Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: George J. Dance@novabbs.com (George J. Dance)
Newsgroups: alt.arts.poetry.comments,rec.arts.poems
Subject: Re: The Return of Michael Monkey
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 06:18:01 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <c6e03e9aecfabad8d781778c46ad9cc6@www.novabbs.com>
References: <893d0c07374428639ba1a1b5cfd722c2@www.novabbs.com> <b2870a625fcc4e69913f79dee0bb1a52@www.novabbs.com> <e0a9c9c83c5dac88ab8c66daef12f823@www.novabbs.com> <87445559ced62c6cbd280b06405e85f9@www.novabbs.com> <96e45bbf062642b889f59b22663b2420@www.novabbs.com> <98bde89002bbf1883bff8e9359482df5@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="1033727"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="8+dz2rsm3jrbG2zIijE9ZpD7dtD/aCelSs77CawmFcg";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$qAdrK9Lv7EUGB6ePV9vssu2CT0tR3FWXzwoNEiK0m2JYaMxJRspem
X-Rslight-Posting-User: da88b0d4e721c88c814af4f3bade12e63975cfc7

On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:30:33 +0000, HarryLime wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 1:56:15 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 18:58:18 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
>> "HarryLime" wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 2:20:10 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:29:37 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
>>>> "HarryLime" wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:07:47 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:47:06 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
>>>>>> "HarryLime" wrote:

snip

>>>>> Nor does this thread show that I am doing anything of the sort.  FYI: I
>>>>> have no "allies" here.  They've all left Usenet AAPC, and are now
>>>>> posting on The Official AAPC page at FB.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure that's true; I think I've seen both Jim and NancyGene
>>>> posting on aapc here:
>>>> https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=253102&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#253102
>>>> But even if it were true, it's not relevant: you're still publishing
>>>> their work, and still slurping their work here.
>>>
>>> If the most recent post you can find from Jim is nearly two months old,
>>> it's safe to say that he is no longer participating in this group.  He's
>>> certainly not participating at the level he was a few years ago.
>>
>> So what? Jim doesn't turn into a neutral bystander every time he
>> flounces off
>> the group; the fact that you're here slurping him in this flame war you
>> reignited is enough to show that you still perceive him as your ally.
>
> Jim doesn't turn into a neutral bystander when he isn't around to
> witness the event/s in question.  Jim has no knowledge of our current
> discussions, is not participating in said discussions, and cannot
> possibly be considered as an ally insofar as said discussions are
> concerned.

There is absolutely no reason to believe you. There is reason to think
your Chimp and your Goon have both posted here (especially since your
only rebuttal was "that was two months ago"), and every reason to think
they're still lurking.
>
>>> Whether I publish his work is irrelevant.
>>
>> MMP, your ONLY reason for saying that I used to see Jim as my ally
>> is that I used to publish his work. If that's now "irrelevant", then you
>> had absolutely no reason for falsely accusing me of using your M.O. in
>> the
>> first place. So, fine; let's agree that it's irrelevant, and you were
>> just
>> making up shit.
>
> 1) Whether *I* publish Jim's work is irrelevant.  I publish the work of
> *everyone* who contributes to the AAPC group's FB page.  Again, that's
> *EVERYONE* -- no exceptions.

So you're say you're doing the same thing with /AYOS/ as I was doing
with /April/. Of course, there are difference. For one, aapc was open to
everyone, whereas your facebook group is closed; you decide who can
publish there and who can't. For another: you declare that AYOS
publishes "everyone" who publishes in your facebook group, whereas in
/April/ and on my blog later I published "everyone who agrees to let me
publish them." See the differences?

> 2) You, otoh, do not publish everyone who takes part in the AAPC Usenet
> forum.

Yes; as noted, I publish only the people who explicitly consents to
their poem's publication; whereas you claim that everyone who posts to
your facebook group has tacitly concented to go into AYOS.

> 3) Your conclusion (that your misrepresentation of my description of
> your practices is irrelevant) does not follow from anything in the
> above.  To wit: I publish *everything* that is posted to the AAPC FB
> group, whereas you only publish the work of Usenet AAPC members of your
> choosing.

I certainly do not publish the work of anyone who explicitly denied me
permission to publish their stuff.

>>> He is not engaging in any flame wars (or what pass for discussions
>>> here), and is therefore not a potential "ally" -- for me or anyone else.
>>
>> Of course he is your "potential" ally. He's been reading and posting
>> here
>> as your ally, and there's nothing stopping him from doing it in the
>> future.
>> Same for your other Team Monkey flunky, NG.
>
> To be an ally, one must be involved in the present conflict.

Don't play the Peabrain. The "present conflict" has been going on since
2017. As you've noted previously, it's an ongoing war. Originally it was
a war you began to seize control of aapc from the people posting here;
now it appears to be just a war to wreck it as much as possible. (That's
so much like Putin's war in the Ukraine, that I might start calling you
"Putindragon" again.)

> From a
> linguistic standpoint, anyone can be a "potential" ally.

Indeed; which is why, when you couldn't show that your Chimp was my ally
or my perceived ally, you switched terms and started calling him a
"potential ally."

> However, as
> applied to this present discussion in which Jim has not taken part (and
> to the best of my knowledge is unaware of), nothing either of us says
> can be realistically seen as having any effect on Jim's allegiances.

As someone who bleats so much about "context", it's rather stupid of you
to try to take "the present discussion" out of context, and pretend it's
just an isolated thread. It's nice that I don't have to fight all three
of you for once, but I am not going to pretend that the other two are
still your allies, still probably lurking, and ready to jump in when you
signal for help.

snip