W.Dockery
2025-02-11 03:54:01 UTC
Reply
Permalinkhttps://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/robert-creeley
Discussion:
Add Reply
A good selection of Robert Creeley poetry at the Poetry Foundation:
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/robert-creeley
HarryLime
2025-02-11 04:18:10 UTC
HarryLime
2025-02-11 04:36:23 UTC
Reply
Permalinkhttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
And FWIW:
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 04:44:19 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
Yes, you're "just saying" but I already know from private conversationshttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
with George Dance that he knows which Robert Creeley book the poem in
question is located.
There's two volumes of Collected Poetry, perhaps with 60 books published
he may need THREE volumes.
Just saying.
HarryLime
2025-02-11 14:07:17 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
with George Dance that he knows which Robert Creeley book the poem in
question is located.
There's two volumes of Collected Poetry, perhaps with 60 books published
he may need THREE volumes.
Just saying.
The two volumes of Collected Poetry cover the dates of his entirePost by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
Yes, you're "just saying" but I already know from private conversationshttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
with George Dance that he knows which Robert Creeley book the poem in
question is located.
There's two volumes of Collected Poetry, perhaps with 60 books published
he may need THREE volumes.
Just saying.
career: 1946-2005.
If such a poem exists, George Dance is the only one who knows of its
existence.
Hey, I gave him the benefit of the doubt on this in spite of his
reputation. But in light of the evidence, I am compelled to believe
that George made the whole thing up. There's just no other option that
open that sounds even vaguely probable.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 05:10:49 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
The collected poems volume only covers 1945-1975, while Robert Creeleyhttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
Mr. Dance has sunk to a new low. Just sayin'.
--
lived 30 more years, and continued to be a prolific poet to the end.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
HTH and HAND.
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 05:58:29 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
I'm currently reading the collected poems of Robert Creeley, excellenthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
work:
https://books.google.com/books?id=dRbtZmIdYecC&pg=PA113&dq=%22robert+creeley%22+%22newspapers%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiX7Mfb9rqLAxVTVTABHfBYAdIQ6AF6BAgKEAM#v=onepage&q=%22robert%20creeley%22%20%22newspapers%22&f=false
***
NancyGene
2025-02-11 12:07:07 UTC
Reply
Permalinkin the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it? Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
HarryLime
2025-02-11 14:26:10 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it? Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
Actually, George Dance has been lying to his Donkey as well.We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it? Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
"Yes, you're "just saying" but I already know from private conversations
with George Dance that he knows which Robert Creeley book the poem in
question is located."
The Donkey doesn't say that George told him the title of the book in
which the supposed poem appears. He only says that Dance claimed to
know the book's title.
Apparently George Dance will lie to his friends and allies as well, if
he thinks he can convince them.
--
NancyGene
2025-02-12 00:11:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink"poem" and Mr. Dance says that he knows what book contains the "poem,"
why wouldn't Mr. Dockery ask what book that was? We certainly would, to
be sure that we were arguing on the right side of the issue. If Mr.
Dockery doesn't know what book supposedly has the poem, he should hold
back on his comments.
We would not accept Mr. Dance's word on one line of a poem that cannot
be found.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 08:15:45 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
No, he hasn't.Post by NancyGene
We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it? Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
Actually, George Dance has been lying toWe did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it? Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-18 11:01:34 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it?
No oue accused you of plagiarizing a line from Creeley, you silly cow.We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it?
Post by NancyGene
Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
Wouldn't it have been
easier for us to just write our own line (which we did)? We are fully
capable of writing our own poetry.
Mr. Dockery claims that Mr. Dance told him the name of the book which
features the phantom poem. If so, he has the obligation to post the
name of the book. Did Mr. Dockery find the book and see the poem there?
Why is this a secret? One would think that Messrs. Dance and Dockery
would be jumping up and down in their glee to share the original poem
and publication location.
--
HarryLime
2025-02-18 12:49:04 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Just man up already, George, and apologize for it.Post by NancyGene
We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it?
No oue accused you of plagiarizing a line from Creeley, you silly cow.We did our word search with the exact words that George Dance "quoted"
in the line. So, "newspapers," "unread," and "pile." No results for
those words or line for a poem called "The Days Pile Up" by Robert
Creeley. The searches were performed in both volumes of Mr. Creeley's
"complete" poetry, plus other books that contained his collected works,
and one book that had an inventory of his works. No results for "The
Days Pile Up" or any similar poem in case Mr. Dance did not give the
exact title or line. Creeley did write some poems about "days" but
those poems were not the poem that starts with "The days pile up like
unread newspapers."
If this supposed poem is so obscure as to not come up in any search of
any of the books which contain Creeley's poetry, how (theoretically) did
we find this poem in the first place, in order for
George-Dance-to-accuse-us-of-plagiarizing-it?
--
NancyGene
2025-02-11 12:13:39 UTC
Reply
PermalinkBoth of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-15 12:35:40 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop repeating"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
your online friend's lie.
NancyGene
2025-02-15 17:47:55 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level of yourPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop repeating"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
your online friend's lie.
depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem. Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny. Is that all you have in your
argument arsenal? We call you George Dance.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-15 18:16:31 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level of yourPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop repeating"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
your online friend's lie.
depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I will
begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will if youYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 00:27:41 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-16 01:30:25 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 02:52:49 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
Or was PJR actually "driven away" also?
😏
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-16 14:29:29 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are coming fromPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 14:38:43 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
That's the reason for your opinion?Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are coming fromPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
PJR doesn't do FarceTw*t, you fool.
Perhaps you could click your heels three times and shout "PJR" at
midnight during a full moon. You may yet summon him for more ridicule at
your expense.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
So exactly what are you going to waste time on in the future? LordPerhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
knows that you've wasted your life so far. It's probably too late to
change your choice of failure at this point.
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 15:17:43 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are coming fromPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-16 15:28:27 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
I'm a bit surprised that Cuckoo has thrown in with Team Monkey, when hisPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are coming fromPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism
are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I don't think
that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words to
the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste time
looking for that quote, of course.
former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a bit
more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though only
"a bit").
Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at her,
after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 16:10:27 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
You misunderstand as usual, Dunce. Laughing at you or Dreckster requiresPost by W.Dockery
I'm a bit surprised that Cuckoo has thrown in with Team Monkey, whenPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are comingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently,Post by NancyGene
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest levelPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and realize
something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that long
ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being published
in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence that I'm part of
the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
Stay kooky, George. Nobody gives a fuck about swearing.Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
PS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Willie Douchebag get you a
new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 16:34:51 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and realize
something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that long
ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being published
in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence that I'm part of
the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
PJR would be so proud... not.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
You misunderstand as usual, Dunce. Laughing at you or Dreckster requiresPost by W.Dockery
I'm a bit surprised that Cuckoo has thrown in with Team Monkey, whenPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are comingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently,Post by NancyGene
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest levelPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and realize
something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that long
ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being published
in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence that I'm part of
the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
😏
Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
PS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Wxxxxxxx Dxxxxxxxxxx get
you a
new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
Homophobic much, Cujo?Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
Stay kooky, George. Nobody gives a fuck about swearing.Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
PS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Wxxxxxxx Dxxxxxxxxxx get
you a
new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
😏
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-16 19:16:09 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and realize
something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that long
ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being published
in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence that I'm part of
the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
Like shit they don't, asshole. NastyGoon is two proper woman, who don'tPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
You misunderstand as usual, Dunce. Laughing at you or Dreckster requiresPost by W.Dockery
I'm a bit surprised that Cuckoo has thrown in with Team Monkey, whenPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are comingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently,Post by NancyGene
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest levelPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to waste
time looking for that quote, of course.
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for (though
only "a bit").
no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and realize
something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that long
ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being published
in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence that I'm part of
the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
Stay kooky, George. Nobody gives a fuck about swearing.Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for NastyGoon,
whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and swore at
her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused her of
plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for swearing,
not for the accusation that never happened).
appreciate fucking profanity from goddamn motherfuckers.
Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
PS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Willie Douchebag get you a
new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
No, but I think I have some kneepads around somewhere. Of course, if youPS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Willie Douchebag get you a
new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
decide to come over, you'll have to bring your own elbow pads.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 19:46:03 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
don't appreciate fucking profanity from goddamn motherfuckers.
Your medications are overdue.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
requires no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and
realize something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that
long ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being
published in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence
that I'm part of the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
Like shit they don't, asshole. NastyGoon is two proper woman, whoPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for
(though only "a bit").
You misunderstand as usual, Dunce. Laughing at you or DrecksterPost by W.Dockery
I'm a bit surprised that Cuckoo has thrown in with Team Monkey, whenPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to
waste time looking for that quote, of course.
I do remember that moment.Post by W.Dockery
Can PJR be far behind?
I doubt PJ Ross will be back. These new "contributors" are comingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Wow, even Cujo is back.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
of the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears
you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
will if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently,Post by NancyGene
level of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we
plagiarized a seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the topPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
stop repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowestPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the
title nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
stop repeating your online friend's lie.
level of your depravity. The lie was yours, that we
plagiarized a seemingly non-existent poem.
of the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears
you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey -
but I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, andYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
will if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
George. Thrashing attracts predators.
Can PJR be far behind?
from the Monkey Cage (MMP's "facebook version" of AYOS page). I
don't think that PJ Ross was ever on that.
Perhaps. I remember him saying, when he killfiled NastyGoon, words
to the effect that he didn't trust that one. I'm not going to
waste time looking for that quote, of course.
his former master PJ Ross wanted nothing to do with them. It shows a
bit more independence than I'd previously given him credit for
(though only "a bit").
requires no such loyalties. You only need to read your nonsense and
realize something you don't.
"Being ridiculous attracts ridicule. It's practically a tautology".
You also have a kooky definition of "independence". It wasn't that
long ago when Pendragon was defending both you and Dreckster.
I was mildly disappointed that you declined to cite my being
published in the new "A Year of Sundays" book as further evidence
that I'm part of the conspiracy to mock you silly fuckers.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for
NastyGoon, whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and
swore at her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused
her of plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for
swearing, not for the accusation that never happened).
Stay kooky, George. Nobody gives a fuck about swearing.Cuckoo may have come in, tag-team style, to substitute for
NastyGoon, whom I haven't noticed posting since I lost my temper and
swore at her, after she once again repeated the lie that I'd accused
her of plagiarism. Pity; I'd like to apologize to NG for that (for
swearing, not for the accusation that never happened).
don't appreciate fucking profanity from goddamn motherfuckers.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
you decide to come over, you'll have to bring your own elbow pads.
I thought you were done with me. Or did you mean that to occur sometimePost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
PS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Willie Douchebag get you
a new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
No, but I think I have some kneepads around somewhere. Of course, ifPS: It's a little late to ask but did Little Willie Douchebag get you
a new set of kneepads for Xmas? Let me know.
you decide to come over, you'll have to bring your own elbow pads.
in the next infinity or so?
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 03:32:42 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
What a comeback. I'm devastated.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of
plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of
plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through the
posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through life, I
had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 06:15:11 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through the
posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through life, I
had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
Hello there Cujo, how's PJR doing these days?Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
What a comeback. I'm devastated.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of
plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line
that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of
plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I
will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will ifYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through the
posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through life, I
had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2025-02-16 14:25:14 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
PJR is doing quite well. He was a bit shocked to discover that despitePost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through
the posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through
life, I had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
Hello there Cujo, how's PJR doing these days?Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
What a comeback. I'm devastated.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through
the posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through
life, I had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
your many comorbidities that you haven't croaked yet.
He promises to stop by and laugh at you some more real soon. But you
could spare him the effort and just become worm chow real soon.
--
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
"I've been writing poetry for nearly fifty years, rest assured it's a
poem, Pendragon." - Will Dockery demonstrating why he's a douchebag.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 20:29:51 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
That's good to hear.Post by W.Dockery
PJR is doing quite wellPost by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through
the posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through
life, I had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
Hello there Cujo, how's PJR doing these days?Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
What a comeback. I'm devastated.Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Thrashing attracts predators.
Whatever, Cuckoo.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Looks like someone swallowed the fleet. Spit it out gently, George.Post by NancyGene
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeating your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level ofPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are
available on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title
nor the line that Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized.
Accusations of plagiarism are taken very seriously.
repeating your online friend's lie.
your depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a
seemingly non-existent poem.
the page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you
haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but
I will begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and willYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
if you continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Thrashing attracts predators.
I didn't realize how badly you missed me. I just blundered through
the posts and spotted this. Given your obvious blundering through
life, I had hoped for a bit more sympathy.
Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
He was a bit shocked to discover that despite
your many comorbidities that you haven't croaked yet.
Still here.He was a bit shocked to discover that despite
your many comorbidities that you haven't croaked yet.
Tell old PJR I said howdy.
Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
He promises to stop by and laugh at you some more real soon. But you
could spare him the effort and just become worm chow real soon.
I'm not planning on it anytime soon if course.He promises to stop by and laugh at you some more real soon. But you
could spare him the effort and just become worm chow real soon.
😏
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 03:02:23 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I will
begin to if you repeat it one more time.
continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
Exactly, as I pointed out earlier, George Dance made an observation, notPost by NancyGene
depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
Once again, no one accused you of plagiarizing. Go to the top of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
your online friend's lie.
Evidently you, George Dance, have not reached the lowest level of yourPost by NancyGene
"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
No one accused you of plagiarism, you silly cunt. Please stop repeating"How low can he go?"
Both of the collected works books of Robert Creeley are available
on-line, as you found, and neither contain the title nor the line that
Mr. Dance maintains we plagiarized. Accusations of plagiarism are taken
very seriously.
your online friend's lie.
depravity. The lie was yours, that we plagiarized a seemingly
non-existent poem.
page, and read what I actually wrote (since it appears you haven't).
I haven't called you a liar for that yet - just your Monkey - but I will
begin to if you repeat it one more time.
Post by NancyGene
Your jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
Oh, grow up or get out. I can call you worse than that, and will if youYour jealousy is so deep and wide that you are now
resorting to vulgarities and misogyny.
continue to spread lies about me.
Why the hell should I care what you call me?
an accusation.
HTH and HAND.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-12 01:15:22 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 02:04:05 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
I did find a good article on Robert Creeley's relationship with JackOn Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Kerouac:
https://raintaxi.com/two-roads-diverged-jack-kerouac-and-robert-creeley/
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-14 03:37:50 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPPP page.
At least we're getting something from all this nonsense besides a few
laughs.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 06:26:38 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Excellent. I got 3 links to downloadable copies of Creeley books for his
PPP page.
At least we're getting something from all this nonsense besides a few
laughs.
That's good news and actually deserves a stand alone post for RobertExcellent. I got 3 links to downloadable copies of Creeley books for his
PPP page.
At least we're getting something from all this nonsense besides a few
laughs.
Creeley.
NancyGene
2025-02-12 02:31:15 UTC
Reply
PermalinkLoading Image...
- Title pageLoading Image...
- Index of Titles and FirstLines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
Your move, George Dance. The other book of Mr. Creeley's poems is at:
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 02:38:06 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either
Robert Creeley might have decided to leave the poem out for whatever"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either
reason.
It's not uncommon for a writer to decide certain works should be left in
the past.
Just a quick guess
NancyGene
2025-02-12 02:47:49 UTC
Reply
Permalinkpoem exists but not in any book, how did George Dance find it and how
did we plagiarize it? Reminder: These books are the "complete" poetry
works of Robert Creeley. He did not pick and choose as would be the
case in "selected" works.
https://i.imghippo.com/files/hmhx6426CNU.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines
--
NancyGene
2025-02-12 02:37:52 UTC
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-12 03:04:51 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /C, and Creeley's claim
(quoted on Amazon) that that book , I think I'll have to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLime
2025-02-12 04:15:20 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /C, and Creeley's claim
(quoted on Amazon) that that book , I think I'll have to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
LOL! So George Dance is doesn't even know if such a poem exists, but isPost by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /C, and Creeley's claim
(quoted on Amazon) that that book , I think I'll have to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
basing his charges of plagiarism on heresay!
