Re Dungeons and Dragoons.
Peter J Ross
news:fadef76.01080...@posting.google.com...
<snip-the-tripe>
I'm interested to learn that you're willing to tolerate plagiarism, but your
recent trollish behaviour here leaves me unsurprised. Go away, please.
*plonk*
PJR
Dale Houstman
> Sat, 04 Aug 2001 04:47:38 GMT
> "Michael" <co...@mediaone23.net> wrote:
>
> Chuck Lysaght,
>
> You have no credibility left; you traded it for a misguided ideal.
> For my part I've notified the several originations I am associated
> with as well as the AAP. I do hope you stick around here though, I
> would miss Sherman and Ross bitch-slapping you around like a red-headed
stepchild.
>
> Mdc>
>
> Guys, isn't there a man-on-man-bitch-slapping-newsgroup-for-poetry-
> writers that you can haunt with this stuff?
>
> Speaking as a person who has small levels of testosterone, and has
> discovered that she has a low nausea threshold as well, I would like
> to ask you to please consider starting such a group --
>
> Then whoever shares your particular fetish(es) could chew the fat
> _there_. This crap is old and it's freaky. Enough, please.
>
> cythera.
Cythera, although I am as tired as you seem to be of this "Chuckles versus
Mothra" Punch and Judy show, at least I had the intelligence to quit joining
in. Your insistence on playing (here and elsewhere) the role of "moral
overlord/Mommy/level-headed rationalist/control freak" is almost as
aggravating as the rest of the brouhaha. Children will be children, but the
sanctimonious uber-maman act is beyond my ability to withstand
self-righteousness. Repair to a leper colony, where such saintliness will no
doubt be less wearisome.
As for your tired "testosterone" reference: the most recent studies show no
link between that hormone and aggressiveness.
But you do seem to conquer your "nausea threshold" rather handily. Enough -
at least - to keep sustaining your Sister Goodie act through the vertigo and
the vomit. Quite a feat. Canonization awaits you like a lover.
dmh
Joshua P. Hill
>Tolerate plagiarism? You are so manipulative and dishonest.
>I don't "tolerate" plagiarism any more than I do the game you are
>playing around it now, a similar game to the one you play with Kenny
>(the laboratory mouse in your equation), whenever he gives you the
>chance.
>At least j r sherman and Michael Cook admit what they do for
>_pleasure._
>I might not agree with them on principle but can respect that they
>are honest about themselves.
>
>Now by all means put your tidy little label on me and *plonk* away.
Oh, come on, Cythera. You're a sanctimonious (thank you, Dale)
hypocrite who defends those who commit the most blatant outrages while
attacking those who attempt to respond. You concoct in the
neurofibrilllary tangles of your addled wit positive
fantasy-motivations for the perpetrators, and base ones for the
blameless. You have shown in the clearest way possible that you are
perfectly willing to brush off a brutal, below-the-belt attack on
another, yet respond with lizardly viciousness when the junk heap in
your cranium mistakenly concludes that someone else has aimed that
very same attack at you.
I'm not overly fond of the medicalization of neurotic personality
traits, and when somone asked me once oustide this forum whether I
thought you were crazy, I said I saw no strong evidence of psychosis.
So rather than attempting to match the tone of your admittedly flakey
paint to a syndrome in DSM-IV, I'll just say that in you I see a
greedy, self-centered infant who reacts with paranoid venom to
fantasy-attacks on her own person, but not at all to real attacks on
others. I see an addlepated maker of moral pretzels, with a compulsion
to justify the bad and degrade the good. And I see these distinctly
unpleasant characteristics gift-wrapped in the cloying
sanctimoniousness (thank you, Dale) one would normally associate with
a treacle-aggressing schoolgirl.
All in all, a particularly disaffecting combination, the personality
equivalent of whipped cream and sprinkles on pickles and shit.
Josh
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "cythera" <cyt...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:fadef76.01080...@posting.google.com...
>
>
> ><snip-the-tripe>
>
> >I'm interested to learn that you're willing to tolerate plagiarism,
> >but your recent trollish behaviour here leaves me unsurprised.
>
> >Go away, please.
>
> >*plonk*
>
> >PJR
>
> I don't "tolerate" plagiarism any more than I do the game you are
> playing around it now, a similar game to the one you play with Kenny
> (the laboratory mouse in your equation), whenever he gives you the
> chance.
> At least j r sherman and Michael Cook admit what they do for
> _pleasure._
> I might not agree with them on principle but can respect that they
> are honest about themselves.
>
> Now by all means put your tidy little label on me and *plonk* away.
>
> I never did like clowns.
Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer?
Certain can bitch
Of anyone here,
But when the server pops open and spills all the clowns,
Send in the frowns.
