POETRY FLOOD
pandora
Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
If that's a crime, so shoot me.
I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
the horror!) and they were unable to handle that. One has to
wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
and critiqueing any poetry.
So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
again.
pandora
Riaz Ali
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
its only a crime because your poetry is ****
Jeannekhan
Your envy shows...;>
I've yet to read them all this time
around, but I will because she
graces us with her work.
Jeanne
Bindi
pandora <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
It's a dummy spit!
You can't do that!
It's _my_ job! ptoowy!
Bindi
contacting the Union.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/02
Mike Billard
think of the children!>
> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> again.
>
What do you mean again?
Tom Bishop
>
> Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
> If that's a crime, so shoot me.
>
> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
You are over quacking. Come back across
the road like a good duck. I love you like
the tongue that was crucified to my forehead.
>
> It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
> the horror!) and they were unable to handle that. One has to
> wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
> poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
> would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
> and critiqueing any poetry.
>
> So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities.
Don't worry about them.. they wear pink argoyle
socks and fashion religious implements with Dreml tools.
Come over to the middle side pixie,
where nothing matters but poetry,
and the systematic destruction of any
words that get in the way.
> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> again.
Awwww.. with nothing to dance on
how will I learn to tango?
>
> pandora
>
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Lust is to the other passions what the nervous fluid is to life."
- Marquis de Sade
Tom W
> It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
> the horror!) and they were unable to handle that.
It wasn't the quantity, but the quality. Did you hope to improve the
quality of all 36?
Jonathan Penton
If this is considered childish behavior from a newbie, it is surely even
moreso from a regular.
--
Jonathan Penton
http://www.unlikelystories.org
Tom Bishop
"Jeannekhan" <jeann...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20021112175650...@mb-fg.aol.com...
/Her/ work is hardly god-sent, but of course
since she posts it, anyone is free to comment.
She is an obnoxious name calling troll
most of the time, and her poetry is
imageless and flat.
Perhaps if she could listen to criticism,
and people around here gave it instead of
drooling from their hats, she might improve.
Have a nice day!
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Don't be so humble - you are not that great."
-- Golda Meir
j r sherman
In article <BhmcnUZx2Pk...@comcast.com>, "Mike says...
boy, how easily you people forget.
i remember when BOTH these groups with flooded with the dozens of horrid love
poems a day. not everything marg posted i liked, but for christ's sake, even the
worst of them was better than the love poems flood we used to endure here each
and every day.
and would someone tell me WHY a person can't post as many poems as they like, at
any given time, in these newsgroup, WITHOUT mentioning personal annoyance and
the great bullshit myth, "bandwidth considerations"?
thanks.
love and kisses,
j r "don't force us to come over there and kick your ass" sherman
------------------------------------------------------------------
"A sad tale's best for winter: I have one
Of sprites and goblins."
--the Marg Gold Star --- Quote by Uncle Billy
Tom W
j r sherman wrote:
> a heaping pile of bullshit signed with:
>
> j r "don't force us to come over there and kick your ass" sherman
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> "A sad tale's best for winter: I have one
> Of sprites and goblins."
>
> --the Marg Gold Star --- Quote by Uncle Billy
Don't you mean "j r "don't force us to come over there and kick your ass" sherman,
devil's advocate, esquire?
Michael Cook
Tom Bishop <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote in message
news:aqs55t$ci2gs$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "Jeannekhan" <jeann...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021112175650...@mb-fg.aol.com...
> > Riaz,
> >
> > Your envy shows...;>
> >
> > I've yet to read them all this time
> > around, but I will because she
> > graces us with her work.
> >
> > Jeanne
>
> /Her/ work is hardly god-sent, but of course
> since she posts it, anyone is free to comment.
>
> She is an obnoxious name calling troll
> most of the time, and her poetry is
> imageless and flat.
>
> Perhaps if she could listen to criticism,
> and people around here gave it instead of
> drooling from their hats, she might improve.
>
> Have a nice day!
You hypocritical little fuck, you Hammes want to be.
You got some nerve preaching on criticism!
You just can't stay away from the ladies can you?
Now you're here beating a dead horse as well as your
scrawny, hairless chest. God I hate people, who take cheap shots,
drag your sorry ass back to aapc and explain how Bill's poem
ended up with your name on it, you going to sue me now,
like you threatened to do to Ross? Let me guess your response:
"if you don't like it killfile me"
Not a chance!
mdc
Roberlyn
>complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
>that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
i'd rather 36 poems than 298 prosepoems. at least it's more than a quick
profound thought. not that there isn't room here for one-liners... but that's
another topic.
robyn
***
losing love is like a window in your heart
everybody sees you're blown all apart
everybody feels the wind blow
j r sherman
>She is an obnoxious name calling troll
>most of the time, and her poetry is
>imageless and flat.
that you don't see the irony of this statement merely proves who you are, tom.
but as Olivier said, Irony is lost on most Americans.
love and kisses,
j r sherman
david rutkowski
<clip>
> So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
> that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
> ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
People who post a lot of poems, like myself and Robert Morpheal, do it
in real time -- we post what we write that day. Posting poems written
over the course of a year, all at one time, IS a little strange, but not
unforgivable. Don't go away mad. Don't go away at all. As you said, we
need to get out of the rut of Liesaught/Cosmichalitosis off-topic
bullshit. Just a thought ...
Dai Crowther
attention to an item of aapc etiquette about flood posting. I would
rather she stayed rather than retire hurt. Real time posting is fine by
me but in aapc it is accepted that poems are posted for
comment/criticism with a view to improving the individual poem and by
proxy the writer's skills. If the intention is to say 'look what I have
done' (over an extended period) - including a volume of work. If this
is ok in Rap then fine: I just drew her attention that cross-posting to
a critical newsgroup with sheer volume makes appraisal difficult.
Dai.
* and yes, before the question is asked, I would rather have a thousand
of P's poems than one piece of lying, racist, degrading dollop of
Charles' bullshit.
"david rutkowski" <david...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3DD1A341...@yahoo.com...
:
pandora
Thank you for your opinion. I really do appreciate it.
pandora
>
pandora
Nice shot! Would have enjoyed meeting you. So sorry.
pandora
pandora
j r sherman <jr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>In article <BhmcnUZx2Pk...@comcast.com>, "Mike says...
>>
>>
>>"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
>>news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>><pretentious bullshit snipped for the sake of the children. for god's sake,
>>think of the children!>
>>
>>> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
>>> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
>>> again.
>>>
>>
>>What do you mean again?
>
>boy, how easily you people forget.
Yes, they certainly seem to.
>i remember when BOTH these groups with flooded with the dozens of horrid love
>poems a day. not everything marg posted i liked, but for christ's sake, even the
>worst of them was better than the love poems flood we used to endure here each
>and every day.
And certainly better than the flame wars, the inanity of chuckles, etc.
>and would someone tell me WHY a person can't post as many poems as they like, at
>any given time, in these newsgroup, WITHOUT mentioning personal annoyance and
>the great bullshit myth, "bandwidth considerations"?
It's okay jr, really. I might comment that it's like throwing pearls
before swine but then again, not everyone considered them *pearls* (as
you didn't.) Even that is okay by me; hate my poems, critique my poems,
call them garbage etc, but really,......complain because there were too
many of them? The height of idiocy, IMO.
pandora
[who will now go away permanently]
Beth Gottschalk
> In article <BhmcnUZx2Pk...@comcast.com>, "Mike says...
> >
> >
> >"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> >news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> ><pretentious bullshit snipped for the sake of the children. for god's sake,
> >think of the children!>
> >
> >> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> >> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> >> again.
> >>
> >
> >What do you mean again?
>
> boy, how easily you people forget.
>
> i remember when BOTH these groups with flooded with the dozens of horrid love
> poems a day. not everything marg posted i liked, but for christ's sake,
even the
> worst of them was better than the love poems flood we used to endure here each
> and every day.
>
> and would someone tell me WHY a person can't post as many poems as they
like, at
> any given time, in these newsgroup, WITHOUT mentioning personal annoyance and
> the great bullshit myth, "bandwidth considerations"?
>
> thanks.
Marg, you did nothing wrong. We do need more poetry here, not more
flames. Please listen to Dr. Jims and stay.
Cheers,
Beth
pandora
I want to improve the quality of all of them?
pandora
pandora
yes, I would have stayed. At this point in my life, I'm tired....
tired of small minds, tired of princesses who wish to run things
and put others down for writing and posting poetry (oh my GOD, of
all things to do on a POETRY group). I have committed, apparently,
an unforgiveable sin and I must do penance for it. I shall do so.
Yes, I will go now.
pandora
pandora
Dai Crowther <d...@talkingfish.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>I suppose I threw the spanner in the works when I drew Pandora's
>attention to an item of aapc etiquette about flood posting. I would
>rather she stayed rather than retire hurt.
Too late for that.
Real time posting is fine by
>me but in aapc it is accepted that poems are posted for
>comment/criticism with a view to improving the individual poem and by
>proxy the writer's skills.
And you assumed that I was doing otherwise. Sad.
If the intention is to say 'look what I have
>done' (over an extended period) - including a volume of work.
That was merely YOUR take on the situation. It's alright. I
can take it. So be it.
If this
>is ok in Rap then fine: I just drew her attention that cross-posting to
>a critical newsgroup with sheer volume makes appraisal difficult.
You (or anyone else) could (if you had so chosen) critiqued any one
or two (or whatever you felt like) of the many poems that I posted.
You chose not to. Instead you decided to ridicule and castigate
a longtime poet for posting TOO MANY POEMS. What a crime. Especially
for a poetry newsgroup. I'm quite saddened by that response, frankly,
but it shows me that most are not interested in poetry at all.