Again, why am I not surprised?
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 04:56:31 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /C, and Creeley's claim
(quoted on Amazon) that that book , I think I'll have to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
Well put, George.Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /C, and Creeley's claim
(quoted on Amazon) that that book , I think I'll have to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-12 06:33:56 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the secondPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
Well put, George.Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
NancyGene
2025-02-12 12:01:31 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 13:13:30 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
From:
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
HarryLime
2025-02-12 14:22:52 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, Donkey, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 02:38:39 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, Donkey, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
publication in my high school newspaper:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
In my original typed manuscript I had written:
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
job was so dazzling that we just ran with it back in 1976:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
HarryLime
2025-02-16 07:12:03 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
What's "dazzling" about it? It's chock full of errors.Post by HarryLime
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, Donkey, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
Your friend should have first run it past his English teacher... oh,
right... your English teacher was Danny Barfly.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 07:36:09 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Thanks for reading and commenting.Post by W.Dockery
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
What's "dazzling" about it? It's chock full of errors.Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
Can you point out the errors?
Hopefully I caught them all in my later revisions.
Post by HarryLime
Your friend should have first run it past his English teacher... oh,
right... your English teacher was Danny Barfield.
--
Your childish name calling is noted and corrected, Pendragon.Your friend should have first run it past his English teacher... oh,
right... your English teacher was Danny Barfield.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-16 13:44:43 UTC
Reply
PermalinkOn Sun, 16 Feb 2025 7:11:59 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
responded to atOn Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:22:48 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=16481&group=rec.arts.poems#16481
HarryLime
2025-02-16 22:34:30 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
Can you point out the errors?
For starters, he hyphenated "never" as "ne-ver." Hyphenation isPost by HarryLime
Thanks for reading and commenting.Post by W.Dockery
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
What's "dazzling" about it? It's chock full of errors.Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
--
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
Can you point out the errors?
something that the rest of us had mastered by the 5th grade.
As to pointing out your errors, see below.
*ON* the floor. Not "at" it.
"here" is superfluous. "lost in some other guy's past"
LOL! Is your speaker "here" or "there"? He can't be in both
simultaneously.
Whose seconds, Donkey? In the opening line they were "the seconds"
connoting universal measurements of time. Now the seconds belong to
someone els
You should be imprisoned for torturing language like that.
"a life passed by" is the correct way of expressing this. However, the
tense would be incorrect. "Lying there" is present tense, meaning that
your speaker is in the present moment. If he's thinking about someone
else's life that touched his in the past, he needs to specify this
before switching tenses.
"remembering a life that passed by"
You've already said that it "went by." "Going by" is just a needless
repetition.
It also changes the tense back from past "went" to "present". Random
switches between tenses are an earmark of a Will Donkey poem. You need
to learn how to use tenses correctly.
What are you trying to say here? That this unidentified person's life
was never caused? One should think their parents had been the source.
And how is a life traced? Generally this would mean
recalled/recollected/remembered, but you wouldn't just use "traced" to
signify that. Your sentence appears to be bemoaning the fact that no
one ever traced their image on a piece of transparent paper.
And what's with the "never ever"? People stop saying "never ever" at
the age of 5 or 6.
Again, this is torturous prose. It should be "If I awake some morning."
In your line, the speaker is pondering the consequences of his waking
up a morning.
"Here," again, is superfluous -- where else would you be expected to
wake? "There"?
At this point, your speaker is babbling incoherently. One doesn't wake
up in the middle of attempting to find a reason for doing something.
One wakes up from sleeping.
And, you have yet to identify who this person being addressed is.
This is another earmark of a Will Donkey poem -- addressing various
pronouns (you, he, she, it, they) without identifying them to the
reader.
It's impossible to tell if this line relates to that preceding or
following it. It doesn't make sense either way.
Is he seeing things he once defined denied? What did he define? For a
person to "define" something would mean that he was the perfect symbol
of that particularly quality or characteristic (Joe was the definition
of courage).
Or is his waking contemplation of the possibility of returning to...
some unidentified thing (a relationship?) being denied by the
unidentified someone's actions?
You need to learn how to convey information to your readers. Language
is about communication. It is the means by which we pass on
*information* to others. When your poetry hints at vague relationships
with unidentified pronouns, it is failing to express anything.
Vaguery can be used to a poem's advantage -- but the *entire poem*
should never be incoherent.
Where's "there"? If the life "just" passed you by, it would have done
so just a few seconds ago, so "there" should be "here."
But earlier in the poem, you'd said that someone else's life had just
passed by.
Which life was it? The speaker's life? Or the unidentified "you" he is
addressing?
This is just another way of saying "passed me by." If a line doesn't
add anything to the poem, you should cut it.
WFT?
Was everything not real a moment ago?
More importantly, *what* has become real?
I'm guessing that you were stoned out of your senses when you wrote
this, and that it all made perfect sense to you at the time?
Are you telling the unidentified "you" (whose life had passed --
implying that they had died) to wait?
Are you telling yourself to wait -- as your train of thought jumps
tracks?
Or are you telling the reader, who you haven't been addressing, to wait?
And why use "portion" rather than "part"? It just sounds false (like a
child attempting to use "big words").
And just what part of what finish are you referring to?
Everything has suddenly become real (even though you had given no
previous indication that it was false, and even though you've failed to
even hint at what "real" and "everything" relate to), is meant to be a
false finish that never comes (and is, therefore, not a finish)?
That would sound vaguely profound if it actually had any intelligible
meaning.
We have now arrived at the point in a Will Donkey poem, when I'm
inwardly screaming out "SHOOT ME NOW!!!"
How does the dimming glow of some lights affect your speaker's ego?
Does he feel inconsequential at dusk?
u
So your speaker is still lying "here" (or, perhaps, "there") waking up
from contemplating returning to someone or something, and the lights
have suddenly dimmed? Was there a brown out?
Is the (supposedly deceased) "you" he's been addressing actually lying
on the floor with him (not having "passed by" him at all)?
"Too"? Too implies that he'd already told us about something else that
the morning light was blasting clean.
So... basically, the speaker had gotten drunk and/or stoned, passed out
either here or there, woke up contemplating whether he should return to
someone or something, rambled incoherently about how his life (or the
life of someone else) passed him by... until the morning lights dimmed,
blasting his head clean.
Got it. NOT!
Donkey, Donkey, Donkey [shakes head], always with the pronouns. The
speaker has been forgetting what?
And how can morning be "clearer" when it had never been described as
being "unclear"?
Light streams. Highways don't.
Who is the speaker addressing? Himself? The morning? The unidentified
person whose "uncaused" and "untraced" life had passed him by?
"Hitchhikers" is not hyphenated.
Why would morning lights be dimming again? Usually the ambient light
increases as the sun continues its ascent.
And why are the hitchhikers streaking? I realize this was written in
the 70s when streaking as still a thing, but I don't believe that the
two (hitchhiking and streaking) went together.
And even if there were dim streaks of light in your "here" (or,
possibly, "there"), how does dim light recall a hitchhiker (naked or
dressed)?
WHEN DOES THIS GODAWFUL POEM END???
I'm not joking, Donkey. A poem needs to grab, and hold, the reader's
interest. Since I have no idea what you poem is about (other than your
waking up still feeling the effects of the previous night's drugs), I
have *ZERO* interest in it.
I don't know who is speaking. I don't know who he's speaking to. I
don't know what he's prattling on about. Hell, I don't even know if
he's here or there.
And, as a consequence, I cannot invest any interest (much less feelings)
into his (non-) story.
"Get on up the road"? That's not even decent backwoods slang. When
speaking about reaching a destination (literal, spiritual, etc.), one
says "down" the road. "Up" the road implies back to the start of your
journey.
