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: will.dockery@gmail.com (W.Dockery) Newsgroups: alt.arts.poetry.comments,rec.arts.poems Subject: Re: The Return of Michael Monkey Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 20:41:30 +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="1603475"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="Vf9CM7g99yqfGvzEHTw0bhrjcIfvzYBBhUuRma0rLuQ"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$7tpqfQpvw3iFPCIjFHxdZOg8.SQr5bKlmbrIT6RIpHKwzhLywRttW X-Rslight-Posting-User: acd0b3e3614eaa6f47211734e4cbca3bfd42bebc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 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 >>> achieve it. > > What is "it"? No one realizes "unlimited" possibilites, but plenty of > people realize some, including ones their parents failed to realize. > >>> As compensation for our wasted lives, we can always take >>> solace in our families (ignoring the fact that our children's potential >>> will be as unrealized as our own. ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========