Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mpsilvertone@yahoo.com (HarryLime)
Newsgroups: alt.arts.poetry.comments,rec.arts.poems
Subject: Re: The Return of Michael Monkey
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 04:35:48 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <5ac365f7b35ef332d699ccc13bc8f2d9@www.novabbs.com>
References: <893d0c07374428639ba1a1b5cfd722c2@www.novabbs.com> <24c7ff3ab399ab877f7a96f14c4ef230@www.novabbs.com> <1007dcaa6968069d03a624f97e220bc9@www.novabbs.com> <2c2e025ed0dde58c77697111f55d89e0@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1804481"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="9yNNWN6S3jCL2bQghupeZ7yt9QQF3aIiWb2guQimaIw";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: e04a750cbe04de725ce24a46bcc3953c76236e3b
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$DrDnfs7ZdoQgg5Chg8NA0epnbXT0L2c7CcvlQUjDL8Epqoxr/jDhq
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 18968
Lines: 380

On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 4:22:38 +0000, W.Dockery wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 4:08:43 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 21:55:57 +0000, Will Dockery wrote:
>>
>>> George J. Dance wrote:
>>>>
>>>> from
>>>> https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=253903&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#253903
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 15:22:04 +0000, Michael Monkey aka "HarryLime"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) has returned, as Will and I
>>>> suspected. Even the name of his new sock, "HarryLime", looked like an
>>>> obvious clue to the "third man" on Team Monkey (the other two being
>>>> Jim/Edward and NancyGene). So we devised a way to have him out himself:
>>>> Will would bump up an old thread, I'd reply to it, and if "Harry" were
>>>> MMP, he wouldn't be able to resist replying. And it worked.
>>>>
>>>> (Since the backthread has served its purpose, I've snipped most of it.)
>>>>
>>>>> It's "Jerk store!" time, again.  George Dance re-responds to a post I
>>>>> made almost two years ago (because he thinks I'm no longer here to smack
>>>>> him around).
>>>>
>>>> If further proof that this is MMP were needed, here it is: he walked
>>>> right into the trap, and he's still clueless that it even happened.
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2023 4:13:51 +0000, Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>>>>> The above passage demonstrates why so-so poets should avoid
>>>>>> predetermined formats at all costs.  The "sentence" is incomplete.
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: That's because it wasn't a "sentence" until "Edward" added the full
>>>>> stop. Which demonstrates only that so-so poets should avoid
>>>>> repunctuating their betters' poetry.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: GD is now aping PJR (because PJR is no longer here to slap him
>>>>> around).
>>>>
>>>>>> Years conspire to decrease possibilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: Exactly what the poem says, which Michael would have discovered if
>>>>> he
>>>>> had bothered to look it up. He didn't even need to look it up on line;
>>>>> he could have found it in his own "literary journal" (AYOS 2021, 10).
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: My literary journal was created to highlight the best examples of
>>>>> poetry from AAPC's various members.  The best poetry by Member G does
>>>>> not necessarily measure up to the best poetry of Member J.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Mr. Dance has so ably demonstrated above, his own poem left no traces
>>>>> on my memory.
>>>>
>>>> MMP's memory lapses are something I'm sure we're all familiar with by
>>>> now. But let us remember what else I just ably demonstrated: that back
>>>> in 2021 (when he was still hoping to recruit me as an ally) he
>>>> considered Possibilities one of "the best examples of poetry" on AAPC.
>>>>
>>>>>> These too lines don't form a coherent sentence.
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: I think you mean those *two* lines. They are not a sentence, even in
>>>>> Edward's edit, and neither of them are a sentence in the actual poem.
>>>>> Once again, Edward added a full stop that's not in the original (as
>>>>> Michael would have known, if he'd bothered to read the original).
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: It seems that Mr. Dance's purpose in reopening this thread is to
>>>>> re-state that Mr. Rochester mistakenly added end punctuation to his
>>>>> lines, thereby making his poem appear to be more illiterate than it
>>>>> actually is.
>>>>
>>>> MMP seems completely clueless about my actual "purpose" but that's par
>>>> for the course. So let's focus on what's important:
>>>> (1) He claimed my poem was "illiterate";
>>>> (2) I pointed out that every example of "illiteracy" he found was added
>>>> by his ally Jim;
>>>> (3) Now he's claiming my poem is still "illiterate".
>>>>
>>>> Remember, again, that three years ago, when he still hoped to talk me
>>>> into becoming his ally, he considered it one of "the best poems" on aapc
>>>> that year. Now that he considers me his adversary, it's "illiterate."