"firefly" is not hyphenated.
So the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking light is now a hastily departing
firefly?
Pick ONE metaphor and stick with it.
OMFG!
Now the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking, hastily departing firefly like
light has turned into unseen gravestones???
I can't wait to discover what the morph into next.
There it is!
They went from dimming, to streaking, to hitchhiking, to hastily
departing fireflies, to unseen gravestone, to marbles spilling from
shattered minds.
And this is the end of the poem?
What was the topic? The speaker lying in the "Here" or "There"? The
unknown person he was addressing? Someone's life having passed -- or
passed by? Contemplating returning to... something? Or the bizarre
transformation of the morning light?
I would like to say that this is bad, even for you, but it's really just
par for the course as Donkey poems go: incoherent, incompetently
written, and terminally uninteresting.
--
NancyGene
2025-02-17 02:01:48 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
We have never heard of seconds being on or at or under a floor.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
Post by W.Dockery
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
Post by HarryLime
Ha, ha, fancy typesetting and artwork! Typed and mimeographed.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
Post by W.Dockery
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
Post by HarryLime
And the problem is Will Dockery never recognized the errors, over aperiod of 50 years. He is just as clueless in using the English
language now as he was in 1976. Some people never learn. Some people
are unteachable. Some people are both.
Post by HarryLime
For starters, he hyphenated "never" as "ne-ver." Hyphenation is
something that the rest of us had mastered by the 5th grade.
Wasn't Dockery in the 5th grade for several years?For starters, he hyphenated "never" as "ne-ver." Hyphenation is
something that the rest of us had mastered by the 5th grade.
Post by HarryLime
As to pointing out your errors, see below.
*ON* the floor. Not "at" it.
"here" is superfluous. "lost in some other guy's past"
LOL! Is your speaker "here" or "there"? He can't be in both
simultaneously.
It's a Beatles song reference! "Here, There and Everywhere."As to pointing out your errors, see below.
*ON* the floor. Not "at" it.
"here" is superfluous. "lost in some other guy's past"
LOL! Is your speaker "here" or "there"? He can't be in both
simultaneously.
Post by HarryLime
Whose seconds, Donkey? In the opening line they were "the seconds"
connoting universal measurements of time. Now the seconds belong to
someone else
Maybe he was dueling or boxing?Whose seconds, Donkey? In the opening line they were "the seconds"
connoting universal measurements of time. Now the seconds belong to
someone else
Good call!
Post by HarryLime
"a life passed by" is the correct way of expressing this. However, the
tense would be incorrect. "Lying there" is present tense, meaning that
your speaker is in the present moment. If he's thinking about someone
else's life that touched his in the past, he needs to specify this
before switching tenses.
"remembering a life that passed by"
You've already said that it "went by." "Going by" is just a needless
repetition.
It also changes the tense back from past "went" to "present". Random
switches between tenses are an earmark of a Will Donkey poem. You need
to learn how to use tenses correctly.
He didn't learn then and can't learn now (then, there, here)."a life passed by" is the correct way of expressing this. However, the
tense would be incorrect. "Lying there" is present tense, meaning that
your speaker is in the present moment. If he's thinking about someone
else's life that touched his in the past, he needs to specify this
before switching tenses.
"remembering a life that passed by"
You've already said that it "went by." "Going by" is just a needless
repetition.
It also changes the tense back from past "went" to "present". Random
switches between tenses are an earmark of a Will Donkey poem. You need
to learn how to use tenses correctly.
Post by HarryLime
What are you trying to say here? That this unidentified person's life
was never caused? One should think their parents had been the source.
And how is a life traced? Generally this would mean
recalled/recollected/remembered, but you wouldn't just use "traced" to
signify that. Your sentence appears to be bemoaning the fact that no
one ever traced their image on a piece of transparent paper.
And what's with the "never ever"? People stop saying "never ever" at
the age of 5 or 6.
That was Mr. Dockery's mental age at 22 in the 11th grade. He was doingWhat are you trying to say here? That this unidentified person's life
was never caused? One should think their parents had been the source.
And how is a life traced? Generally this would mean
recalled/recollected/remembered, but you wouldn't just use "traced" to
signify that. Your sentence appears to be bemoaning the fact that no
one ever traced their image on a piece of transparent paper.
And what's with the "never ever"? People stop saying "never ever" at
the age of 5 or 6.
the best he could with what he had.
Post by HarryLime
Again, this is torturous prose. It should be "If I awake some morning."
In your line, the speaker is pondering the consequences of his waking
up a morning.
"Here," again, is superfluous -- where else would you be expected to
wake? "There"?
Maybe "on" or "at?"Again, this is torturous prose. It should be "If I awake some morning."
In your line, the speaker is pondering the consequences of his waking
up a morning.
"Here," again, is superfluous -- where else would you be expected to
wake? "There"?
Post by HarryLime
At this point, your speaker is babbling incoherently. One doesn't wake
up in the middle of attempting to find a reason for doing something.
One wakes up from sleeping.
Maybe he was trying to return something at Walmart without a receipt?At this point, your speaker is babbling incoherently. One doesn't wake
up in the middle of attempting to find a reason for doing something.
One wakes up from sleeping.
Probably the principal, after Mr. Dockery got kicked out of school.
Post by HarryLime
This is another earmark of a Will Donkey poem -- addressing various
pronouns (you, he, she, it, they) without identifying them to the
reader.
It was all a dream, and he had forgotten their names, although they hadThis is another earmark of a Will Donkey poem -- addressing various
pronouns (you, he, she, it, they) without identifying them to the
reader.
told him twice. "Hole in one"
Post by HarryLime
It's impossible to tell if this line relates to that preceding or
following it. It doesn't make sense either way.
Not surprising.It's impossible to tell if this line relates to that preceding or
following it. It doesn't make sense either way.
Post by HarryLime
Is he seeing things he once defined denied? What did he define? For a
person to "define" something would mean that he was the perfect symbol
of that particularly quality or characteristic (Joe was the definition
of courage).
Or is his waking contemplation of the possibility of returning to...
some unidentified thing (a relationship?) being denied by the
unidentified someone's actions?
All of those things.Is he seeing things he once defined denied? What did he define? For a
person to "define" something would mean that he was the perfect symbol
of that particularly quality or characteristic (Joe was the definition
of courage).
Or is his waking contemplation of the possibility of returning to...
some unidentified thing (a relationship?) being denied by the
unidentified someone's actions?
Post by HarryLime
You need to learn how to convey information to your readers. Language
is about communication. It is the means by which we pass on
*information* to others. When your poetry hints at vague relationships
with unidentified pronouns, it is failing to express anything.
That's a theme in Mr. Dockery's attempts at writing.You need to learn how to convey information to your readers. Language
is about communication. It is the means by which we pass on
*information* to others. When your poetry hints at vague relationships
with unidentified pronouns, it is failing to express anything.
Post by HarryLime
Vaguery can be used to a poem's advantage -- but the *entire poem*
should never be incoherent.
At least he is consistent.Vaguery can be used to a poem's advantage -- but the *entire poem*
should never be incoherent.
Post by HarryLime
Where's "there"? If the life "just" passed you by, it would have done
so just a few seconds ago, so "there" should be "here."
That was Sydne's wrong left turn with Stinky G.Where's "there"? If the life "just" passed you by, it would have done
so just a few seconds ago, so "there" should be "here."
Sydne's ghost.
The ghost of Dan Barfly.
Post by HarryLime
This is just another way of saying "passed me by." If a line doesn't
add anything to the poem, you should cut it.
Perhaps the whole poem should be cut? Not just perhaps.This is just another way of saying "passed me by." If a line doesn't
add anything to the poem, you should cut it.
"The Real Housewives of Atlanta?"
He did the best drugs he could score on the playgrounds.
Post by HarryLime
Are you telling the unidentified "you" (whose life had passed --
implying that they had died) to wait?
