I Suck

[adamlynn]

I suck. Get your mind out of the gutter
you pig; no I will not give you a blowjob.
You know very well what I mean:
I’m no good. Everything I touch turns to shit.
Poor Midas wept when he hugged his wife
and she turned to gold. Well, King M.--
at least she didn’t stink. And she glittered
pretty in the light of the sun all clean.
My better half heaves with maggots.
My better half is full of disease.
My better half says ten billion flies can’t be wrong.
And don’t even get me started on our kids…..
Little bastards. I suck. I know.

[George Dance]

Not always; but, if you keep trying to write in new ways, a fair
amount of it is going to suck.
The fact is, most of what you post doesn't go beyond an initial idea
and first draft, but there's nothing wrong with posting those here.
Too many people have been scared away from posting drafts, and I think
you're setting a good example in the opposite direction. I may not
like every one (or even most) that you post, but I read them all, and
appreciate being able to.

[adamlynn]

Thanks George. Sort of a back-handed compliment though,
don't you think? You toss around words like "fact" and "idea"
far too casually. That's not a "fact", it's an "opinion". Do you
get the "idea"? Most of what you post here doesn't go beyond
the political. But there's nothing wrong with that.
Polls and prizes have their place. So does popularity.
If your into that kind of thing.
Quite privately, it bores me.
To death.

And boredom’s not a luxury I can afford.

Sorry to be so brusque, but your a big boy George,
and I know that you can take it.

Right?

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:28:03 -0700 (PDT),

George Dance <george...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> Too many people have been scared away from posting drafts,

Might that have something to do with the fact that their drafts are
likely to be either plagiarised by you or reposted daily for the next
decade by your chum Dreckery?


--
PJR :-)

[Will Dockery]

Peter J Ross <p...@example.invalid> wrote:
>
> Might that have something to do with the fact that their drafts are
> likely to be either plagiarised

Far less likely now that your chums Dale M. Houstman & Michael Cook
have left us, PJR.

--
Shark Pact Manifesto / Will Dockery & Shadowville All-Stars:
http://youtu.be/Ft3X3kC6nr4

[George Dance]

On Sep 18, 9:06 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you think I'm stuck up, like I act like I'm better than other
> people?  I think I am.  Stuck up, that is.  At least that's what I've
> been told.  I never thought I was before, but I'm sure they must be
> right, or can't be all wrong. Otherwise, why would they say such a
> thing?

If two (or more) people tell you to change something you've built,
wrote, or acquired, is no good, and you should either throw it away or
change it, do you? If you go to a store with just enough money to buy
something, and 2 or more people tell you to give them your money
instead, do you? If (assuming you didn't give your money away), you
arrive at the store and find they don't have the product; but two (or
more salesmen) tell you to buy something else instead that you don't
want, do you? If you answered no to any of these, you could very well
be stuck up, or at least seen to be stuck up.

As Bentham argued with rigorous logic, if you don't believe that you
-- or anyone -- is better than anyone else, then you should believe
that you -- or anyone -- should do what "the greater number"
commands.

[George Dance]

Yes, it read that way to me, too, later. I did't need that first
conjunct in the last sentence. Unfortunately, one can't revise a post
on usenet (which is why it's particularly suited for posting drafts) -
and if one revises in a repost, a different group complains - so all I
can do
is add a footnote.

> You toss around words like "fact" and "idea"
> far too casually. That's not a "fact", it's an "opinion". Do you
> get the "idea"?

Not exactly; you could mean either that what I said was not a matter
of fact, but a matter of opinion -- just as, for example, it's
arguable whether the question of a work of art is "good" or has
"quality" is a matter of fact or opinion. Or you could be saying that
it is a matter of fact, but that what I said wasn't true (ie, didn't
correspond to the actual fact).

If you're mean the first, then you're committing the second: how many
drafts you write of something is a question of physical things, and
physical questions are matters of fact (by axiom if by nothing else).
If you mean the second, then, of course I could be wrong: I use reason
to reach conclusions, and there are several way reason can go astray.
My major premise here (based on experience, observation of public [ie,
published] writers, and analogy, is that if someone is churning out
two or more poems a day, every day, he can't be doing anything more
than producing first drafts.

I apologize if any of that sounded pedantic, but I wanted to show you
that there was nothing casual about my thought process. You're not the
first person on aapc to tell me what I was thinking, and how (even in
regard to the fact/opinion distinction), and IMO to get it completely
wrong.

> Most of what you post here doesn't go beyond
> the political.