Thanks for you kind words, but I'm outta here.
pandora
Tom W
It's really a question of focus. If you do nothing else in life but poetry,
then you might have the prerequisite time, attention and skill to work 36 poems
at once. I've seen a chess master play a roomfull of students concurrently and
win every game, but that level of single-minded focus is beyond most people, and
it isn't clearly evident in the quality of what you've presented en masse. If
you're honest in wanting to improve, then work one poem at a time—you'll find
that this practice benefits the poem enormously by giving added attention from
both readers and yourself.
pandora
>pandora wrote:
>
>> In article <3DD19C06...@mchsi.com>, Tom W <twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> >pandora wrote:
>> >
>> >> It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
>> >> the horror!) and they were unable to handle that.
>> >
>> >It wasn't the quantity, but the quality. Did you hope to improve the
>> >quality of all 36?
>> >
>> Yes, I most certainly did. I wrote them to begin with, why wouldn't
>> I want to improve the quality of all of them?
>>
>> pandora
>
>It's really a question of focus. If you do nothing else in life but poetry,
>then you might have the prerequisite time, attention and skill to work 36 poems
>at once.
Now you're getting it. I not only work at revising 36 poems (at once)
but work on writing more all the time as well as working on several
novels at the same time along with walks on the beach, making and eating
food, driving my husband to work, taking 2 college courses, doing the
wash, taking care of 3 cats etc.
I've seen a chess master play a roomfull of students concurrently and
>win every game, but that level of single-minded focus is beyond most people, and
>it isn't clearly evident in the quality of what you've presented en masse. If
>you're honest in wanting to improve, then work one poem at a time—you'll find
>that this practice benefits the poem enormously by giving added attention from
>both readers and yourself.
Please forgive me if I live my life and my work the way that *I* see
fit and not by someone else's rules, eh? You've already spent more
time and effort than it would have taken to critique even ONE of my
posted poems but you chose to not do that.
pandora
Tom W
pandora wrote:
Nor am I likely to if you try to hit me again with spurious logic. I didn't tell you
how to live your life, and I don't appreciate you saying so. Forgive me for being
kind.
pandora
Kind? If what you wrote was what you consider *kind*, please
spare me from the kindness of strangers.
pandora
Tom Bishop
"Michael Cook" <coo...@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:3dd19fc6$1...@corp-news.newsgroups.com...
>
> Tom Bishop <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote in message
> news:aqs55t$ci2gs$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "Jeannekhan" <jeann...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20021112175650...@mb-fg.aol.com...
> > > Riaz,
> > >
> > > Your envy shows...;>
> > >
> > > I've yet to read them all this time
> > > around, but I will because she
> > > graces us with her work.
> > >
> > > Jeanne
> >
> > /Her/ work is hardly god-sent, but of course
> > since she posts it, anyone is free to comment.
> >
> > She is an obnoxious name calling troll
> > most of the time, and her poetry is
> > imageless and flat.
> >
> > Perhaps if she could listen to criticism,
> > and people around here gave it instead of
> > drooling from their hats, she might improve.
> >
> > Have a nice day!
>
> You hypocritical little fuck, you Hammes want to be.
I wouldn't be a professional "Usenet Poet" for all the
20-year-old big-hair women in Texas.
I am a hobbyist, Sir!
> You got some nerve preaching on criticism!
I have some nerve in general, next?
> You just can't stay away from the ladies can you?
No, and they feel the same.
> Now you're here beating a dead horse as well as your
> scrawny, hairless chest. God I hate people, who take cheap shots,
> drag your sorry ass back to aapc and explain how Bill's poem
> ended up with your name on it,
Bill's poem was a galumphing pile of simplistic crap,
mine was an well imaged, clever, sonic feast.
I see little similarity, with the exception of a few words.
I didn't even really read his poem. I just saw enough words
to form a poem from. I have been rearranging words (sometimes
every one). In this case only few words were used.
Neither work has any commercial value, though I will probably
publish that one someday. Bill deserves, and will get no credit,
of course. He says he doesn't want it anyway. The noble asshole
that he is. ;-)
> you going to sue me now,
> like you threatened to do to Ross?
No, I'm going to smear you in tandoori sauce and
attempt a new kind of Popsicle.
> Let me guess your response:
> "if you don't like it killfile me"
> Not a chance!
Hang in there Mike, the good drugs will arrive soon.
>
> mdc
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
Poetry is what gets lost in translation.
-- Robert Frost
Tom W
pandora wrote:
Oh good lord. You've been saying goodbye all day, and yet you're still here? I'm
going to close my eyes and count to thirty six.
Tom Bishop
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqsc65$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >> >that this practice benefits the poem enormously by giving added
> >attention from
> >> >both readers and yourself.
> >>
> >> Please forgive me if I live my life and my work the way that *I* see
> >> fit and not by someone else's rules, eh? You've already spent more
> >> time and effort than it would have taken to critique even ONE of my
> >> posted poems but you chose to not do that.
> >>
> >> pandora
> >
> >Nor am I likely to if you try to hit me again with spurious logic. I
> >didn't tell you
> >how to live your life, and I don't appreciate you saying so. Forgive me
> >for being
> >kind.
>
> Kind? If what you wrote was what you consider *kind*, please
> spare me from the kindness of strangers.
>
> pandora
Why would he spend the time, if he didn't care?
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
-- Napoleon Bonaparte
pandora
Jeannekhan <jeann...@aol.com> wrote:
>Riaz,
>
>Your envy shows...;>
>
>I've yet to read them all this time
>around, but I will because she
>graces us with her work.
Thank you for the kind words, Jeanne. I am trying to stem the
tide of tears that your words have caused. I guess I'm just an
aged crone who has outlived her usefulness after all. I can
accept that even if it annoys the hell outta me.
>Jeanne
pandora
pandora
>
>>She is an obnoxious name calling troll
>>most of the time, and her poetry is
>>imageless and flat.
>
>that you don't see the irony of this statement merely proves who you are, tom.
>
>but as Olivier said, Irony is lost on most Americans.
I LOVED Olivier!!! My favorite actor.
pandora
pandora
Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
pandora
pandora
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
>> If that's a crime, so shoot me.
>>
>> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
>> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
>> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
>> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
>> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>>
>> wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
>> poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
>> would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
>> and critiqueing any poetry.
>>
>> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
>> that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
>> ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
>>
>> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
>> again.
>>
>
>If this is considered childish behavior from a newbie, it is surely even
>moreso from a regular.
An apology is now considered childish? Really? You have some strange
ideas, sonny.
pandora
>--
>Jonathan Penton
>http://www.unlikelystories.org
>
>
Texas Max King
. . . . you did great, you stirred up more old furry ball dust
around here than has been in a long time.
Just getting poets riled up enough to open their mouths
is a feat unto itself. Mass 'poetry' posting is not 'bad etiquette'
neither here nor on AAPC.
The fact of the matter is that both newsgroups
needed the jumpstart to realize 'poetry'.
The idiots that I've seen critique your poems here aren't really even
'poetry critics',
they're just idots who want to be poets
and when they realize they can't even do that well,
they turn to critique as if it was an easy thing to do . . .
and as if they even knew half ass about it,
which most of them don't.
Your poetry flood was the best thing bost of these newsgroups
have seen around here in a long time.
As poets we have tried to write and share against the onslaught
of trash and idiots that also visits here,
only because we are wahat we are . . . .
'an open forum' for anyone to say pretty much
whatever the fuck they please.
Some exercise that right more than most of us
would care to hear
but we let it be, so if a creative hair happens to grow . . .
we'll know it. Most of the critics that I've herad open their mouths
are the same bunch that hold the ng down
by trying to keep it within their 'own' parameters.
Post on Marg, you kicked ass where it counts and I'm proud of you.
I'm proud of anyone you makes the hiding scum
pop their heads out so we can see
how ugly their faces really are.
-Max (poetic collection)
gnarl
> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
Come on now, NO ONE said hanging was too good for you.
A poem or three would likely have received a more thorough critique.
There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
awareness...
Otherwise, I'm sure comments might have been much different.
g.
pandora
Roberlyn <robe...@aol.comcastbad> wrote:
>> It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
>>complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
>>that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>
>i'd rather 36 poems than 298 prosepoems. at least it's more than a quick
>profound thought. not that there isn't room here for one-liners... but that's
>another topic.
Thanks for your very kind words. If I thought there were more like you,
I might consider staying. I write poetry. Not particularly very good
poetry, obviously, but I DO so enjoy it and trying to improve my craft.
I have actually won *some* awards although that isn't why I write. I
write because I wantto/haveto. I post because I wish to a) share it
with others and b) solicit critique to help better my work. It seems
that posting in quantity is considered to be a crime.
pandora
Tom Bishop
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqscnd$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
> Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
> poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
> saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
> IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
>
> pandora
The troll breaks free of her
poetry-pretense cocoon.
Oh pixie:
Go see the meow mixers, for your sleazy ISP,
"we burn our log files daily", account, so you are
harder to track. Yeah!
Have fun troll, too bad poetry didn't work for you.
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Give me chastity and continence,
but not yet." -- Saint Augustine
Tom W
pandora wrote:
Have it your way then. I'm not a regular any longer, but I like to pop in every
now and then to say hello. Speaking of, say hello to my little kill-file. How
much of a burr will you be now?
Tom
"I heard a troll buzz when I replied"
Sig (C) 2002 by me.
Tom Bishop
"Texas Max King" <max...@pstx.com> wrote in message news:EFiA9.316115$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
> As poets we have tried to write and share against the onslaught
> of trash and idiots that also visits here,
> only because we are wahat we are . . . .
> 'an open forum' for anyone to say pretty much
> whatever the fuck they please.
How's the big-haired Texas woman, Kingy?
Does mcquen-mosh work on them?