--
>^,,^<
When did it stop being true that an artist is somebody
who can do something more or less well which the rest of us
can only do badly or not at all? -- Tom Stoppard
http://t-independent.com/scrawlmark-press/
gga...@excite.com
<j...@null.mindspring.com> wrote:
Sometimes I like to tell myself that if I really tried,
I could write as well as Josh and Dale.
gg
But then my objectivity returns.
And then there's Lorinda.
Where the hell is she?
Joshua P. Hill
>I wouldn't have become nearly so _revolted_
Oh, so _revolted,_ ooh-hoo-hoo.
Josh
Joshua P. Hill
>On Sat, 04 Aug 2001 10:01:41 -0400, Joshua P. Hill
><j...@null.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Sometimes I like to tell myself that if I really tried,
>I could write as well as Josh and Dale.
Heh
Sometimes I tell myself that if I really tried, I could write as well
as Dale and Gary.
Ah, well, my B-52's may not have the elegance of your sharpshooter's
rifles, but they do leave a rather satisfying crater.
Josh "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" Hill
shunichi waha
rushdie in mind (it was made, appropriately enough, in reference to 'big
brother' and the reality tv phenomenon).
"It's impossible to maintain a sense of outrage about people being so
trivially self-serving for so long"
by the way (or, if allowed - btw) clowns are usually funny or tragic.
neither of these qualities can really be found here, except maybe from
gilbert. that isn't meant to be pejorative.
--
the stupidity is limited to these areas -
www.geocities.com/shunichi_waha
or
http://members.dingoblue.net.au/~shunichi
shunichi waha
Dennis M. Hammes
He sat on his batteries /twice/?
Joshua P. Hill
<scraw...@cableone.net> wrote:
>"Joshua P. Hill" wrote:
>>
>> On 4 Aug 2001 14:09:18 -0700, cyt...@my-deja.com (cythera) wrote:
>>
>> >I wouldn't have become nearly so _revolted_
>>
>> Oh, so _revolted,_ ooh-hoo-hoo.
>>
>> Josh
>
>He sat on his batteries /twice/?
Potentially . . .
Josh
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2001 22:03:35 -0500, "Dennis M. Hammes"
> <scraw...@cableone.net> wrote:
>
> >"Joshua P. Hill" wrote:
> >>
> >> On 4 Aug 2001 14:09:18 -0700, cyt...@my-deja.com (cythera) wrote:
> >>
> >> >I wouldn't have become nearly so _revolted_
> >>
> >> Oh, so _revolted,_ ooh-hoo-hoo.
> >>
> >> Josh
> >
> >He sat on his batteries /twice/?
>
> Potentially . . .
>
> Josh
No wonder he's wired all the time...
Joshua P. Hill
<scraw...@cableone.net> wrote:
>"Joshua P. Hill" wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 04 Aug 2001 22:03:35 -0500, "Dennis M. Hammes"
>> <scraw...@cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"Joshua P. Hill" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 4 Aug 2001 14:09:18 -0700, cyt...@my-deja.com (cythera) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I wouldn't have become nearly so _revolted_
>> >>
>> >> Oh, so _revolted,_ ooh-hoo-hoo.
>> >>
>> >> Josh
>> >
>> >He sat on his batteries /twice/?
>>
>> Potentially . . .
>>
>> Josh
>
>No wonder he's wired all the time...
Perhaps a mantra would help: Ohm . . .
Josh
ben
"Joshua P. Hill" <XXjos...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:6qhqmtkconbbr4m3r...@4ax.com...
This is shocking.
b.
Dennis M. Hammes
Yabut you can't charge him with anything for it.
Mikel Potts
(in message <6qhqmtkconbbr4m3r...@4ax.com>):
Or if he wants to be more current, he could get some
dopey crystals and get into the whole flow thing.
Mikel
Joshua P. Hill
>"shunichi waha" <ben_...@malthusian.ate> wrote in message news:<3b6ca854$0$20932$7f31...@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au>...
>> yikes, watch out girl! they're closing in.
>:)
>
>Dale is often worth listening to, at least for me.
>
>The other three were terribly wounding --
>a thick thirst darkened my wrist.
>
>> keep this quote from salman rushdie in mind (it was made,
>> appropriately enough, in reference to 'big brother' and the reality tv
>> phenomenon).
>
>> "It's impossible to maintain a sense of outrage about people being so
>> trivially self-serving for so long"
>
>If only those people could muster up one scintilla of poetics or flair
>to their insults. Then some of us with an actual desire to write poetry
>and or prose _might_ get a triggering image or word from them.
>
>As it is, why _not_ take them with a grain of salt the size of a
>dinosaur?
Perhaps because, when four people criticize you for the same thing,
there's a fairly large probability that you are indeed guilty of it.