I'm not quite sure whether you mean actual politics - I am thinking
and writing more that these days - or the internal politics of the
group. I suspect you mean the latter; and I'd have to agree with that.
It's not often that I post anything creative here, for the reasons I
mentioned in my previous post.

> But there's nothing wrong with that.
> Polls and prizes have their place. So does popularity.
> If your into that kind of thing.
> Quite privately, it bores me.
> To death.
>
> And boredom’s not a luxury I can afford.
>
> Sorry to be so brusque, but your a big boy George,
> and I know that you can take it.
>
> Right?

Oh, I have to take it; if you mean what I think you mean, you're
right. Besides, that is very good writing (even with that "your"
sticking out like a rigid digit). You're copying, or mirroring, the
style of my post, and showing (rather than just telling) me what it
was about it that you didn't like.

[George Dance]

On Sep 18, 10:32 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 18, 10:23 am, George Dance <georgedanc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>
> LOL, I knew exactly what he meant.  

LOL, maybe you think you do,

> ... Or are
> you just being funny?  You are funny, you know.

Oh, is that a "fact"? I don't take you seriously, either, as an
authority on the fact/opinion distinction; but at least the reader can
see why.

> Don't let anybody
> ever tell you different.  LOL.

I think you're just being deliberately insulting, in order to provoke
a reaction from me. It might be best to ignore you for a while.

[George Dance]

On Sep 18, 9:42 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> LOL, that reads like the Sunday funnies.  You really crack me up
> sometimes, George.  Thanks.  Have a good one.

Sounds like it's a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you.

[adamlynn]

> was about it that you didn't like.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thanks for the thoughtful response George.
Nothing personal. I hope you understand that.
Have a meaningful day cousin.

-Adam

[adamlynn]

On Sep 18, 12:33 pm, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Nothing personal."
>
> The most unkindest cut of all.

You're right. As usual.
Please substitute "no disrespect intended"
for "nothing personal".

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 18, 9:06 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you think I'm stuck up, like I act like I'm better than other
> people?  I think I am.  Stuck up, that is.  At least that's what I've
> been told.  I never thought I was before, but I'm sure they must be
> right, or can't be all wrong. Otherwise, why would they say such a
> thing?

JCC, I've met you, and I didn't see that at all... of course my
perception of "stuck up" may be a lot different from other people's.

Being surrounded at all times by a Shadowville All-Stars entourage can
tend to give one a different perspective, I suspect.

Missed you yesterday, got you a shirt & flyer, which I'm calling the
"Sovenir Pack"... will hold until I see you. Next event may be AIDS
Awareness Day dinner, if I can put something together for Jeremy in
time, which I suspect I can.

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 18, 9:30 am, George Dance <georgedanc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Sep 18, 9:06 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ah... interesting perspective there, George.

--
Shadowville Speedway & other songs:
http://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 18, 4:39 pm, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> LOL, who says things like "Bentham argued with rigorous logic", and
> expects to be taken seriously?  JB never argued with rigorous logic,
> and it just sounds silly to say he did did.  George's "perspective"
> isn't very well represented by what he posted, so I wouldn't know
> whether it is interesting, or not.  It just reads funny to me,
> humorous, like so much pointless, self-satisfied silliness.  If that's
> "insulting", so be it.  I just calls 'em as I sees 'em.

I'd have to go back & read what George wrote again to know if I agree
or not... I forgot what he wrote.

Time permitting, I'll read & comment again.

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 15, 10:36 pm, adamlynn <adaml...@live.com> wrote:

Reminds me a bit of at least one Arthur Rimbaud poem... I'll look it
up.

--
Music & poetry:
https://will-dockery-and-friends.soundawesome.com/

[adamlynn]

Rimbaud was bright enough to quit writing poetry at 19.
He grew up, moved to Africa, and became a gunrunner.
He made a little money there, and met some nice boys.
True; things didn't turn out too well. In the end.

Rimbaud would shout "shit!" if he didn’t like your poem.
Most people thought he was an asshole. But, hey, even
assholes can have visions, if they drink enough cheap wine,
and beat off. A lot. And if they’re good. With words.

What would Rimbaud make of usenet?
Do you think he’d post his prose poems here?
Or would he keep yelling “SHIT”!!!?
A Season in Hell. Indeed.

[George Dance]

I'm sure H707 will be happy to hear tha; derailing any and all
discussion here does seem to be the point of his interventions.