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"To judge from the notions expounded by theologians,
one must conclude that God created most men
simply with a view to crowding hell." -Marquis de Sade
Texas Max King
"Tom Bishop" <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote in message news:aqsd0n$clj40$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqscnd$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
> >
> > Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
> > poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
> > saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
> > IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
> >
> > pandora
>
> The troll breaks free of her
> poetry-pretense cocoon.
>
> Oh pixie:
> Go see the meow mixers, for your sleazy ISP,
> "we burn our log files daily", account, so you are
> harder to track. Yeah!
>
> Have fun troll, too bad poetry didn't work for you.
and this asshole is just an obvious case
of a dumb fuck geek nerd gone
over the edge with a terminal mechanized empty hard drive
for a brain.
-Max
pandora
gnarl <gn...@NSolypen.com> wrote:
>
>"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
>news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
>> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
>> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
>> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
>> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
>> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>
>Come on now, NO ONE said hanging was too good for you.
It all came across that way. Prove otherwise if you can.
>
>A poem or three would likely have received a more thorough critique.
>There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
>awareness...
>Otherwise, I'm sure comments might have been much different.
Uhuh, sure, whatever. Face the facts. I posted 36 poems. I
received complaints that I had posted TOO many poems. This is
a poetry critique group. They would, mostly, prefer to wrangle
with flame wars than read and/or critique poetry, obviously.
pandora
> g.
>
>
pandora
Texas Max King <max...@pstx.com> wrote:
> bullshit Marg,
>
> . . . . you did great, you stirred up more old furry ball dust
> around here than has been in a long time.
Thanks, Max! You show by your words, just why you are deserving
of the Marg Gold Star.
> Just getting poets riled up enough to open their mouths
> is a feat unto itself. Mass 'poetry' posting is not 'bad etiquette'
> neither here nor on AAPC.
It would seem to be a crime worse than anything else one can imagine.
I am a tainted individual.
> The fact of the matter is that both newsgroups
> needed the jumpstart to realize 'poetry'.
I thought so or I wouldn't have bothered. However, from the reaction
that I received, I am muchly discouraged. Perhaps even poets would
rather contemplate war and killing than writing poetry.
> The idiots that I've seen critique your poems here aren't really even
> 'poetry critics',
> they're just idots who want to be poets
> and when they realize they can't even do that well,
> they turn to critique as if it was an easy thing to do . . .
> and as if they even knew half ass about it,
> which most of them don't.
> Your poetry flood was the best thing bost of these newsgroups
> have seen around here in a long time.
Thanks! I wish I could think as you do. Why, if I did, I might even
post other years. :-) But I'm beginning to think that it isn't worth
the effort. It took me a while to upload and post all those poems. I
did it for the enjoyment of the readers, not to piss anyone off. I
am truly sorry that I did.
> As poets we have tried to write and share against the onslaught
> of trash and idiots that also visits here,
> only because we are wahat we are . . . .
> 'an open forum' for anyone to say pretty much
> whatever the fuck they please.
> Some exercise that right more than most of us
> would care to hear
> but we let it be, so if a creative hair happens to grow . . .
> we'll know it. Most of the critics that I've herad open
>their mouths
> are the same bunch that hold the ng down
> by trying to keep it within their 'own' parameters.
> Post on Marg, you kicked ass where it counts and I'm proud of you.
Thanks again, Max. As with Jeanne's post, yours is bringing tears to my
eyes, truly. Perhaps I'm just an old fart with more feelings than common
sense. Common sense would tell me to quit writing poetry and to stick my
head in the sand. Perhaps I should listen.
> I'm proud of anyone you makes the hiding scum
> pop their heads out so we can see
> how ugly their faces really are.
>
> -Max (poetic collection)
>
I LOVE you, Max. Really! ANd I'm SO glad that you have been awarded
the Marg Gold Star. You deserve it.
pandora
pandora
Oh my! I've made your killfile. A first for me. :-)
pandora
pandora
Tom Bishop <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote:
>
>"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
>news:aqscnd$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
>>
>> Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
>> poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
>> saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
>> IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
>>
>> pandora
>
>The troll breaks free of her
>poetry-pretense cocoon.
>
>Oh pixie:
>Go see the meow mixers, for your sleazy ISP,
>"we burn our log files daily", account, so you are
>harder to track. Yeah!
>
>Have fun troll, too bad poetry didn't work for you.
I always have fun, dear. Too bad you don't even know what it is.
And I'm sorry that you will never know what poetry is.
pandora
Tom Bishop
"Texas Max King" <max...@pstx.com> wrote in message news:oNiA9.316117$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Tom Bishop" <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote in message news:aqsd0n$clj40$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqscnd$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >
> > >
> > > Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
> > > poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
> > > saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
> > > IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
> > >
> > > pandora
> >
> > The troll breaks free of her
> > poetry-pretense cocoon.
> >
> > Oh pixie:
> > Go see the meow mixers, for your sleazy ISP,
> > "we burn our log files daily", account, so you are
> > harder to track. Yeah!
> >
> > Have fun troll, too bad poetry didn't work for you.
>
> and this asshole is just an obvious case
> of a dumb fuck geek nerd gone
> over the edge with a terminal mechanized empty hard drive
> for a brain.
Not bad, except for the filthy language.
Didn't momma Max teach your lil' Tex manners?
Chuck Lysaght
> Hi all,
>
> Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
> If that's a crime, so shoot me.
>
> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>
> wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
> poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
> would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
> and critiqueing any poetry.
>
> So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
> that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
> ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
>
> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> again.
>
> pandora
Good riddance. Get the fuck out, and don't let the screen door hit you
on your fat ass.
Tom Bishop
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqse0i$jru$2...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> In article <aqsd0n$clj40$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de>,
> Tom Bishop <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote:
> >
> >"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> >news:aqscnd$jru$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >
> >>
> >> Hey, poster boy for the stupid, I said I wouldn't post anymore
> >> poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
> >> saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
> >> IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
> >>
> >> pandora
> >
> >The troll breaks free of her
> >poetry-pretense cocoon.
> >
> >Oh pixie:
> >Go see the meow mixers, for your sleazy ISP,
> >"we burn our log files daily", account, so you are
> >harder to track. Yeah!
> >
> >Have fun troll, too bad poetry didn't work for you.
>
> I always have fun, dear. Too bad you don't even know what it is.
> And I'm sorry that you will never know what poetry is.
Whatever I do know, I am quite happy with.
See.. I don't have the confidence problems you do.
As far as poetry goes, I know how to produce poems that
are thick with image, usually a clever twist, blended metaphors,
or sound play.. about any topic that floats by..
words are totally fun, and I don't need anyone to
tell me that. I love comments, but ultimately, I know enough about
poetry to know that what I produce is what I am attempting.
..if Bill Orr, or rocky doesn't like it, who cares.
If they can convey how it strikes them, Most Excellent, but
everybody is busy.
I have put out numerous poems since getting as much feedback
as I gave you on your poem, and you basically ignore it,
and tell me to FOAD.
But you have a dice play!
Jeannekhan
-- Golda Meir
Atheists like her style..;>
Looking forward to your carefully
crafted critiques of her work because all
may learn how you do what you do.
How did the imbroglio re: your linking
turn out? I too seldom read here.
Nice? How quaint, Tom.
Golda redeems you...;>
Jeannekhan
Have I told you lately...?
Well, I do.
Succinct summation, adroit of you..;>
Jeanne who also danced with Stuart
wearing his Green Knight suit ago.
>
>You hypocritical little fuck, you Hammes want to be.
>You got some nerve preaching on criticism!
>You just can't stay away from the ladies can you?
> Now you're here beating a dead horse as well as your
>scrawny, hairless chest. God I hate people, who take cheap shots,
>drag your sorry ass back to aapc and explain how Bill's poem
>ended up with your name on it, you going to sue me now,
>like you threatened to do to Ross? Let me guess your response:
>"if you don't like it killfile me"
>Not a chance!
>
> mdc
>
Jeannekhan
Crone alone explains enough.
Crones are the repository of wisdom
and kind action taken over time
as in Cronos and chronology bits.
Snowed heads remind us that
spring will come and maidens
now sleeping will spring forth
for May dancing long before
Harvest Mother time arrives.
I posit Crones store their beauty
for the next point in time when
dancing ought begin. Your usefulness
begins anew when you begin Crone time.
You shine during dark nights and
cold days with memories and preparations
for the next season. Remember Magick?
Go to a mirror and notice that unlike
some folks you are not dead inside
or out, but plucky, pleasant and
a working poet destined to be a true
Crone impervious to utter assholes.
Give us a capital P for that Pandora!
Jeanne who notes it is time to re-read
Mary Daly because Spinning was a
good thing before politicos ruined it..;>
Texas Max King
"Tom Bishop" lord of the digit world revealed:
> Not bad, except for the filthy language.
>
> Didn't momma Max teach your lil' Tex manners?
now I understand
a stuffed muffin to boot
sorry tommie
didn't mean to insult your virgin ears
I won't tell your mommy
you're hanging around
'poets', such dirty little kids
with dirty tongues . . .
momma always said
'call an asshole an asshole,
because that's what it is'
you qualified Tommie
-Max
Texas Max King
> Good riddance. Get the fuck out, and don't let the screen door hit you
> on your fat ass.
hah, she always said call a fat ass thief, a fat ass thief
fat ass thief
take your own advice
-Max
pandora
Sorry to disappoint you, oh idiotic one, but not posting any poems
gives me MORE time to fry your ass, as sickening as that is. FOAD
pandora
pandora
For you, yes, for others, just a bundle of sticks for the fire.
>Crone alone explains enough.
>Crones are the repository of wisdom
>and kind action taken over time
>as in Cronos and chronology bits.
