Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!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: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 20:35:52 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: References: <893d0c07374428639ba1a1b5cfd722c2@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="1229580"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="9yNNWN6S3jCL2bQghupeZ7yt9QQF3aIiWb2guQimaIw"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Rslight-Posting-User: e04a750cbe04de725ce24a46bcc3953c76236e3b X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$pBBQkKGM2R0kjKAoSzZTeOvtL4WYXBbZDonJv9Fg3Nf7hDeXBIQQm X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 27054 Lines: 630 On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 21:00:16 +0000, 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.) Someone is certainly full of himself. "Harry Lime" is the name I use on my Instagram account. I needed to create a new account for Nova BBS, so I used that one. There was never anything to "out," as I was never posting incognito. >> 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. If you say so, George. It still looks like "Jerk Store" from where I'm sitting. >> 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. Someone is certainly desperate for my approval. The operative word in the out-of-context quote you've attributed to me is "examples." Your poem is an example of poetry. "Poetry" (as defined by myself, of course), denotes a literary form employing rhyme, meter, and assorted devices such as metaphor, alliteration, and allusion. You write formal poetry. Few poets, nowadays, do. Your poetry, in general, is something that I would continue to point to as an example of what I consider a poem to be. Once again, this is not, nor was it ever, intended as a judgment call. "Possibilities" is a poem. Much of Mr. Rochester's work, for example, is not. Ergo, your poem is better example of poetry than Edward's. That said, I prefer many of Mr. Rochester's pieces over yours. >>> 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". Your claim that you reopened this post to trap me into revealing my identity is nonsense. The content of my posts (whether as HarryLime or MMP) are clearly stemming from the same hand. I understand that it is embarrassing to have been caught playing "Jerk Store," but play it you did, and you're not going to wriggle out of it so easily. > 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 Note how you've changed the quote from one of "the best examples of poetry" on aapc to 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." Also note that while you have called me "Michael Monkey" in the title of this thread (and "Michael Monkey Peabrain" in the body), I have consistently referred you as "George" and "Mr. Dance." One of us certainly does assign childish names to perceived adversaries, and this thread makes it abundantly clear as to who that one of us is. >> 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. Are you trying to make Will appear as petty as yourself? And why are you still attacking Jim, two years after the fact? >> 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. I'm afraid you're having difficulty understanding what you actually wrote. Your poem stated that time and circumstance will *always* diminish the alleged "possibilities" one is born with, as if it were a universal, hard-fast law of the universe. By attempting to undercut it later in your poem, your poem's conclusion creates an oxymoron. >>> 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. ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========