poem. If you feel
>>>>>> a word in a certain place is awkward, feel free to comment on it and
>>>>>> suggest a suitable replacement word if you can. It isn't necessary to
>>>>>> give a detailed commentary on each poem, though; in general, the poet
>>>>>> will appreciate knowing you read the poem, so a few words to indicate
>>>>>> you read and enjoyed it are always nice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 11. IS IT OK TO EMAIL MY COMMENTS DIRECTLY TO THE POET?
>>>>>> This is usually a matter of personal preference. If you have become
>>>>>> familiar with the poet through other posts to the newsgroup, it is
>>>>>> generally acceptable. If you do not know the person, they may ignore
>>>>>> your email, so it is preferable to post to the group.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 12. CAN I REWRITE SOMEONE'S POEM FOR THEM?
>>>>>> If you feel comfortable doing so, the poet will usually appreciate the
>>>>>> effort involved. Rewriting sections or giving comments on specific
>>>>>> lines are welcome as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 13. DO YOU HAVE IRC CHATS OR OTHER SCHEDULED GATHERINGS?
>>>>>> Not as of this writing (February 1999). There is a semi-official AAPC
>>>>>> chat room but it has never been used for a formal AAPC chat. There has
>>>>>> also been some banter on having a picnic in the summer of 1999, but no
>>>>>> volunteer hosts as of yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 14. ARE THERE ANY AAPC-RELATED WEB SITES?
>>>>>> Many of the poets have their own sites, and most list them in their
>>>>>> signature files or post notices of updates to the newsgroup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 15. ARE THERE ANY PUBLISHED / FAMOUS / INFAMOUS POETS IN THE GROUP?
>>>>>> Depends on who you ask! The vast majority of the poets have had some of
>>>>>> their work published. Some are published widely in anthologies and
>>>>>> well-respected poetry journals. No one has made a million from their
>>>>>> poetry, but we have our suspicions on who will be famous someday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 16. DO POETRY EDITORS READ THE NEWSGROUP?
>>>>>> Some participants are editors of poetry journals, both on-line and
>>>>>> print. Quite possibly there are other editors who "lurk" (read but
>>>>>> don't post).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 17. MIGHT I BE OFFERED A BOOK CONTRACT BY POSTING MY POETRY HERE?
>>>>>> Not likely. If you are, be very suspicious of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 18. WHAT IS CONSIDERED "OFF-TOPIC"?
>>>>>> Poets by their nature enjoy tangents. You'll see a lot of threads
>>>>>> beginning with a poem and going off in a sometimes bizarre, completely
>>>>>> unrelated direction.
>>>>>> By and large, keep your original posts (not part of an existing thread)
>>>>>> limited to your own poetry, or questions about poetry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 19. DO I HAVE TO USE MY REAL NAME?
>>>>>> Internet handles are okay, many regulars use them. To build
>>>>>> familiarity, stick to the same one, or use your real name.
>>>> The guidelines were written in 1999, why do you attribute them to Michael?
>>>
>>> I proposed that we rewrite the GLs in 2017 (with George's encouragement and support): https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bazlxZjkvdo/m/EHSpG55UBQAJ?hl=en
>>
>> Tell the truth, Michael. There was no discussion of "GLs" in 2017, as a
>> quick read of the thread will show.
>
> If you are able to read the thread, and if the thread consists of more than one post, a discussion obviously took place.
>
> You posted at least two of those responses in support of it.
>
>>> Over the course of the next 5 years, the GLs were continually redrafted to comply with the concerns and include the suggestions of the various AAPC members who participated.
>>>
>>
>> Tell the truth, Michael. In fact, there were no "GLs" as late as
>> December 2019:
>> <quote>
>> michaelmalef...@gmail.com
>> 12/25/19
>> There are no official guidelines for the group, at present.
>> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/LJilyVh7W5c/m/G10_imv5AgAJ?hl=en
>> </q>
>>
>> You wrote them between Christmas 2019 and January 2021 (when you
>> presented them to your "members" for approval).
>
> What part of "Official" are you failing to comprehend.
>
> The GLs were still being written/discussed/modified in 2019. They did not become Official until they had been approved by the AAPC Members in 2021.
>
>>> IOW: I wrote the GLs with input from the group; and these GLs were eventually agreed on by everyone involved
>>
>>
>> As usual, you won't say *who* actually agreed with them. But, thanks to
>> NG's due diligence, we have list of who agreed:
>>
>> - you (TM)
>> - NG (TM)
>> - Ash (TM)
>> - Spam-a-Lot (TM fan)
>> - fake "Clay Dockery"
>>
>> Since then, Jim Senetto (TM) has also agreed to comply with them.
>
> When proposed GLs are posted for approval, one has the option of approving them or not.
>
> Those who fail to cast their vote, or to voice any objections they might have, have approved it by default.

No, those who don't vote on a matter have not "approved" it.

Words matter, Monkey. Learn what they mean and how to use them correctly.

>> , and adopted by the same as the Official Guidelines of AAPC.
>
> If you had a problem regarding any the the GLs, you should have spoken up.

You didn't necropost your "GLs" until Nov. 1, after you began hijacking
my threads to whine that I wasn't following them. I have been speaking
up about them ever since,

> Whining about it nearly two years after the fact isn't going to accomplish anything.
>
> That said, if you wish to make any suggestions regarding the existing GLs, you are free to do so.
>
> Your suggestions will be considered. However, since the existing GLs have already been approved, changing them will require a majority vote (i.e., your suggestions would have to be approved by at least half of the following members: MMP, ME, NancyGene, Jim, Jim, Ash, Robert, Corey, Mabool, FamilyGuy, Karen, PJR, Cujo, Rachel, Ilya, Louise W., Eiv L, Roseanne S., Zo-Alonzo G., Jeanna N., JJ S., Chad P., Zsuzsanna P., Silvatiicus R., Carlos D., Carolyn S., Yaya H., Mary Grace N., Marcy G., Edward Y., Sammi G., Jonathan O., Christina S., May Lene R., Nusrat H., Scott T., M I., Janice L., Sharon B., Sue P., Charles G., and Tanya P.).

And of that list, "Those who fail to cast their vote" will "have
approved" my changes by default.
>
> May apologies to anyone I may have accidentally forgotten to include.

> *Mack, Jordy, The Donkey & his Stink have refused to comply with the GLs, and are not considered to be legitimate members at this time.

Why would you expect anyone, besides Team Monkey and fake "Clay", to
"comply" with "GLs" that they haven't approved and would do nothing for
them?