>>>> "When [someone] is seen as an adversary, you assign a childish name to
>>>> him and claim he can't write."
>>>>
>>>>> The fact that Mr. Dance feels compelled to do so nearly two years after
>>>>> both the original post *and* after his original refutation demonstrates
>>>>> an alarming degree of obsessive pettiness on his part.
>>>>
>>>> LOL! Will picked the thread - and it's a good one - but there were many
>>>> other possibilities. (heh!) Suffice it to say, Jim is a fool and no one
>>>> in their right mind would judge their poetry by what he says about it.
>>>>
>>>>> GD: Having children restores the lost possibilities; you no longer have
>>>>> them, but your children do.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: No, they don't.  If the poem is expressing a universal principle,
>>>>> then the children's possibilities will necessarily be decreased as they
>>>>> mature as well.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, onr's children will fail to realize some of their possibilities,
>>>> too; but they will also realize some that their parents did not. Just
>>>> because MMP or Jim failed to reach your own goals, for example, it does
>>>> not follow that your children will fail at their goals as well.
>>>>
>>>>>> This, again, is not a coherent sentence.
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: Once again, that is solely due to Edward's editing.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: "Once again,..." Quite.  And one supposes that will be repeating it
>>>>> yet a third time two years from now.
>>>>
>>>> If MMP shows up two years from now with a new sock, we might try the
>>>> same thing. But not probably with a different thread; the archives are
>>>> full of threads like this.
>>>>
>>>>>> You really spend way too much
>>>>>> time interacting with the Donkey; his illiteracy is rubbing off.
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: It figures that you'd try to blame Will; but I don't see how you can
>>>>> blame him for Edward's sloppy editing.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: Mr. Donkey serves as proof of the old adage concerning the "one bad
>>>>> apple."
>>>>>
>>>>> In this case, the presence of one illiterate member of a group causes
>>>>> the other members to relax their standards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or, in the words of another adage, any group will inevitably settle to
>>>>> the level of its lowest participant.
>>>>
>>>> MMP repeatedly complains about me repeating this point, but it doesn't
>>>> seem to have sunk in yet, so:
>>>> The only examples of "illiteracy" that have been shown in this thread
>>>> came from Jim. (Better yet, let's "settle" to MMP's level and start
>>>> calling Jim Mr. Chimp again.)
>>>>
>>>> I'd say the only reason for MMP to call Will an illiterate that's been
>>>> shown in this thread is that he doesn't like Will. Will's also MMP's
>>>> adversary. As he says: "When [someone] is seen as an adversary, you
>>>> assign a childish name to him and claim he
>>>> can't write."
>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/EA_gCO9_BDk/m/DWT2Fq0TBwAJ?hl=en
>>>>
>>>>>> How do the possibilities justify our lives if they are decreased to
>>>>>> irrelevancy by years?
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: As I already explained: they're restored in the next generation.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: And as I've already explained, the next generation's possibilities
>>>>> are as limited as those of their forebears.  Since time and circumstance
>>>>> will *always* conspire to decrease their possibilities by the time they
>>>>> reach adulthood, the seemingly unlimited possibilities at birth are
>>>>> necessarily an illusion.
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense; people can and do realize possibilities in their lives,
>>>> including those their ancestors never did. No one can do everything, of
>>>> course, but plenty of people have done enough to justify their existence
>>>> {many of whose ancestors did nothing to justify theirs, beyond - wait
>>>> for it - having families).
>>>>
>>>>>> Roughly speaking (i.e., ignoring the incoherent pseudo-sentences),
>>>>>
>>>>> GD: I do hope we've spent enough time on Edward's pseudo-sentences.
>>>>>
>>>>> MMP: LOL! If Mr. Dance actually meant what he said, he wouldn't have
>>>>> reopened a two-year old thread in order to bitch about Mr. Rochester's
>>>>> "edits" to his poem a second time.
>>>>
>>>> LOL right back. I've already explained why I commented on the thread
>>>> Will reopened. But I'm serious; we've advanced the debate. MMP has not
>>>> disputed that all "illiteracy" he discovered was caused by Mr. Chimp,
>>>> but he's sticking to his story that the poem is still "illiterate"
>>>> anway, as per his editorial philosophy: "When [someone] is seen as an
>>>> adversary, you assign a childish name to him and claim he can't write."
>>>>
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> poem is saying that we are all born with unlimited potential, but that
>>>>>> the years conspire (with circumstance) to undercut our ability to
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========