I agree, oh wise one. But then, so few listen to crones these
days. I wonder, does the shrub listen to his mother?
>Snowed heads remind us that
>spring will come and maidens
>now sleeping will spring forth
>for May dancing long before
>Harvest Mother time arrives.
I'm ready to harvest as we speak. Got my scythe at the ready.
>I posit Crones store their beauty
>for the next point in time when
>dancing ought begin. Your usefulness
>begins anew when you begin Crone time.
I think so too. Crones are a much unused resource.
>You shine during dark nights and
>cold days with memories and preparations
>for the next season. Remember Magick?
>
>Go to a mirror and notice that unlike
>some folks you are not dead inside
>or out, but plucky, pleasant and
>a working poet destined to be a true
>Crone impervious to utter assholes.
:-) Methinks you are too wise for your own good. :-)
>Give us a capital P for that Pandora!
pandora had way too much bad pr. I use her name respectfully
as she allows me to.
pandora
Jonathan Penton
If you consider your words an apology, then so do you.
gnarl
> In article <ut3d9v2...@corp.supernews.com>,
> gnarl <gn...@NSolypen.com> wrote:
> >
> >"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> >news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >
> >> I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
> >> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> >> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> >> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> >> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
> >
> >Come on now, NO ONE said hanging was too good for you.
>
> It all came across that way. Prove otherwise if you can.
gad.
my point was that hanging is not too good for you.
> >
> >A poem or three would likely have received a more thorough critique.
> >There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
> >awareness...
> >Otherwise, I'm sure comments might have been much different.
>
> Uhuh, sure, whatever. Face the facts. I posted 36 poems. I
> received complaints that I had posted TOO many poems.
Facts faced.
And you have posted far more whining than poetry, that is, you have become a
major contributor
to the very flaming static you objected to in the first place.
C'mon, this is a common occurrence; nascent poets appear, get neither oh or
ah, then go on to bitch and rave
for days and weeks and(just look at chiclet)years(though this is the first
time I've noted such spectacular histrionics
over a simple point of group etiquette).
Why don't you just post a damn poem you would like to improve and then
revise it according to relevant
comments? Of course, that would be playing right into the Cabal's hands...
g.
Tom Bishop
"Texas Max King" <max...@pstx.com> wrote in message news:ITjA9.316165$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Tom Bishop" lord of the digit world revealed:
>
> > Not bad, except for the filthy language.
> >
> > Didn't momma Max teach your lil' Tex manners?
>
> now I understand
> a stuffed muffin to boot
> sorry tommie
> didn't mean to insult your virgin ears
> I won't tell your mommy
> you're hanging around
> 'poets', such dirty little kids
> with dirty tongues . . .
> momma always said
> 'call an asshole an asshole,
> because that's what it is'
> you qualified Tommie
If I call tommie an asshole, that's me being self-
depracating. If you call me an asshole, that is
you being an asshole.
Come by any time. Happy to help.
>
> -Max
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"The world is full of asses, but muleshit grows lilacs."
-- Dennis M. Hammes
Texas Max King
"Jonathan Penton"
> If you consider your words an apology, then so do you.
figured you'd come along and join
your pal Tom
couldn't stay out of a 'good one'
eh, Jonathan?
Wonder why?
-Max
Texas Max King
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqsdrc$jru$2...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> In article <EFiA9.316115$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com>,
> Texas Max King <max...@pstx.com> wrote:
> > bullshit Marg,
> >
> > . . . . you did great, you stirred up more old furry ball dust
> > around here than has been in a long time.
>
> Thanks, Max! You show by your words, just why you are deserving
> of the Marg Gold Star.
. . . and proud to display it . . .
> > Just getting poets riled up enough to open their mouths
> > is a feat unto itself. Mass 'poetry' posting is not 'bad etiquette'
> > neither here nor on AAPC.
>
> It would seem to be a crime worse than anything else one can imagine.
> I am a tainted individual.
the few small germs of slime
that hit the shore would hardly
be considered littering
but small pollutants can sometimes
make a bigger mess than desired
> > The fact of the matter is that both newsgroups
> > needed the jumpstart to realize 'poetry'.
>
> I thought so or I wouldn't have bothered. However, from the reaction
> that I received, I am muchly discouraged. Perhaps even poets would
> rather contemplate war and killing than writing poetry.
nah poets always get beyond war and killing
to the root of it all. Problem is many that respond aren't really poets.
See Marg, this is a microcosm of the world
and politics plays a major part in it all.
Just make note of the ones that
have pulled their head out of the sand
to complain. The list is by no means
a roster for heroes and saints. The ones that responded
adversely are generally ill-tempered
and skewed too far left or right anyway.
They don't really count.
The important ones are the ones that
relate without having to ruffle feathers and peacock.
You did good Marg. Don't ever think otherwise.
If I decided to post a chapbook on these ng's,
I would and I wouldn't give it a second thought.
Frustration is part of the artisitic life,
but the artist that rises above the menial
inhumane indignities from others,
and overcomes the frustration . . .
is the artist that is most true to the art.
And like I said AAPC
is a toilet flush, most poems posted
don't ever even get a second look.
It's as limited and useless as a
biased editor. AAPC serves it's purpose for some,
but it is also counter-productive to many
of the true ideals of poetry. They need more poetry en-masse,
it's the only way they can truly appreciate the art and the artist.
> > The idiots that I've seen critique your poems here aren't really even
> > 'poetry critics',
> > they're just idots who want to be poets
> > and when they realize they can't even do that well,
> > they turn to critique as if it was an easy thing to do . . .
> > and as if they even knew half ass about it,
> > which most of them don't.
> > Your poetry flood was the best thing bost of these newsgroups
> > have seen around here in a long time.
>
> Thanks! I wish I could think as you do. Why, if I did, I might even
> post other years. :-) But I'm beginning to think that it isn't worth
> the effort. It took me a while to upload and post all those poems. I
> did it for the enjoyment of the readers, not to piss anyone off. I
> am truly sorry that I did.
we've all been there, work hard on a poem,
post it, and some idiot decides to
open a racist thread and crosspost it to
skinheads, and no brainers.
It's common respect like anywhere else,
if they don't have any here, they
most likely don't have any anywhere else either.
One thing I've found out about the net
is that you find out who people really are
you can cut through the masks they employ with others
on a daily basis. Some of us look better,
and then some we actually get to see what
they are really like
and generally it's not pretty.
The Tom, chuck and Jonathan show is a good example.
> > As poets we have tried to write and share against the onslaught
> > of trash and idiots that also visits here,
> > only because we are wahat we are . . . .
> > 'an open forum' for anyone to say pretty much
> > whatever the fuck they please.
> > Some exercise that right more than most of us
> > would care to hear
> > but we let it be, so if a creative hair happens to grow . . .
> > we'll know it. Most of the critics that I've herad open
> >their mouths
> > are the same bunch that hold the ng down
> > by trying to keep it within their 'own' parameters.
> > Post on Marg, you kicked ass where it counts and I'm proud of you.
> Thanks again, Max. As with Jeanne's post, yours is bringing tears to my
> eyes, truly. Perhaps I'm just an old fart with more feelings than common
> sense. Common sense would tell me to quit writing poetry and to stick my
> head in the sand. Perhaps I should listen.
>
> > I'm proud of anyone you makes the hiding scum
> > pop their heads out so we can see
> > how ugly their faces really are.
> >
> > -Max (poetic collection)
> >
> I LOVE you, Max. Really! ANd I'm SO glad that you have been awarded
> the Marg Gold Star. You deserve it.
I love you too Marg, for many reasons, but one
that I think is most important here. A story . . .
I used to go read poetry around town with a
young very attractive lady,
(most of the time my wife didn't mind 'cause I'm a good guy),
her poetry was very different from mine.
Whereas my poetry can be idealisitic,
heavily symbolic, philosophical and minimalist . . .
or downright borderline sensually provacative . . .
Her poetry on the otherhand was
very emotional, detail oriented, follksy
and more lyrical than minimalist.
I loved to have her read with me
because I felt the juxtaposition in styles
related a very important message about the diversity
and individuality of poetry.
My point being that women write much different poetry
than men. Women are naturally sensual.
Men have to work at it. For hundreds of years
men worked at being more sensual like women . . .
Shakespeare, Pope, Shelley. Some of them succeeded in writing poetry
that was so sensual and emotionally suave
that you could have sworn it was written by a woman,
but it wasn't. When men read womens poetry
they have a difficult time relating because
they can't think sensually and emotionally to understand it.
This is Tom's problem (and others)
they can't always relate to your poems
because they're afraid and they can't understand why.
Yet at the same time they want to be able
to express those deep emotions that women can
but most men find difficult to express.
To write and think that way you have to be able to
sexually free yourself from socially imposed bonds
and chains that date back thousands of years.
Most men don't know where to start. Which is why
the gay guys can write fluid, emotional and many times
the pent up hetero boys can't understand it.
I'll post a poem I wrote several years ago. . .
I wrote it to see if I could write a poem from the vantage point
of the opposite gender. You'll notice that
as good as the poem might be in expressing the view of the oppostie gender . . .
it does not however have the 'fluidity'
or sensuality that it would if it were actually written by a woman.
don't bet the farm on the first
rooster that crows in the morning
Check it out.
Luvs,
-Max
Tom Bishop
"Jeannekhan" <jeann...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20021112222200...@mb-fk.aol.com...
> "Don't be so humble - you are not that great."
> -- Golda Meir
>
> Atheists like her style..;>
I am not religious enough for atheism.
At times I have been charismatic and Pentecostal,
but also Buddhist, and Sikh, and psychic etc.
..now I rather like my own private samadhi-orgasm
with shrimp cocktail.