"Wait for Me" - Hall and OatesAre you telling the unidentified "you" (whose life had passed --
implying that they had died) to wait?
"Then I'm willing to wait for it.
I'm willing to wait for it." - "Hamilton"
"Wait Mister Postman"
Post by HarryLime
And why use "portion" rather than "part"? It just sounds false (like a
child attempting to use "big words").
Dockery was merely a 22-year-old, just entering the 5th grade. He knewAnd why use "portion" rather than "part"? It just sounds false (like a
child attempting to use "big words").
few words.
He meant Finnish.
Post by HarryLime
Everything has suddenly become real (even though you had given no
previous indication that it was false, and even though you've failed to
even hint at what "real" and "everything" relate to), is meant to be a
false finish that never comes (and is, therefore, not a finish)?
Yes.Everything has suddenly become real (even though you had given no
previous indication that it was false, and even though you've failed to
even hint at what "real" and "everything" relate to), is meant to be a
false finish that never comes (and is, therefore, not a finish)?
You have words and music. Do you need meaning too?
Post by HarryLime
We have now arrived at the point in a Will Donkey poem, when I'm
inwardly screaming out "SHOOT ME NOW!!!"
That's when his teachers committed mass suicide.We have now arrived at the point in a Will Donkey poem, when I'm
inwardly screaming out "SHOOT ME NOW!!!"
Post by HarryLime
How does the dimming glow of some lights affect your speaker's ego?
Does he feel inconsequential at dusk?
He is rhyming three consecutive lines. It is vaguely reminiscent ofHow does the dimming glow of some lights affect your speaker's ego?
Does he feel inconsequential at dusk?
"Leggo my Eggo." The "so low" also refers to George Dance.
Post by HarryLime
u
So your speaker is still lying "here" (or, perhaps, "there") waking up
from contemplating returning to someone or something, and the lights
have suddenly dimmed? Was there a brown out?
He's also falling up or down. Maybe into?u
So your speaker is still lying "here" (or, perhaps, "there") waking up
from contemplating returning to someone or something, and the lights
have suddenly dimmed? Was there a brown out?
Post by HarryLime
Is the (supposedly deceased) "you" he's been addressing actually lying
on the floor with him (not having "passed by" him at all)?
Robot.Is the (supposedly deceased) "you" he's been addressing actually lying
on the floor with him (not having "passed by" him at all)?
Post by HarryLime
"Too"? Too implies that he'd already told us about something else that
the morning light was blasting clean.
Why does his head need to be cleaned? We thought that was what the"Too"? Too implies that he'd already told us about something else that
the morning light was blasting clean.
Brillo hair was for?
Post by HarryLime
So... basically, the speaker had gotten drunk and/or stoned, passed out
either here or there, woke up contemplating whether he should return to
someone or something, rambled incoherently about how his life (or the
life of someone else) passed him by... until the morning lights dimmed,
blasting his head clean.
Got it. NOT!
And fell down.So... basically, the speaker had gotten drunk and/or stoned, passed out
either here or there, woke up contemplating whether he should return to
someone or something, rambled incoherently about how his life (or the
life of someone else) passed him by... until the morning lights dimmed,
blasting his head clean.
Got it. NOT!
Post by HarryLime
Donkey, Donkey, Donkey [shakes head], always with the pronouns. The
speaker has been forgetting what?
Forgot to put his pants on?Donkey, Donkey, Donkey [shakes head], always with the pronouns. The
speaker has been forgetting what?
Post by HarryLime
And how can morning be "clearer" when it had never been described as
being "unclear"?
He put his glasses on?And how can morning be "clearer" when it had never been described as
being "unclear"?
He is rhyming "seem" and "stream." So unexpected!
Post by HarryLime
Who is the speaker addressing? Himself? The morning? The unidentified
person whose "uncaused" and "untraced" life had passed him by?
"All or nothing at all."Who is the speaker addressing? Himself? The morning? The unidentified
person whose "uncaused" and "untraced" life had passed him by?
Post by HarryLime
"Hitchhikers" is not hyphenated.
Why would morning lights be dimming again? Usually the ambient light
increases as the sun continues its ascent.
The laws of physics work differently in Shadowville."Hitchhikers" is not hyphenated.
Why would morning lights be dimming again? Usually the ambient light
increases as the sun continues its ascent.
Post by HarryLime
And why are the hitchhikers streaking? I realize this was written in
the 70s when streaking as still a thing, but I don't believe that the
two (hitchhiking and streaking) went together.
"Sweet HitchhikerAnd why are the hitchhikers streaking? I realize this was written in
the 70s when streaking as still a thing, but I don't believe that the
two (hitchhiking and streaking) went together.
We could make music at the Greasy King
Sweet Hitchhiker,
Won't you ride on my fast machine?" - Creedence Clearwater Revival
Post by HarryLime
And even if there were dim streaks of light in your "here" (or,
possibly, "there"), how does dim light recall a hitchhiker (naked or
dressed)?
"A thumb goes up, a car goes byAnd even if there were dim streaks of light in your "here" (or,
possibly, "there"), how does dim light recall a hitchhiker (naked or
dressed)?
It's nearly one A.M. And here am I
Hitchin' a ride, hitchin' a ride" - Vanity Fare
It ends when it ends, and not a pile of seconds before.
Post by HarryLime
I'm not joking, Donkey. A poem needs to grab, and hold, the reader's
interest. Since I have no idea what your poem is about (other than your
waking up still feeling the effects of the previous night's drugs), I
have *ZERO* interest in it.
It should have been thrown "at" the floor in English class. Big f'n FI'm not joking, Donkey. A poem needs to grab, and hold, the reader's
interest. Since I have no idea what your poem is about (other than your
waking up still feeling the effects of the previous night's drugs), I
have *ZERO* interest in it.
grade.
Post by HarryLime
I don't know who is speaking. I don't know who he's speaking to. I
don't know what he's prattling on about. Hell, I don't even know if
he's here or there.
"But who knows where or when?"I don't know who is speaking. I don't know who he's speaking to. I
don't know what he's prattling on about. Hell, I don't even know if
he's here or there.
Post by HarryLime
And, as a consequence, I cannot invest any interest (much less feelings)
into his (non-) story.
The writing is beyond bad and not something anyone should be proud toAnd, as a consequence, I cannot invest any interest (much less feelings)
into his (non-) story.
show others.
Post by HarryLime
"Get on up the road"? That's not even decent backwoods slang. When
speaking about reaching a destination (literal, spiritual, etc.), one
says "down" the road. "Up" the road implies back to the start of your
journey.
Unless one is lying by the side of the road, and the asphalt is quite"Get on up the road"? That's not even decent backwoods slang. When
speaking about reaching a destination (literal, spiritual, etc.), one
says "down" the road. "Up" the road implies back to the start of your
journey.
thick. Didn't the speaker fall down in previous stanzas?
Post by HarryLime
"firefly" is not hyphenated.
So the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking light is now a hastily departing
firefly?
Fireflies are very slow fliers."firefly" is not hyphenated.
So the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking light is now a hastily departing
firefly?
That's like asking Mr. Dockery to stick with one pronoun.
Post by HarryLime
OMFG!
Now the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking, hastily departing firefly like
light has turned into unseen gravestones???
And they are up on the road!OMFG!
Now the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking, hastily departing firefly like
light has turned into unseen gravestones???
Post by HarryLime
I can't wait to discover what the morph into next.
There it is!
They went from dimming, to streaking, to hitchhiking, to hastily
departing fireflies, to unseen gravestone, to marbles spilling from
shattered minds.
How many people can relate to marbles spilling out of minds? Lost theirI can't wait to discover what the morph into next.
There it is!
They went from dimming, to streaking, to hitchhiking, to hastily
departing fireflies, to unseen gravestone, to marbles spilling from
shattered minds.
marbles? That's a literal interpretation that is typical of immature,
cliched thinking.
Post by HarryLime
And this is the end of the poem?