The incompetent poet is typically characterized by an inability to
accept, and thereby profit from, criticism of his work; so too, one
suspects, the incompetent personality.
Josh
Joshua P. Hill
What a base notion
Gateway drugs drain the source of creativity
Not that I'm biased or anything
Josh
Mikel Potts
(in message <3kprmtgnscdrpsbjm...@4ax.com>):
It's a proven fact that people are more chipper when
using this integrated approach. Move with the times,
or see moss growing at life's junctions, and get a
lot of static blown your way.
Mikel
shunichi waha
accept, and thereby profit from, criticism of his work; so too, one
suspects, the incompetent personality.
well, i wouldn't say yr incompetent. perhaps just a little overwhelmed with
yr competence. :(
Cynthia Moyer
news:01HW.B79340930...@news-central.giganews.com...
The critical dimension dictates whether a positive or a negative resist will
best define the required logic. Spiking your control monitor analysis begs a
short pathway, and overall reduced yields. Of course, not all processes are
so complex, nor resolutions so fine, as to demand the same precision (and
intermediate passivations might be of help).
\\//_ - cyn
Dale Houstman
<gga...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:3b6e0cdf....@news.supernews.com...
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2001 10:01:41 -0400, Joshua P. Hill
> <j...@null.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
> Sometimes I like to tell myself that if I really tried,
> I could write as well as Josh and Dale.
>
are: sitting in the middle of downtown Barstow, listening to classic Menudo
on your Walkman.
Sometimes I like to tell myself that if I really tried, I could get up off
the couch and turn off the television set.
dmh
gga...@excite.com
<dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
><gga...@excite.com> wrote in message
>news:3b6e0cdf....@news.supernews.com...
>> On Sat, 04 Aug 2001 10:01:41 -0400, Joshua P. Hill
>> <j...@null.mindspring.com> wrote:
> But then the Demerol/strychnine/Beefeater's combo wears off, and there you
>are: sitting in the middle of downtown Barstow, listening to classic Menudo
>on your Walkman.
I just hate it when that happens. I'm considering switching to
Tanquerey.
>Sometimes I like to tell myself that if I really tried, I could get up off
>the couch and turn off the television set.
My remote is worn out as well.
That's a lie, it never worked properly. I'm never buying a tv at
Costco ever again. The remote on the bedroom tv isn't working so well
either. I dropped it in the hottub as I was reaching for my neck
pillow lufa, and now when I try to turn the sound up loud enough to
drown out the plaintive squeals of the hysterical tapir, the neighbors
garage door mysteriously opens and closes.
gg
"There is nothing as vindictive as a confused flying monkey."
Gary Gamble
Ok, I made up the part about the tapir.
Mikel Potts
(in message <9kl6bg$51jq3$1...@ID-77510.news.dfncis.de>):
I smell a raster. You've obviously been taken in by a scan.
Mikel
Joshua P. Hill
>Joshua P. Hill <XXjos...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<aqermtkakfabnt2ib...@4ax.com>...
>> Perhaps because, when four people criticize you for the same thing,
>> there's a fairly large probability that you are indeed guilty of it.
>
>Does that apply to _everyone_?
I think so. But I was careful to say *probability.* After all, it's
quite possible to be in the minority and be right.
>We have philosophical differences, Joshua. I reject your dualistic
>point of view -- here, not just in your implied universal assessment
>of observed human behavior in terms of guilt v. innocence (are you a
>medievalist?), but in that assessment's implication that perfection is
>desirable. I could say more but will leave this open for you to
>explain yourself, should you wish.
What kind of moral philosphy ignores questions of guilt and innocence?
I'd be the first to acknowledge that the two are not always easy to
define or delineate, and that moral standards tend to be relative to a
given social system. But that doesn't mean the dichotomy between guilt
and innocence is invalid, that a Benthamic calculus of some sort isn't
a universal social necessity, or that there's no social benefit in the
improvement of mores.
And as much as I like Dante, I don't see any special relationship
between "medievalism" (or for that matter, any ism) and the rather
straightforward application of moral philosophy. These concepts --
guilt, innocence, even the necessarily asymptotic approach towards
moral perfection -- were recognized in the middle ages, and before the
middle ages, and they are recognized now, albeit their philosphical
and scientific bases are somewhat more firmly developed. Which is to
say that we're heirs to the wonderful moral philosohy of the 18th
Century, as we are heirs to the wonderful moral philosophies of
Dante, and as we have in more recent times developed the psychodynamic
model -- ego, libido, and superego supplanting the slightly simpler
appetite and will of the middle ages -- and more recently still, an
ethological and Darwinian perspective. Guilt and innocence are found
in higher animals to the extent that they're social -- which is to say
that I've seen dogs evince strong evidence of guilt, but never cats.