>
> Looking forward to your carefully
> crafted critiques of her work because all
> may learn how you do what you do.
I reviewed one of her poems in detail,
and read a few which indicated a core
similarity.
I am sincerely interested in what it is about
imageless abstraction that is so fascinating.
Poetry that is not well imaged must be clever
(at least) or have really good sounds. AFAIK.
Am I wrong? ..it is a quite sincere question
I have been asking for several days. People
think I am picking a fight. I just want to know
whether I should care.
>
> How did the imbroglio re: your linking
> turn out? I too seldom read here.
What, linking usenet?
I decided I don't like Google enough to link them.
..that at some point I will simply
become a limited Usenet archive for selected
filterings of selected groups. Poetry will be
only one topic area.
Most of the filtering would be based on author,
or customized selection mechanisms.
At that point, people can take advantage of a number
of features, including "subscribing" to digests of
filtered postings. Get your favorite Usenet poetry
authors in daily email (user preferences control
the digest scheduling).
Or they can access the filtered NNTP feed
on my server..
Works now, but just sources the poetry hosted
on my site: news://here.nu
Here is my salute to Usenet Poets page,
for when I turn this on: https://here.nu/hp?13@@.eea1722
;-)
>
> Nice? How quaint, Tom.
> Golda redeems you...;>
Good.. ;-)
..I love bossy Jewish women!
Course I love almost all women, and some men.
Make a great tartar.
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"We have Art to save ourselves from the truth."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
Jonathan Penton
news:DFkA9.316198$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
Oh, lord. Max, if you're worried about the psychology of people who like to
argue on r.a.p., there are more prominent figures to study than I. Or even
you.
All you're doing with this comment, and your defense of Marg in general is
showing that you don't apply your own rules evenly. When newbies say that
they'll never post poetry again because Jimmy-Jim mocks them, you make fun
of them. When Marg says she'll never post poetry again because the aapc-ers
criticized her, you rush to her defense.
What do we call that, Max? Do we call it hypocrisy? Is it because you're a
hypocrite? Why yes, I believe it is.
zphysics1
i hate to say this but you sound trite when you succumb to those who flame .
;-) you do know they probably have too much time in their hands, don't
you?
why do you let people dictate what you can or cannot do?
do not let them put you in a state of funk. what ever happened to that
o'toole spirit? do what you want.
/z.
one of the high priests of the coven of poets. ya-ya! ;-)
Bolduc619
pandora posts:
>
>Hi all,
>
>Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
>If that's a crime, so shoot me.
>
>I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
>It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
>two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
>complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
>that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>
>It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
>the horror!) and they were unable to handle that. One has to
>wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
>poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
>would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
>and critiqueing any poetry.
>
>So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
>one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
>that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
>ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
>
>Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
>bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
>again.
>
>pandora
>
I don't understand the bitch fest (pardon my pre-feminist usage), if people
don't like your work they get to skip the posts, and for those who say nice
work but too much in a day, my aoler news reader lets me keep posts up for 30
days . . . or 1 a day from you.
And I don't see where those complaining about your posts have done much to post
work of thier own to balance the kl0wnflames.
Best wishes, and welcome back soon,
David B.---
(proud marg gold star)
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> In article <BhmcnUZx2Pk...@comcast.com>, "Mike says...
> >
> >
> >"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> >news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >think of the children!>
> >
> >> Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> >> bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> >> again.
> >>
> >
>
> boy, how easily you people forget.
>
> i remember when BOTH these groups with flooded with the dozens of horrid love
> poems a day. not everything marg posted i liked, but for christ's sake, even the
> worst of them was better than the love poems flood we used to endure here each
> and every day.
>
> and would someone tell me WHY a person can't post as many poems as they like, at
> any given time, in these newsgroup, WITHOUT mentioning personal annoyance and
> the great bullshit myth, "bandwidth considerations"?
Bandwidth considerations in Luuve Poultry? Sounds like a
golddigger... ("The width of the band is directly proportional to
the size of the caret.")
"Who was that band I saw you width last night?"
"I wouldn't touch that band width a 20-mil rubber."
obpome:
when i saw you
my heart melted
like butter
and iran
like a river
for youraq
>
> thanks.
>
> love and kisses,
>
> j r "don't force us to come over there and kick your ass" sherman
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> "A sad tale's best for winter: I have one
> Of sprites and goblins."
>
> --the Marg Gold Star --- Quote by Uncle Billy
--
------(m+
~/:o)_|
ASCII stupid question,
you get a stupid ANSI.
http://scrawlmark.net
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> pandora wrote:
>
> > In article <3DD1BF98...@mchsi.com>, Tom W <twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >pandora wrote:
> > >
> > >> In article <3DD1BD45...@mchsi.com>, Tom W <twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> > >> >pandora wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> In article <3DD19C06...@mchsi.com>, Tom W
> > ><twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >pandora wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> the horror!) and they were unable to handle that.
> > >> >> >
Heh.
I wasn't gonna.
But the constant thrust of her posts is on the /quantity/.
So -- I'll keep my eyes open and count to 156.
I believe all of them appeared here (rap/aapc).
They took almost exactly two years, from 11/14/00 to 11/3/02 (that
sort of crap is part of the files). I may have poked at as many as
four in a sit, but they're mostly one-offs.
For those who arrived late, I refer to my erstwhile sonnet
sequence, /The Singing Head/. And though it's been a mere trickle
for a few months, that 156 is two more than Shakespeare.
Who took five and a half years.
If we are to be impressed by quantity over time, there's a couple
numbers.
But I don't believe that most (any?) others here are impressed by
quantity, either, since we can all turn it out by the yard. Which
isn't spoZe to be the point, either, IIRC.
And I could actually be a little miffed about the "quantity" bit,
since I /do/ throw away (I don't put 'em in my poetry files) some
300 pomes/year on these two froups. From fillips to monsters.
(That is no insult to the groups. It's a matter of /fit/; most of
those exercises/illustrations too closely fit only the post to which
they respond, to go into a general collection. And a few do
anyway. And they were all easier to write than a prose
critique/treatise on the same subject; I'm /lazy/.)
(N.B.: The "why" is /my/ experiment, Tomble. And I pays for my
own research.)
No, dear, /nobody/ works on 36 pomes at once. We -- and you --
work on /one/ pome at a time. Indeed, one /line/ at a time. (It's
not a matter of art, even ability, but of simple physics.)
You got some praise, you got some critique, you got some rebuffs,
you got some slams, you even got some gush -- but /nobody/ was
fooled by the fact of the flood itself.
And frankly, My Dear, it was far better-received than you had any
right to expect for pulling a stunt like that; several others have
had the crap slapped out of them for eight-ten in a bunch, even
three-four in the same post. Some even stuck around anyway.
Finally: some 50 of those sonnets were written in my bathroom, by
which I /do/ mean that I write better pomes (and apparently /more/)
while taking a schidt than you do while PurSuing Your 36 With A
LifeStyle (or whatever it was) -- and, no, I am /not/ recommending
"somebody else's rules."
I read them. I put somewhere that you've a good eye and
reasonable responsees -- and apparently no love for language (a
conclusion you compounded more recently). I didn't critique because
you were getting what seemed enough and to a competent point. And
critique takes /time/, girl. And they gave it.
Kwitcherbelyakin.
If you want to leave in a huff, it's a free country (even up
there) and free froups. But if you merely wanted only to waste
two-three days of everybody's life with the ploy, you fail; it's
also obvious most handed your packet to their secretaries, Mark
Allread or Shifty Emma.
As could have we all.
Dennis M. Hammes
> poems. I didn't say that I would stop being a burr under your
> saddle, forever perhaps. I can give it. Can you take it? It
> IS after all, ALL that you're interested in, eh? FOAD.
>
> pandora
As I was walking down the road,
I met a girl who wouldn't FOAD.
She wouldn't FOAD again today.
(How /can/ a vacuum go away?)
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> In article <aqs8u4$ph9$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>,
> Dai Crowther <d...@talkingfish.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >I suppose I threw the spanner in the works when I drew Pandora's
> >attention to an item of aapc etiquette about flood posting. I would
> >rather she stayed rather than retire hurt.
>
> Too late for that.
rain
on rap a child's bawl
is getting wet
(after Buson)
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> In article <3DD1A341...@yahoo.com>,
> david rutkowski <david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >pandora wrote:
> >
> ><clip>
> >> So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
> >> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
> >> that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
> >> ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
> >
> >
> >in real time -- we post what we write that day. Posting poems written
> >over the course of a year, all at one time, IS a little strange, but not
> >unforgivable. Don't go away mad. Don't go away at all. As you said, we
> >need to get out of the rut of Liesaught/Cosmichalitosis off-topic
> >bullshit. Just a thought ...
> >
> Thanks for the considerate response, David. At one point in my life,
> yes, I would have stayed. At this point in my life, I'm tired....
> tired of small minds, tired of princesses who wish to run things
> and put others down for writing and posting poetry (oh my GOD, of
> all things to do on a POETRY group). I have committed, apparently,
> an unforgiveable sin and I must do penance for it. I shall do so.
> Yes, I will go now.
>
> pandora
don't let jim
morrison hit you
in the ass
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message
> news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
>
> > It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> > two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> > complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> > that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
>
>
> There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
> awareness...
Actually, there was. Thus beginning the insult. Which was
subsequently confessed -- repeatedly -- that that's all it was.
Too: verstehen sie "hostage"? (Spec: "If you don't grant my
Higher Feelings I won't grant your Higher Feelings." You /can/
think of it as natural selection in action. It helps. Hell, it
even /works/.)
> Otherwise, I'm sure comments might have been much different.
>
> g.
Chuck Lysaght
> hiya pandora,
>
> i hate to say this but you sound trite when you succumb to those who flame .