What was the topic? The speaker lying in the "Here" or "There"? The
unknown person he was addressing? Someone's life having passed -- or
passed by? Contemplating returning to... something? Or the bizarre
transformation of the morning light?
I would like to say that this is bad, even for you, but it's really just
par for the course as Donkey poems go: incoherent, incompetently
written, and terminally uninteresting.
Did you note the title of the poem, as shown in the Carverlite Crappage?And this is the end of the poem?
What was the topic? The speaker lying in the "Here" or "There"? The
unknown person he was addressing? Someone's life having passed -- or
passed by? Contemplating returning to... something? Or the bizarre
transformation of the morning light?
I would like to say that this is bad, even for you, but it's really just
par for the course as Donkey poems go: incoherent, incompetently
written, and terminally uninteresting.
"SHATT, RD" - The title describes the writing perfectly!
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-17 16:50:45 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
period of 50 years. He is just as clueless in using the English
language now as he was in 1976. Some people never learn. Some people
are unteachable. Some people are both.
Good call!
the best he could with what he had.
Probably the principal, after Mr. Dockery got kicked out of school.
told him twice. "Hole in one"
Sydne's ghost.
The ghost of Dan Barfly.
"The Real Housewives of Atlanta?"
He did the best drugs he could score on the playgrounds.
"Then I'm willing to wait for it.
I'm willing to wait for it." - "Hamilton"
"Wait Mister Postman"
few words.
He meant Finnish.
You have words and music. Do you need meaning too?
"Leggo my Eggo." The "so low" also refers to George Dance.
Brillo hair was for?
He is rhyming "seem" and "stream." So unexpected!
We could make music at the Greasy King
Sweet Hitchhiker,
Won't you ride on my fast machine?" - Creedence Clearwater Revival
It's nearly one A.M. And here am I
Hitchin' a ride, hitchin' a ride" - Vanity Fare
It ends when it ends, and not a pile of seconds before.
grade.
show others.
thick. Didn't the speaker fall down in previous stanzas?
That's like asking Mr. Dockery to stick with one pronoun.
marbles? That's a literal interpretation that is typical of immature,
cliched thinking.
"SHATT, RD" - The title describes the writing perfectly!
--
Thanks everyone, for reading and commenting.Post by HarryLime
We have never heard of seconds being on or at or under a floor.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
Post by W.Dockery
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
Post by W.Dockery
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
No, they really aren't. "Time piles up" is a common expressionPost by NancyGene
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
the physical book will show anything different?
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
your ass.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
Of course, I wrote a very similar opening line back in 1976 that hasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
We have had the link (and access to the book) since we started lookingPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
Post by NancyGene
"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
Well, thank you for finding the volume that HarryLiar lied about giving"The Collected Poems of Robert Creeley 1945 - 1975"
https://www.imghippo.com/i/gJIH8498pOk.jpg - Title page
https://www.imghippo.com/i/QhcG5616is.jpg - Index of Titles and First
Lines, pp. 664-665
There is no poem listed called "The Days Pile Up," and there is no first
line of "The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No "The Days Pile Up" in there either. You are either a liar or know not
what you do.
a link to. If it's in any /Collected Poems/ volume, that would be the
one. There's no sense in my downloading the file at this point.
for the phantom poem. The poem is not in that book (or any other book).
Was the trusted source your wife or your daughter? We don't think that
anyone else might read these messages. Were they trying to protect you
against us? If so, they did considerable harm.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
We posted pictures of the title page and the index. Do you think thatPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in [/Collected Poems of
Robert
Creeley 1945 - 1975/], and Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that
[book contains everything he published up till 1975,] I think I'll have
to wait till the
copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for myself if it's
actually in that book or not. I don't see any reason to make a move
until then, so you'll just l have to wait.
the physical book will show anything different?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
??? Mr. Dockery has no information on it. We already have the book.Post by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Since it will take me longer to receive the book than it would take you,
I've asked Will to not give the group any information on it. I've read
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Mr. Dance, why don't you drop the silly name-calling? If anyone in thisPost by W.Dockery
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
HarryLiar's made-up stories about why Will won't tell you the name of
the book, so I think it's best for me to tell you that much at least.
thread is a liar, it is not Michael or us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Thanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
We perfectly understand what you are saying. You are trying to coverThanks for the kind words, Will, but on rereading I see the second
paragraph wasn't well-put at all, and needs a serious rewrite. Let me
add it in here so that (I hope) I'll just be able to paste it in if
NastyGoon can't understand what I'm saying.
your ass.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
It's up to you, but we will expect a full apology from you and Mr.I was given the information on the poem by a trusted source; but given
this claim of yours that it doesn't appear in /Collected Poems,
1945-1975/ plus Creeley's claim (quoted on Amazon) that that book
contains everything he published up until 1975, I think I'll have to
wait till the copy I ordered on Amazon is in my hands and I can see for
myself if it's actually in the book I ordered or not. I don't see a
reason to make any "move" till then, so you'll just have to wait.
Dockery for calling us a "plagiarist" and "second hander." We write our
own poetry and have no need to plagiarize anyone else's.
--
been visible online for at least a decade, and I hadn't seen the Robert
Creeley poem either, "The seconds have piled up at the floor..."
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=256444&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#256444
***
Shattered
The seconds have piled up
at the floor
lost here in some other guy's past
lying there
with your seconds piled
there went by a life
untold
unasked
going by
never caused and never traced
the future never ever appears here.
If some morning I wake
here for you
trying to find some reason to return
if I see things denied
I once defined
a life just passed me by there
slipped through my fingers
everything here now is real
so wait.
That portion of the finish
never comes.
Now that the lights are going so low
the dimming glow
falls on my ego
now that I'm falling
into my morning
here I am gazing into those
reflector eyes
morning light
is blasting my head clean too.
Morning's clearer
I've been forgetting it.
Your thoughts seem to stream
like a highway
dimming lights seem to streak
like hitch-hikers.
When does this dream end?
When do I get on up the road?
The light sped out
like a fire-fly
like gravestones
never noticed
never seen.
Like marbles
spilling from shattered minds.
-Will Dockery / August 20 1976
***
(Published March 1977 in the Carverlite, the Carver High School
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
***
I didn't accuse you of borrowing my line, but they are very similar
opening lines.
-- as are more specific variations like "seconds pile up," "minutes pile
up," "hours pile up," "days pile up," "weeks pile up," "months pile up,"
etc.
Not to mention the fact that "at the floor" is just bad English. The
seconds would pile up *on* the floor, not *at* it.
Post by HarryLime
Ha, ha, fancy typesetting and artwork! Typed and mimeographed.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
Post by W.Dockery
Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
--
After some thought and discussion with my editor, I agree.Although it doesn't matter at this point, the change in my poem was
actually made by /another/ editor nearly fifty years ago, for the first
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/15ndUbyxDi/
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past."
But somewhere during the fancy typesetting, artwork and whatnot, my
friend and editor Michael Ehrhart changed "on" to "at" and his overall
Post by HarryLime
And the problem is Will Dockery never recognized the errors, over aperiod of 50 years. He is just as clueless in using the English
language now as he was in 1976. Some people never learn. Some people
are unteachable. Some people are both.
Post by HarryLime
For starters, he hyphenated "never" as "ne-ver." Hyphenation is
something that the rest of us had mastered by the 5th grade.
Wasn't Dockery in the 5th grade for several years?For starters, he hyphenated "never" as "ne-ver." Hyphenation is
something that the rest of us had mastered by the 5th grade.
Post by HarryLime
As to pointing out your errors, see below.
*ON* the floor. Not "at" it.
"here" is superfluous. "lost in some other guy's past"
LOL! Is your speaker "here" or "there"? He can't be in both
simultaneously.
It's a Beatles song reference! "Here, There and Everywhere."As to pointing out your errors, see below.
*ON* the floor. Not "at" it.
"here" is superfluous. "lost in some other guy's past"
LOL! Is your speaker "here" or "there"? He can't be in both
simultaneously.