And I think the evolutionary benefits of that -- not just of morality,
but of transgression -- can be readily devised from first principles.
So it seems to me a bit phlogistic to dispense with the primary
ethical dichotomies.
>> The incompetent poet is typically characterized by [...]
>
>Maybe you and or someone else will find this interesting:
>
>from http://www.execpc.com/~bogartte/Lamantia.html
>
>THE CRIME OF POETRY
>by Philip Lamantia
>
>Fabre d'Olivet, prodigious philologist of the early 19th
>century, contradicted the classical-academic etymology of
>the words "poetry" and "poet" as, respectively, "making" and
>"maker", thereby superseding the false consciousness exuding
>from connotations of this dictionary and literary "definition"
>persisting to this day even among the allegedly "avant-garde."
>Fabre d'Olivet's erudition discovered that the Greek word for
>poetry derived from the Phoenician which translated signifies:
>"the superior principle of language." Developing correspondences
>with this central etymological key in the length preface (The Essence
>and Form of Poetry) to his book, The Golden Verses of Pythagoras,
>Fabre d'Olivet signaled his profound agreement with the poetics of Sir
>Francis Bacon who, from the following viewpoint, can be justly claimed
>as a precursor of surrealism: "Poetry does truly refer to the
>Imagination, which may at pleasure join that which nature has severed
>and sever
>that which nature has joined and so make unlawful matches and divorces
>of things... it does raise and erect the mind by submitting the show
>of
>things to the desires of the mind, whereas reason does buckle and bow
>the mind to the nature of things." Rejecting "craftsmanship", the
>surrealist viewpoint, respecting sovereignty of mind, the primacy of
>human desires and oneiric exaltation, considers and finds true poetry
>to be an instrument of knowledge, of discovery, of unveiling, and of
>human freedom. Authentic poetry is certainly the highest principle of
>language, but one which has generally been lost and which surrealism
>aims to restore, illuminating André Breton's saying: "Language has
>been
>given to man so that he make surrealist use of it," together with
>Benjamin Péret's genial affirmation, "poetry is the source and crown
>of
>all thought." Surrealism's fifty years of poetic evidence demonstrate
>the initial steps taken towards this supreme disalienation of humanity
>with its language, an emancipatory leap in opposition to the civilized
>debasement and fragmentation of language by reason, that is, language
>conditioned to serve as aesthetic object, submission-to-reality,
>national chauvinism, entertainment, neo-formal energy-fields,
>stylization, mirror-mockery, everyday speech, pseudo-revolutionary
>mystification, personal confession, conscious self-expression and
>other idiocies -- all of which,
>I insist, can be summed up in the self-condemned monstrosity that was
>Ezra Pound, his worthless emulators and what generally passes for
>poetry
>and good writing in this country.
>
> *
>
>Furthermore, the object of surrealism is moral. The demands it may
>elicit from you do not fall short of a furious revolutionary
>perspective concerning language, poetry, love, science, eroticism,
>politics, dependent on an imaginative exaltation of disquieting
>materials
>and potential renewal of latent powers requiring a purification of
>means
>well within your grasp, as easy as the day swallowing the night.
>
>From City Lights Anthology, 1974
I suspect Dale would take issue with the notion that surrealism and
craftsmanship are in any way mutually exclusive.
Of more interest, I think, is the fact that poetry can exist without
one -- surrealism -- but not without the other. Which is to say that
one is a style, a particular means of expression interchangeable with
others, while the other, if we construe it in the most universal
sense, is a necessity. And that, I think, is not the scholastic sense.
Proscriptions and prescriptions are for artistic children. They are in
many cases beneficial, but they are never sufficient.
The true artist works from principles. And the same thing applies to
the question of audience reaction. The sophisticated artist judges the
critic just as he judges his own choices.
The artist who has a grasp of principle will never want for, or
overlook, craftsmanship. He will be neither unlettered and inept, nor
will he a droning scholastic.
So too the individual who has a grasp of moral principle; his moral
choices will be superior, albeit they may, to various elements of the
public, seem unconventional, even amoral. The process is really the
same -- a cognitive one -- and so too the purpose, since art and
morality are bedfellows.
Josh
Cynthia Moyer
Yeah, they got me, but I snapped off-grid. Not that it matters, cuz it'll
all come out in the etch.
{psst! hey, kid! wanna buy some dopant?}
\\//_ - cyn
Mikel Potts
(in message <9komee$5eci9$1...@ID-77510.news.dfncis.de>):
Intense. In contrast to your luck they almost got my last pixel before
I focused, composited a new outlook, and continued with even
greater resolution.
>
> {psst! hey, kid! wanna buy some dopant?}
Deer? me? No!