> ;-) you do know they probably have too much time in their hands, don't
> you?
> why do you let people dictate what you can or cannot do?
> do not let them put you in a state of funk. what ever happened to that
> o'toole spirit? do what you want.
Fuck her. She's rude.
Poe Witticism
> Tom Bishop <tom-...@truly.nu> wrote in message
> news:aqs55t$ci2gs$1...@ID-138561.news.dfncis.de...> news:20021112175650...@mb-fg.aol.com...
> > > Riaz,
> > >
> > > Your envy shows...;>
> > >
> > > I've yet to read them all this time
> > > around, but I will because she
> > > graces us with her work.
> > >
> > > Jeanne
> >
> > /Her/ work is hardly god-sent, but of course
> > since she posts it, anyone is free to comment.
> >
> > She is an obnoxious name calling troll
> > most of the time, and her poetry is
> > imageless and flat.
> >
> > Perhaps if she could listen to criticism,
> > and people around here gave it instead of
> > drooling from their hats, she might improve.
> >
> > Have a nice day!
>
> You hypocritical little fuck, you Hammes want to be.
> You got some nerve preaching on criticism!
> You just can't stay away from the ladies can you?
> Now you're here beating a dead horse as well as your
> scrawny, hairless chest. God I hate people, who take cheap shots,
> drag your sorry ass back to aapc and explain how Bill's poem
> ended up with your name on it, you going to sue me now,
> like you threatened to do to Ross? Let me guess your response:
> "if you don't like it killfile me"
> Not a chance!
I agree with this post.
T.S.Eliot
Dennis M. Hammes
> >> It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> >> two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> >> complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> >> that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
> >
>
> >
> >There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
> >awareness...
>
> a poetry critique group. They would, mostly, prefer to wrangle
> with flame wars than read and/or critique poetry, obviously.
>
> pandora
I /Luuuuve/
to critique poetry
got any?
The /constant/ bragging of an unbraggable number is a dead giveaway,
anyway (and chuckles only brags about one "girl" at a time).
The 36 "pomes" were, what, a year's "take"? Two?
I've 72 starts, frags, and "unfinisheds" in the \notebook just
now, another couple dozen sonnet frags. And about 70K of frags put
away as "unsalvageable" or "nothin' /I/ can do anything with."
Yeats said "six finished lines a day" was "a good output for a
professional poet." So I've kept an annual tally ever since (1985)
most of the numbers were already in the computer (editors,
publishers, want them).
SeZ here I've written 99.9 finished keepers every year for 33
years. (Of course, that's not TrVth, that's the average.) While
working one or two jobs, changing diapers, cooking, washing,
teaching fencing and Boy Scouts, yatta, yatta just about anything
you listed (no soccer hauling; Tae Kwon Do).
In 1993, I retired to my Little Cardboard House On The Prairie.
And wrote 300.0 finished keepers a year, 12.5 "finished lines a
day," ever since. Well, Yeats was fiddling with that Irish
Theater. But I'm fiddling with these froups.
Shall I repost all 478 pomes I wrote last year? And dig the other
300 out of my NetScrape files? And why should I not? /I've/ had to
sift as many as 400 posts/day on /one/ of these froups, some days
not one dam' pome in the list.
But 36 isn't really up to /anybody/ who writes here (my numbers
are a little fat because it's /what I do/).
/You're/ gonna get these froups "back to posting poetry" with 36,
uh, poems, when I posted 778 pomes last year all by my lonesome?
And DB posted even more than that? d r's little experiments will
run him well over 1000 for the year, about any of them as "poetic"
as anything you put, /and/ they're settling into a form and style.
Marek drops 20-30 /translations/ a year. PJ manages a major
surrealism every(?) week (52) (and a major critique about every
other day). Bindi leans on 300, morph more, angel less. As does
Jeanne in good health. George routinely leans on the limits of
language-as-code. And Julie goads many of us into at least one new
muscle-building insanity a month.
And all of this under chronic assault from Higher Feelings, Higher
Moralities, Higher Gods, Higher Offices, Higher Sciences, Higher
Math, Higher Hangings, Higher Party Platforms, Higher Taxes, Higher
Dikes, and Lower Slobbovia -- and a reasonably-genuwhine war that
could turn any/every f.king one of us into Molotov-broiled anthrax
food.
Kwitcherbelyakin, Princess.
This critique of a critique was brought to you by the number 11/11.
Dennis M. Hammes
[nothing follows]
>
> bullshit Marg,
>
> . . . . you did great, you stirred up more old furry ball dust
> around here than has been in a long time.
> Just getting poets riled up enough to open their mouths
> is a feat unto itself. Mass 'poetry' posting is not 'bad etiquette'
> neither here nor on AAPC.
> The fact of the matter is that both newsgroups
> needed the jumpstart to realize 'poetry'.
> The idiots that I've seen critique your poems here aren't really even
> 'poetry critics',
> they're just idots who want to be poets
> and when they realize they can't even do that well,
> they turn to critique as if it was an easy thing to do . . .
> and as if they even knew half ass about it,
> which most of them don't.
> Your poetry flood was the best thing bost of these newsgroups
> have seen around here in a long time.
> As poets we have tried to write and share against the onslaught
> of trash and idiots that also visits here,
> only because we are wahat we are . . . .
> 'an open forum' for anyone to say pretty much
> whatever the fuck they please.
> Some exercise that right more than most of us
> would care to hear
> but we let it be, so if a creative hair happens to grow . . .
> we'll know it. Most of the critics that I've herad open their mouths
> are the same bunch that hold the ng down
> by trying to keep it within their 'own' parameters.
> Post on Marg, you kicked ass where it counts and I'm proud of you.
> I'm proud of anyone you makes the hiding scum
> pop their heads out so we can see
> how ugly their faces really are.
>
> -Max (poetic collection)
>
> "pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Yes, I am crossposting this so that both groups may read it.
> > If that's a crime, so shoot me.
> >
> > I recently posted 36 poems, crossposted that is, to both groups.
> > It was an attempt on my part to being back some *poetry* to these
> > two groups. It was a dismal failure, obviously, based on the
> > complaints from those who feel that I did something so onerous
> > that hanging would be too good for me. Oh well.
> >
> > It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
> > the horror!) and they were unable to handle that. One has to
> > wonder how these individuals deal with bookstores with ALL those
> > poems there. Way too much input, I guess. Obviously, they
> > would (and do) prefer the inane chuckles posts etc to reading
> > and critiqueing any poetry.
> >
> > So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
> > one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
> > that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
> > ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
> >
> > Enjoy your little flame wars and your high towers. I won't be
> > bothering to inundate you with anything SO horrific as poetry
> > again.
> >
> > pandora
> >
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> In article <EFiA9.316115$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com>,
> Texas Max King <max...@pstx.com> wrote:
> > bullshit Marg,
> >
> > . . . . you did great, you stirred up more old furry ball dust
> > around here than has been in a long time.
>
> of the Marg Gold Star.
Which has so far gone to more trolls than to poets.
>
> > Just getting poets riled up enough to open their mouths
> > is a feat unto itself. Mass 'poetry' posting is not 'bad etiquette'
> > neither here nor on AAPC.
>
> It would seem to be a crime worse than anything else one can imagine.
> I am a tainted individual.
Right. 'Tain't poetry, 'tain't prose.
>
> > The fact of the matter is that both newsgroups
> > needed the jumpstart to realize 'poetry'.
[Speaking of the gag reflex (below), I just noticed this.]
>
> I thought so or I wouldn't have bothered. However, from the reaction
> that I received, I am muchly discouraged. Perhaps even poets would
> rather contemplate war and killing than writing poetry.
...
Lissen, Princess,
Any poet who won't contemplate war and killing in the middle of a
war and killing -- isn't.
And the resulting gag reflex doesn't always emit pomes.
But it always emits subject matter. (Amid other matter -- so?)
Dennis M. Hammes
Jacksonville:
[nothing follows]
Dennis M. Hammes
A filly who fattened on FOAD
Got the trots on the less-travelled road.
She really was stuck
'Til she posted up Chuck
Who recoiled at the size of the load.
(This poetry shit is /easy/.)
Julie
Geeze, get over it. Take a writing class. You seem to have enough time on your
hands for that. You're sounding like a whiney newbie who just got their first
flame.
-- Julie
In article <aqs0jc$40a$1...@quark.scn.rain.com>, pan...@peak.org says...
Dennis M. Hammes
...
>
> Whatever I do know, I am quite happy with.
>
> See.. I don't have the confidence problems you do.
"I have confidence in confidence alone
(Oh help!)"
>
> As far as poetry goes, I know how to produce poems that
> are thick with image, usually a clever twist, blended metaphors,
Tom is: metaphors in a blender
thick
with a twist
> or sound play.. about any topic that floats by..
> words are totally fun, and I don't need anyone to
> tell me that. I love comments, but ultimately, I know enough about
> poetry to know that what I produce is what I am attempting.
> ..if Bill Orr, or rocky doesn't like it, who cares.
> If they can convey how it strikes them, Most Excellent, but
> everybody is busy.
>
> I have put out numerous poems since getting as much feedback
Whereas I would never put out a pome that sparked my interest.
> as I gave you on your poem, and you basically ignore it,
> and tell me to FOAD.
>
> But you have a dice play!
>
> >
> > pandora
> >
> > >--
> > >Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
> > >"Give me chastity and continence,
> > > but not yet." -- Saint Augustine
Tom Bishop
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD22F74...@arvig.net...
A major feature of the Usenet!
> (That is no insult to the groups. It's a matter of /fit/; most of
> those exercises/illustrations too closely fit only the post to which
> they respond, to go into a general collection. And a few do
> anyway. And they were all easier to write than a prose
> critique/treatise on the same subject; I'm /lazy/.)