Post by HarryLime
Whose seconds, Donkey? In the opening line they were "the seconds"
connoting universal measurements of time. Now the seconds belong to
someone else
Maybe he was dueling or boxing?Whose seconds, Donkey? In the opening line they were "the seconds"
connoting universal measurements of time. Now the seconds belong to
someone else
Good call!
Post by HarryLime
"a life passed by" is the correct way of expressing this. However, the
tense would be incorrect. "Lying there" is present tense, meaning that
your speaker is in the present moment. If he's thinking about someone
else's life that touched his in the past, he needs to specify this
before switching tenses.
"remembering a life that passed by"
You've already said that it "went by." "Going by" is just a needless
repetition.
It also changes the tense back from past "went" to "present". Random
switches between tenses are an earmark of a Will Donkey poem. You need
to learn how to use tenses correctly.
He didn't learn then and can't learn now (then, there, here)."a life passed by" is the correct way of expressing this. However, the
tense would be incorrect. "Lying there" is present tense, meaning that
your speaker is in the present moment. If he's thinking about someone
else's life that touched his in the past, he needs to specify this
before switching tenses.
"remembering a life that passed by"
You've already said that it "went by." "Going by" is just a needless
repetition.
It also changes the tense back from past "went" to "present". Random
switches between tenses are an earmark of a Will Donkey poem. You need
to learn how to use tenses correctly.
Post by HarryLime
What are you trying to say here? That this unidentified person's life
was never caused? One should think their parents had been the source.
And how is a life traced? Generally this would mean
recalled/recollected/remembered, but you wouldn't just use "traced" to
signify that. Your sentence appears to be bemoaning the fact that no
one ever traced their image on a piece of transparent paper.
And what's with the "never ever"? People stop saying "never ever" at
the age of 5 or 6.
That was Mr. Dockery's mental age at 22 in the 11th grade. He was doingWhat are you trying to say here? That this unidentified person's life
was never caused? One should think their parents had been the source.
And how is a life traced? Generally this would mean
recalled/recollected/remembered, but you wouldn't just use "traced" to
signify that. Your sentence appears to be bemoaning the fact that no
one ever traced their image on a piece of transparent paper.
And what's with the "never ever"? People stop saying "never ever" at
the age of 5 or 6.
the best he could with what he had.
Post by HarryLime
Again, this is torturous prose. It should be "If I awake some morning."
In your line, the speaker is pondering the consequences of his waking
up a morning.
"Here," again, is superfluous -- where else would you be expected to
wake? "There"?
Maybe "on" or "at?"Again, this is torturous prose. It should be "If I awake some morning."
In your line, the speaker is pondering the consequences of his waking
up a morning.
"Here," again, is superfluous -- where else would you be expected to
wake? "There"?
Post by HarryLime
At this point, your speaker is babbling incoherently. One doesn't wake
up in the middle of attempting to find a reason for doing something.
One wakes up from sleeping.
Maybe he was trying to return something at Walmart without a receipt?At this point, your speaker is babbling incoherently. One doesn't wake
up in the middle of attempting to find a reason for doing something.
One wakes up from sleeping.
Probably the principal, after Mr. Dockery got kicked out of school.
Post by HarryLime
This is another earmark of a Will Donkey poem -- addressing various
pronouns (you, he, she, it, they) without identifying them to the
reader.
It was all a dream, and he had forgotten their names, although they hadThis is another earmark of a Will Donkey poem -- addressing various
pronouns (you, he, she, it, they) without identifying them to the
reader.
told him twice. "Hole in one"
Post by HarryLime
It's impossible to tell if this line relates to that preceding or
following it. It doesn't make sense either way.
Not surprising.It's impossible to tell if this line relates to that preceding or
following it. It doesn't make sense either way.
Post by HarryLime
Is he seeing things he once defined denied? What did he define? For a
person to "define" something would mean that he was the perfect symbol
of that particularly quality or characteristic (Joe was the definition
of courage).
Or is his waking contemplation of the possibility of returning to...
some unidentified thing (a relationship?) being denied by the
unidentified someone's actions?
All of those things.Is he seeing things he once defined denied? What did he define? For a
person to "define" something would mean that he was the perfect symbol
of that particularly quality or characteristic (Joe was the definition
of courage).
Or is his waking contemplation of the possibility of returning to...
some unidentified thing (a relationship?) being denied by the
unidentified someone's actions?
Post by HarryLime
You need to learn how to convey information to your readers. Language
is about communication. It is the means by which we pass on
*information* to others. When your poetry hints at vague relationships
with unidentified pronouns, it is failing to express anything.
That's a theme in Mr. Dockery's attempts at writing.You need to learn how to convey information to your readers. Language
is about communication. It is the means by which we pass on
*information* to others. When your poetry hints at vague relationships
with unidentified pronouns, it is failing to express anything.
Post by HarryLime
Vaguery can be used to a poem's advantage -- but the *entire poem*
should never be incoherent.
At least he is consistent.Vaguery can be used to a poem's advantage -- but the *entire poem*
should never be incoherent.
Post by HarryLime
Where's "there"? If the life "just" passed you by, it would have done
so just a few seconds ago, so "there" should be "here."
That was Sydne's wrong left turn with Stinky G.Where's "there"? If the life "just" passed you by, it would have done
so just a few seconds ago, so "there" should be "here."
Sydne's ghost.
The ghost of Dan Barfly.
Post by HarryLime
This is just another way of saying "passed me by." If a line doesn't
add anything to the poem, you should cut it.
Perhaps the whole poem should be cut? Not just perhaps.This is just another way of saying "passed me by." If a line doesn't
add anything to the poem, you should cut it.
"The Real Housewives of Atlanta?"
He did the best drugs he could score on the playgrounds.
Post by HarryLime
Are you telling the unidentified "you" (whose life had passed --
implying that they had died) to wait?
"Wait for Me" - Hall and OatesAre you telling the unidentified "you" (whose life had passed --
implying that they had died) to wait?
"Then I'm willing to wait for it.
I'm willing to wait for it." - "Hamilton"
"Wait Mister Postman"
Post by HarryLime
And why use "portion" rather than "part"? It just sounds false (like a
child attempting to use "big words").
Dockery was merely a 22-year-old, just entering the 5th grade. He knewAnd why use "portion" rather than "part"? It just sounds false (like a
child attempting to use "big words").
few words.
He meant Finnish.
Post by HarryLime
Everything has suddenly become real (even though you had given no
previous indication that it was false, and even though you've failed to
even hint at what "real" and "everything" relate to), is meant to be a
false finish that never comes (and is, therefore, not a finish)?
Yes.Everything has suddenly become real (even though you had given no
previous indication that it was false, and even though you've failed to
even hint at what "real" and "everything" relate to), is meant to be a
false finish that never comes (and is, therefore, not a finish)?
You have words and music. Do you need meaning too?
Post by HarryLime
We have now arrived at the point in a Will Donkey poem, when I'm
inwardly screaming out "SHOOT ME NOW!!!"
That's when his teachers committed mass suicide.We have now arrived at the point in a Will Donkey poem, when I'm
inwardly screaming out "SHOOT ME NOW!!!"
Post by HarryLime
How does the dimming glow of some lights affect your speaker's ego?
Does he feel inconsequential at dusk?
He is rhyming three consecutive lines. It is vaguely reminiscent ofHow does the dimming glow of some lights affect your speaker's ego?
Does he feel inconsequential at dusk?
"Leggo my Eggo." The "so low" also refers to George Dance.
Post by HarryLime
u
So your speaker is still lying "here" (or, perhaps, "there") waking up
from contemplating returning to someone or something, and the lights
have suddenly dimmed? Was there a brown out?
He's also falling up or down. Maybe into?u
So your speaker is still lying "here" (or, perhaps, "there") waking up
from contemplating returning to someone or something, and the lights
have suddenly dimmed? Was there a brown out?
Post by HarryLime
Is the (supposedly deceased) "you" he's been addressing actually lying
on the floor with him (not having "passed by" him at all)?