He did buy two of my books, so I don't think he has evil motives; but
for now I have to consider him a complete waste of time.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:20:05 -0700 (PDT),

adamlynn <adam...@live.com> wrote:

> On Sep 18, 10:23 am, George Dance <georgedanc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

<Dunce's drivel snipped unread>

> Thanks for the thoughtful response George.
> Nothing personal. I hope you understand that.
> Have a meaningful day cousin.

If by "have a meaningful day" you mean "have a day in which you are
fatally but meaningfully run over by a bus", then your response to
Dunce is a sensible one.

But I suspect that you don't mean that.

I understand the temptation to be polite to the stupid people, having
experienced it myself in the early days of my AAPC experience. Not
only was I polite to R*bert B*rcus, K*nny Ch*ffin and others, but I
politely criticised the people who weren't polite to them. I'd still
welcome them both back to the newsgroup, because they were just
ordinary stupid people who wrote bad poetry and got upset when they
were told that their poems were bad.

But there's a difference between stupid people like B*rcus, Ch*ffin
and Al*crity St*ne on the one hand, and stupid people who persistently
lie, plagiarise, forge and vandalise on the other.

I think unambiguous, united loathing for Dunce and all his antics has
to be the only writen response if AAPC is to have any chance of
survival.

"Hey, what about posting poems and critiques in AAPC?"

"I thought about it, but it's a place where they're polite to liars,
plagiarists, forgers and vandals."

"Oh, I'll go somewhere else then."


--
PJR :-)

[Will Dockery]

Peter J Ross <p...@example.invalid> wrote:
>

> persistently lie, plagiarise, forge and vandalise

Speaking of your thieving chum, PJR, whatever happened to Michael
Cook, anyway?

[Will Dockery]

Peter J Ross <p...@example.invalid> wrote:
>

> persistently lie, plagiarise, forge and vandalise

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 18, 5:19 pm, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sep 18, 1:53 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Sep 18, 9:06 am, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Sep 18, 7:21 am, Will Dockery wrote:

> > > Do you think I'm stuck up, like I act like I'm better than other
> > > people? I think I am. Stuck up, that is. At least that's what I've
> > > been told. I never thought I was before, but I'm sure they must be
> > > right, or can't be all wrong. Otherwise, why would they say such a
> > > thing?
>

> > JCC, I've met you, and I didn't see that at all... of course my
> > perception of "stuck up" may be a lot different from other people's.
>
> > Being surrounded at all times by a Shadowville All-Stars entourage can
> > tend to give one a different perspective, I suspect.
>
> > Missed you yesterday, got you a shirt & flyer, which I'm calling the
> > "Sovenir Pack"... will hold until I see you. Next event may be AIDS
> > Awareness Day dinner, if I can put something together for Jeremy in
> > time, which I suspect I can.
>

> > --
> > Shark Pact Manifesto / Will Dockery & Shadowville All-Stars:http://youtu.be/Ft3X3kC6nr4
>

> Is Jeremy a frickin' homo name? Jeremy Bentham, that guy George was
> talking about, wrote an essay, Offences Against One's Self, in 1785,
> but it remained unpublished until 1931 for fear of offending public
> morality. In it, he advocated for the legalization of all sorts of
> unspeakable homo type behavior, like people actually have a right to
> do that kind of stuff to themselves and each other. I mean, ew,
> right? Frickin' homos.

I'll have to check him out one of these days... I know a lot of folks
named Jeremy, most are pretty cool folks.

[Will Dockery]

> > - Show quoted text -
>

> Clearly I remember
> picking on the boy ...

Lemon yellow sky...

Yeah, I had completely forgotten about those guys for a while...

--
Music & poetry of Will Dockery & Friends:
https://will-dockery-and-friends.soundawesome.com/

[Will Dockery]

Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Not completely forgotten.
> You got Lemon yellow right.

Yeah, fragments of the song surface, not in any particular (that I can
tell) order... my memory of the song & lyrics are sort of chopped/
jumbled kind of like a Dale M. Houstman version of a poem.

Seems the main thing I remember when I think of Pearl Jam is that
thing the singer did with his eyes in the videos, rolled them around
real fast kind of.

[Will Dockery]

Peter J Ross <p...@example.invalid> wrote:
>

> if AAPC is to have any chance of survival.

I thought you'd already decared it dead and you were moving on to
create a new, moderated newsgroup, PJR?

Oh, right... that idea failed miserably.

[Will Dockery]

On Sep 21, 7:00 pm, Hieronymous707 <hieronymous...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sep 21, 4:01 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > Oh, right... that idea failed miserably.
>

> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/21/troy-davis-judge-rejects-...

Did they carry out the execution, after all?

Late last night radio news was reporting that the execution had been
delayed...