Ya.. Sometimes I don't even fire up the composer.
> (N.B.: The "why" is /my/ experiment, Tomble. And I pays for my
> own research.)
Fer as I'm concerned it is /what you can get away with/.
Wit me, you can get away with dancing on my eviscerated corpse.
Others get blood-hosed, but your sword is grooved for that.
>
> No, dear, /nobody/ works on 36 pomes at once. We -- and you --
> work on /one/ pome at a time. Indeed, one /line/ at a time. (It's
> not a matter of art, even ability, but of simple physics.)
> You got some praise, you got some critique, you got some rebuffs,
> you got some slams, you even got some gush -- but /nobody/ was
> fooled by the fact of the flood itself.
> And frankly, My Dear, it was far better-received than you had any
> right to expect for pulling a stunt like that; several others have
> had the crap slapped out of them for eight-ten in a bunch, even
> three-four in the same post. Some even stuck around anyway.
> Finally: some 50 of those sonnets were written in my bathroom, by
> which I /do/ mean that I write better pomes (and apparently /more/)
> while taking a schidt than you do while PurSuing Your 36 With A
> LifeStyle (or whatever it was) -- and, no, I am /not/ recommending
> "somebody else's rules."
Any toilet paper recommendations? I hear staying away from
re-cycled is good. If there is one thing that you want to be the
first to use, gee, hunh?
> I read them. I put somewhere that you've a good eye and
> reasonable responsees -- and apparently no love for language (a
> conclusion you compounded more recently). I didn't critique because
> you were getting what seemed enough and to a competent point. And
> critique takes /time/, girl. And they gave it.
> Kwitcherbelyakin.
> If you want to leave in a huff, it's a free country (even up
> there) and free froups. But if you merely wanted only to waste
> two-three days of everybody's life with the ploy, you fail; it's
> also obvious most handed your packet to their secretaries, Mark
> Allread or Shifty Emma.
> As could have we all.
Like wind through the towers.
gnarl
> >
> > A poem or three would likely have received a more thorough critique.
> > There was no primary mention of a project to raise AAPC's cultural
> > awareness...
>
> Actually, there was. Thus beginning the insult. Which was
> subsequently confessed -- repeatedly -- that that's all it was.
> Too: verstehen sie "hostage"? (Spec: "If you don't grant my
> Higher Feelings I won't grant your Higher Feelings." You /can/
> think of it as natural selection in action. It helps. Hell, it
> even /works/.)
Oops, I should have specified
"pre-flood announcement"
g.
Sherrie Lee
>From: "Dennis M. Hammes" scraw...@arvig.net
Wow. If Marg's 36 inspired that, I say title the collection 36. Not a bad age,
and 36 reversed is 63. What's wrong with that?
Rarely is a number ever (11, 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, and so on)
In numerology 36 and 63 are 9 -- an okay year for language, and there's also
Higher Learning, Dennis. Don't forget that one. Or the other way to spell
Higher, but that would be off-topic, and I'd better get off my High Horse; cuz,
I transplanted expressions here (implied or otherwise).
Hi.
Sherrie Lee (U of MIZING)
Tom Bishop
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD24914...@arvig.net...
> pandora wrote:
<>
>
> I /Luuuuve/
> to critique poetry
> got any?
Well, you love a few things at least.
<>
> In 1993, I retired to my Little Cardboard House On The Prairie.
> And wrote 300.0 finished keepers a year, 12.5 "finished lines a
> day," ever since. Well, Yeats was fiddling with that Irish
> Theater. But I'm fiddling with these froups.
> Shall I repost all 478 pomes I wrote last year?
I would say no, but only if your website was up.
Otherwise, go ahead, please.
(A newsgroup should be created for you under alt.poetry)
..others also, instead of the /kook/ idiocy.
My Usenet Archiving interest is mostly driven from
having good access to /your/ poetry. Others also, of course,
but you get a special treatment.
I hope you don't mind. It seems that irrespective my bull-offal,
you want people to have access to it, since you /do/ know
the nature of Usenet (at least I have gathered that).
> And dig the other
> 300 out of my NetScrape files? And why should I not?
I think you should publish your poetry in as many ways
as you can possibly think of, and stop killing your fingers
over a few dozen peeps on the Usenet. Yeah, they are cute
and cuddly, but you deserve a MUCH wider audience.
But what do I know? ..other than that you are one of the most
impressive poets I have ever read, and clearly my experience
is limited, but I have sampled enough to know that /for me/
what I am saying is 100% true. The unwashed masses would
have problems with the density, but it seems that there
is a "Publishing Moment" to be had somewhere. Why wait
for PD? (which is sure to see you published) You will be
long dead.
<>
> --
> ------(m+
> ~/:o)_|
> ASCII stupid question,
> you get a stupid ANSI.
> http://scrawlmark.net
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
Tom Bishop
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD24B93...@arvig.net...
> Which has so far gone to more trolls than to poets.
Now upgradable to: "Marge Troll Star" !!!
> ------(m+
> ~/:o)_|
> ASCII stupid question,
> you get a stupid ANSI.
> http://scrawlmark.net
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Hanging is too good for a man who makes puns;
he should be drawn and quoted." --Fred Allen
Tom Bishop
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD24E3F...@arvig.net...
The poultry cloaca's quite easy
but the chick's FOAD strikes me as sleazy
Pixie scratches the sand,
but her poetry's bland
to the ear, to the head downright cheesy.
> --
> ------(m+
> ~/:o)_|
> ASCII stupid question,
> you get a stupid ANSI.
> http://scrawlmark.net
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"The world is full of asses, but muleshit grows lilacs."
-- Dennis M. Hammes
pandora
Bolduc619 <bold...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>I don't understand the bitch fest (pardon my pre-feminist usage), if people
>don't like your work they get to skip the posts, and for those who say nice
>work but too much in a day, my aoler news reader lets me keep posts up for 30
>days . . . or 1 a day from you.
>
>And I don't see where those complaining about your posts have done much to post
>work of thier own to balance the kl0wnflames.
Nor have I, but obviously they prefer such flames.
>Best wishes, and welcome back soon,
Thanks, David.
pandora
pandora
Julie <Ju...@nunyabidniss.com> wrote:
>
>Geeze, get over it. Take a writing class. You seem to have enough time on your
>hands for that. You're sounding like a whiney newbie who just got their first
>flame.
Did you critique any ONE of the poems? No, you didn't. You merely
spent an inordinate time complaining (as did others) about there
being too many poems posted. Sounds pretty whiney to me. Don't worry
about it. I won't bother you again.
pandora
Tom Bishop
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD26208...@arvig.net...
> Tom Bishop wrote:
> > I have put out numerous poems since getting as much feedback
>
> Whereas I would never put out a pome that sparked my interest.
If the interest won't burn, torch the capital.
If the capital won't torch, nuke the lowercase.
If the microwave is on the fritz,
...poor kitty.
Tom Bishop
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aqu2hn$q04$2...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> In article <aqti7...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> Julie <Ju...@nunyabidniss.com> wrote:
> >
> >Geeze, get over it. Take a writing class. You seem to have enough time on your
> >hands for that. You're sounding like a whiney newbie who just got their first
> >flame.
>
> Did you critique any ONE of the poems? No, you didn't. You merely
> spent an inordinate time complaining (as did others) about there
> being too many poems posted. Sounds pretty whiney to me. Don't worry
> about it. I won't bother you again.
If there was an imaged,
clever poem every time you promise....
;-)
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"Other than being totally inaccurate,
you're right on. --Dale Houstman
Julie
didn't read any of them.
Like I said - get over it.
-- Julie
In article <aqu2hn$q04$2...@quark.scn.rain.com>, pan...@peak.org says...
Tom Bishop
"Poe Witticism" <PoeWit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> I agree with this post.
Sorry to dissappoint, but I don't have a
hairless chest.
>
> T.S.Eliot
Were you lubing up? ..or killfiling out?
;-)
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"When it comes to a choice between two evils,
I always choose the one I haven't tried before."
-- Mae West
Texas Max King
"Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote in message news:3DD249C0...@arvig.net...
> Texas Max King admits he can't get laid in Texas:
cute, but I don't remember writing it.
I heard they wanted you to
send a poem to Canada
but you couldn't get it up
there.
-Max
Texas Max King
Hi Marge,
like I said, just notice who
the fools were that responded negatively
it reads like a who's who of
newsgroup whiners and bitchers
Tom . . . a robotic joke . . .
Julie . . . on permanent PMS
Dennis . . . blinded by his own brilliance
Bindi . . . in her own words
'but guess by now you probably can tell
there's not a lot of substance in this guff.
Hell! all I seem to write is doggerel!' by Bindi
an 'x' gen space case
Riaz Ali . . . with a cheap shot from a 31 year old video game flunkie
c'mon Marg, I don't consider any of these five fools
an intelligent consensus
let alone anything of value that should
bother anyone who strives for the art.
And you saw Hammes's little sexual insult toward me
these aren't poetry crirtics Marg
these are idiots vying for attention and fame which
they evidently have not achieved from their poetry.
Tell 'em all to fuck off and get on
with your writing.
-Max (Hey Dennis, get a stiffie yet?)
pandora
>I didn't critique any of them or complain about them being posted because I
>didn't read any of them.
Okay, no problem. I'll be sure to give you the same courtesy.
pandora
pandora
> like I said, just notice who
> the fools were that responded negatively
> it reads like a who's who of
> newsgroup whiners and bitchers
> Tom . . . a robotic joke . . .
> Julie . . . on permanent PMS
> Dennis . . . blinded by his own brilliance
> Bindi . . . in her own words
> 'but guess by now you probably can tell
> there's not a lot of substance in this guff.
> Hell! all I seem to write is doggerel!' by Bindi
> an 'x' gen space case
> Riaz Ali . . . with a cheap shot from a 31 year old video game flunkie
Seems about right from what they posted. It was indeed an
interesting experiment.
> c'mon Marg, I don't consider any of these five fools
> an intelligent consensus
> let alone anything of value that should
> bother anyone who strives for the art.
And I do, at least I think I do, mostly.
> And you saw Hammes's little sexual insult toward me
> these aren't poetry crirtics Marg
> these are idiots vying for attention and fame which
> they evidently have not achieved from their poetry.
> Tell 'em all to fuck off and get on
> with your writing.
I will do that, of course, can't NOT do it. And thanks for
the support, Max.
pandora
Tom Bishop
"pandora" <pan...@peak.org> wrote in message news:aquftd$lbs$2...@quark.scn.rain.com...
> In article <P1zA9.319469$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com>,
> Texas Max King <max...@pstx.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Marge,
> > like I said, just notice who
> > the fools were that responded negatively
> > it reads like a who's who of
> > newsgroup whiners and bitchers
> > Tom . . . a robotic joke . . .
wow.. top billing.
..but the centerspace cornflake. oh boy!
> > Julie . . . on permanent PMS
> > Dennis . . . blinded by his own brilliance
..not in this issue.
> > Bindi . . . in her own words
> > 'but guess by now you probably can tell
> > there's not a lot of substance in this guff.
> > Hell! all I seem to write is doggerel!' by Bindi
..quite fun little villanelle. Clever.
> > an 'x' gen space case
> > Riaz Ali . . . with a cheap shot from a 31 year old video game flunkie
>
> Seems about right from what they posted. It was indeed an
> interesting experiment.
..that we get to continue if you will stay around
pixie.. please, please... ;-)
>
> > c'mon Marg, I don't consider any of these five fools
> > an intelligent consensus
> > let alone anything of value that should
> > bother anyone who strives for the art.
Art? ..you hear that.. They're striving.. clawing,
their bleeding fingernails to the bone for "Art"
..the things that they might suffer, for "Art"
..too funny. ;-)
You two can't even listen to some of the basic elements
of poetry, like "image" like "crafting the words"
(so they don't sound like back fence chatter)
..hell, when did you even use a dictionary.
Hey.. Pssstt.. "Use a dictionary".. not to mention a thesaurus,
if your rhyme, (seems you're more the free versy drivel variety)
but rhymezone.com is handy. Or Dennis' RimeTyme.
WorldNet is quite handy, as are web/ usenet searches
to do word research.
>
> And I do, at least I think I do, mostly.
>
> > And you saw Hammes's little sexual insult toward me
> > these aren't poetry crirtics Marg
After you resorted to such with me, mex neck?
Get your story straight.
> > these are idiots vying for attention and fame which
> > they evidently have not achieved from their poetry.
> > Tell 'em all to fuck off and get on
> > with your writing.
>
> I will do that, of course, can't NOT do it. And thanks for
> the support, Max.
Max is doing you no good pixie.
He is just helping you masturbate in front of Usenet Poetry,
but feel free. I love female genetalia all exposed!!!!
>
> pandora
>
> > -Max (Hey Dennis, get a stiffie yet?)
Yeah Dennis! (I'll pray for you)
--
Tom Bishop -- http://Poetry.Here.Nu
"To judge from the notions expounded by theologians,
one must conclude that God created most men
simply with a view to crowding hell." -Marquis de Sade
Bindi
Texas Max King <max...@pstx.com> wrote in message
news:P1zA9.319469$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> Hi Marge,
> like I said, just notice who
> the fools were that responded negatively
> it reads like a who's who of
> newsgroup whiners and bitchers
> Tom . . . a robotic joke . . .
> Julie . . . on permanent PMS
> Dennis . . . blinded by his own brilliance
> Bindi . . . in her own words
> 'but guess by now you probably can tell
> there's not a lot of substance in this guff.
> Hell! all I seem to write is doggerel!' by Bindi
> an 'x' gen space case
Thanks! Max,
You read it and remembered it.:-)
Bindi
a 'Voyager' space case!
> Riaz Ali . . . with a cheap shot from a 31 year old video game flunkie
>
> c'mon Marg, I don't consider any of these five fools
> an intelligent consensus
> let alone anything of value that should
> bother anyone who strives for the art.
> And you saw Hammes's little sexual insult toward me
> these aren't poetry crirtics Marg
> these are idiots vying for attention and fame which
> they evidently have not achieved from their poetry.
> Tell 'em all to fuck off and get on
> with your writing.
>
> -Max (Hey Dennis, get a stiffie yet?)
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/02
Peter J Ross
alt.arts.poetry.comments squeezed the following precious droplets from
pan...@peak.org (pandora):
<snip>
>So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
>one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities.
The problem is that you posted more poems to aapc than anybody could
be expected to write detailed critiques of. aapc isn't rap. For every
poem you post to aapc, I think it would be reasonable to expect about
three detailed critiques of other posters' poems. Were you planning to
post over a hundred detailed critiques? If not, you were asking for
more than you were prepared to give.
Frankly, I just marked them all read. I'd have done the same if you
were Shakespeare. aapc is a critique group, not a showcase.
--
PJR :-)
Peter J Ross
>In article <3DD1C0B9...@mchsi.com>, Tom W <twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>pandora wrote:
>>
>>> In article <3DD1BF98...@mchsi.com>, Tom W <twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >pandora wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> In article <3DD1BD45...@mchsi.com>, Tom W
>><twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>> >> >pandora wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> In article <3DD19C06...@mchsi.com>, Tom W
>>> ><twoo...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >pandora wrote:
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> It would seem that 36 poems put some of them into a tailspin. (Oh,
>>> >> >> >> the horror!) and they were unable to handle that.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >It wasn't the quantity, but the quality. Did you hope to improve the
>>> >> >> >quality of all 36?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> Yes, I most certainly did. I wrote them to begin with, why wouldn't
>>> >> >> I want to improve the quality of all of them?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> pandora
>>> >> >
>>> >> >It's really a question of focus. If you do nothing else in life
>>but poetry,
>>> >> >then you might have the prerequisite time, attention and skill to
>>> >work 36 poems
>>> >> >at once.
>>> >>
>>> >> Now you're getting it. I not only work at revising 36 poems (at once)
>>> >> but work on writing more all the time as well as working on several
>>> >> novels at the same time along with walks on the beach, making and eating
>>> >> food, driving my husband to work, taking 2 college courses, doing the
>>> >> wash, taking care of 3 cats etc.
>>> >>
>>> >> I've seen a chess master play a roomfull of students concurrently and
>>> >> >win every game, but that level of single-minded focus is beyond most
>>> >people, and
>>> >> >it isn't clearly evident in the quality of what you've presented en
>>> >masse. If
>>> >> >you're honest in wanting to improve, then work one poem at a
>>time—you'll find
>>> >> >that this practice benefits the poem enormously by giving added
>>> >attention from
>>> >> >both readers and yourself.
>>> >>
>>> >> Please forgive me if I live my life and my work the way that *I* see
>>> >> fit and not by someone else's rules, eh? You've already spent more
>>> >> time and effort than it would have taken to critique even ONE of my
>>> >> posted poems but you chose to not do that.
>>> >>
>>> >> pandora
>>> >
>>> >Nor am I likely to if you try to hit me again with spurious logic. I
>>> >didn't tell you
>>> >how to live your life, and I don't appreciate you saying so. Forgive me
>>> >for being
>>> >kind.
>>>
>>> Kind? If what you wrote was what you consider *kind*, please
>>> spare me from the kindness of strangers.
>>>
>>> pandora
>>
>>Oh good lord. You've been saying goodbye all day, and yet you're still
>>here? I'm
>>going to close my eyes and count to thirty six.
>
>Hey, poster boy for the stupid,
You can have your Gold Star back. Stay out of aapc, moron.
--
PJR :-)
Peter J Ross
>In article <3DD1A341...@yahoo.com>,
>david rutkowski <david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>pandora wrote:
>>
>><clip>
>>> So, I apologize to all and sundry for posting TOO MANY poems at
>>> one time so as to overwhelm their sensitivities. I won't be doing
>>> that again. As a matter of fact, I may never post another poem,
>>> ever. After all, I wouldn't wish to overwhelm anyone.
>>
>>
>>People who post a lot of poems, like myself and Robert Morpheal, do it
>>in real time -- we post what we write that day. Posting poems written
>>over the course of a year, all at one time, IS a little strange, but not
>>unforgivable. Don't go away mad. Don't go away at all. As you said, we
>>need to get out of the rut of Liesaught/Cosmichalitosis off-topic
>>bullshit. Just a thought ...
>>
>Thanks for the considerate response, David. At one point in my life,
>yes, I would have stayed. At this point in my life, I'm tired....
>tired of small minds, tired of princesses who wish to run things
>and put others down for writing and posting poetry (oh my GOD, of
>all things to do on a POETRY group).
You don't get it, do you? AAPC is a *critique* group. If people want
to read poetry, they can read it anywhere - I prefer books, myself -
but I, and most of the other aapc regulars, read the poems posted here
with a view to critiquing them. If you'd posted two or three poems I
might have considered which one I preferred to critique and then spent
as long as necessary to produce a critique I was satisfied with, quite
possibly an hour or two if I felt that the poem deserved it. Posting
36 poems at once is the worst abuse I've seen in two years reading
aapc. It isn't poetry, it's spam.
>I have committed, apparently,
>an unforgiveable sin
You won't learn whether it's forgivable or not till you apologise.
> and I must do penance for it. I shall do so.
>Yes, I will go now.
Why are you behaving like a typical whining teenage newbie? What next?
The suicide note?
--
PJR :-)