Robot.Is the (supposedly deceased) "you" he's been addressing actually lying
on the floor with him (not having "passed by" him at all)?
Post by HarryLime
"Too"? Too implies that he'd already told us about something else that
the morning light was blasting clean.
Why does his head need to be cleaned? We thought that was what the"Too"? Too implies that he'd already told us about something else that
the morning light was blasting clean.
Brillo hair was for?
Post by HarryLime
So... basically, the speaker had gotten drunk and/or stoned, passed out
either here or there, woke up contemplating whether he should return to
someone or something, rambled incoherently about how his life (or the
life of someone else) passed him by... until the morning lights dimmed,
blasting his head clean.
Got it. NOT!
And fell down.So... basically, the speaker had gotten drunk and/or stoned, passed out
either here or there, woke up contemplating whether he should return to
someone or something, rambled incoherently about how his life (or the
life of someone else) passed him by... until the morning lights dimmed,
blasting his head clean.
Got it. NOT!
Post by HarryLime
Donkey, Donkey, Donkey [shakes head], always with the pronouns. The
speaker has been forgetting what?
Forgot to put his pants on?Donkey, Donkey, Donkey [shakes head], always with the pronouns. The
speaker has been forgetting what?
Post by HarryLime
And how can morning be "clearer" when it had never been described as
being "unclear"?
He put his glasses on?And how can morning be "clearer" when it had never been described as
being "unclear"?
He is rhyming "seem" and "stream." So unexpected!
Post by HarryLime
Who is the speaker addressing? Himself? The morning? The unidentified
person whose "uncaused" and "untraced" life had passed him by?
"All or nothing at all."Who is the speaker addressing? Himself? The morning? The unidentified
person whose "uncaused" and "untraced" life had passed him by?
Post by HarryLime
"Hitchhikers" is not hyphenated.
Why would morning lights be dimming again? Usually the ambient light
increases as the sun continues its ascent.
The laws of physics work differently in Shadowville."Hitchhikers" is not hyphenated.
Why would morning lights be dimming again? Usually the ambient light
increases as the sun continues its ascent.
Post by HarryLime
And why are the hitchhikers streaking? I realize this was written in
the 70s when streaking as still a thing, but I don't believe that the
two (hitchhiking and streaking) went together.
"Sweet HitchhikerAnd why are the hitchhikers streaking? I realize this was written in
the 70s when streaking as still a thing, but I don't believe that the
two (hitchhiking and streaking) went together.
We could make music at the Greasy King
Sweet Hitchhiker,
Won't you ride on my fast machine?" - Creedence Clearwater Revival
Post by HarryLime
And even if there were dim streaks of light in your "here" (or,
possibly, "there"), how does dim light recall a hitchhiker (naked or
dressed)?
"A thumb goes up, a car goes byAnd even if there were dim streaks of light in your "here" (or,
possibly, "there"), how does dim light recall a hitchhiker (naked or
dressed)?
It's nearly one A.M. And here am I
Hitchin' a ride, hitchin' a ride" - Vanity Fare
It ends when it ends, and not a pile of seconds before.
Post by HarryLime
I'm not joking, Donkey. A poem needs to grab, and hold, the reader's
interest. Since I have no idea what your poem is about (other than your
waking up still feeling the effects of the previous night's drugs), I
have *ZERO* interest in it.
It should have been thrown "at" the floor in English class. Big f'n FI'm not joking, Donkey. A poem needs to grab, and hold, the reader's
interest. Since I have no idea what your poem is about (other than your
waking up still feeling the effects of the previous night's drugs), I
have *ZERO* interest in it.
grade.
Post by HarryLime
I don't know who is speaking. I don't know who he's speaking to. I
don't know what he's prattling on about. Hell, I don't even know if
he's here or there.
"But who knows where or when?"I don't know who is speaking. I don't know who he's speaking to. I
don't know what he's prattling on about. Hell, I don't even know if
he's here or there.
Post by HarryLime
And, as a consequence, I cannot invest any interest (much less feelings)
into his (non-) story.
The writing is beyond bad and not something anyone should be proud toAnd, as a consequence, I cannot invest any interest (much less feelings)
into his (non-) story.
show others.
Post by HarryLime
"Get on up the road"? That's not even decent backwoods slang. When
speaking about reaching a destination (literal, spiritual, etc.), one
says "down" the road. "Up" the road implies back to the start of your
journey.
Unless one is lying by the side of the road, and the asphalt is quite"Get on up the road"? That's not even decent backwoods slang. When
speaking about reaching a destination (literal, spiritual, etc.), one
says "down" the road. "Up" the road implies back to the start of your
journey.
thick. Didn't the speaker fall down in previous stanzas?
Post by HarryLime
"firefly" is not hyphenated.
So the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking light is now a hastily departing
firefly?
Fireflies are very slow fliers."firefly" is not hyphenated.
So the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking light is now a hastily departing
firefly?
That's like asking Mr. Dockery to stick with one pronoun.
Post by HarryLime
OMFG!
Now the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking, hastily departing firefly like
light has turned into unseen gravestones???
And they are up on the road!OMFG!
Now the dimming, streaking, hitchhiking, hastily departing firefly like
light has turned into unseen gravestones???
Post by HarryLime
I can't wait to discover what the morph into next.
There it is!
They went from dimming, to streaking, to hitchhiking, to hastily
departing fireflies, to unseen gravestone, to marbles spilling from
shattered minds.
How many people can relate to marbles spilling out of minds? Lost theirI can't wait to discover what the morph into next.
There it is!
They went from dimming, to streaking, to hitchhiking, to hastily
departing fireflies, to unseen gravestone, to marbles spilling from
shattered minds.
marbles? That's a literal interpretation that is typical of immature,
cliched thinking.
Post by HarryLime
And this is the end of the poem?
What was the topic? The speaker lying in the "Here" or "There"? The
unknown person he was addressing? Someone's life having passed -- or
passed by? Contemplating returning to... something? Or the bizarre
transformation of the morning light?
I would like to say that this is bad, even for you, but it's really just
par for the course as Donkey poems go: incoherent, incompetently
written, and terminally uninteresting.
Did you note the title of the poem, as shown in the Carverlite Crappage?And this is the end of the poem?
What was the topic? The speaker lying in the "Here" or "There"? The
unknown person he was addressing? Someone's life having passed -- or
passed by? Contemplating returning to... something? Or the bizarre
transformation of the morning light?
I would like to say that this is bad, even for you, but it's really just
par for the course as Donkey poems go: incoherent, incompetently
written, and terminally uninteresting.
"SHATT, RD" - The title describes the writing perfectly!
--
All comments and suggestions will be taken into consideration in the new
edited version.
😏
HarryLime
2025-02-12 04:10:48 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 01:24:11 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
George Dance already explained the delay earlier today.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-15 00:35:56 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
But if you wanted to accuse someone of accusing someone of plagiarism,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
no proof is required?
Post by W.Dockery
He does seem a bit slow lately, doesn't he?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
George Dance already explained the delay earlier today.Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
HarryLime
2025-02-15 00:57:55 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
But if you wanted to accuse someone of accusing someone of plagiarism,
no proof is required?
I've already explained how your post could not be read as anything otherPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
no proof is required?
than such an accusation.
If that isn't what you'd intended to say, offer your apologies and
retract it.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-15 12:47:32 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
than such an accusation.
No, Lying Michael, you have not; you merely noted that what I said wasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
no proof is required?
I've already explained how your post could not be read as anything otherOn Wed, 12 Feb 2025 4:10:42 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
But if you wanted to accuse someone of accusing someone of plagiarism,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
no proof is required?
than such an accusation.
"contingent" on whether the line was attributed or not. You have not
explained, for instance, why you or anyone would think that using one
line, unattributed, from another poet's work, would be considered
"plagiarism".
Excuse me? You're asking me to apologize for your paraphrase of a line
you apparently misread? How would you like me to phrase it? "I apologize
for the fact that you heard about what I said from someone who was
either too stupid or too dishonest to get it right." Does that work for
you?
NancyGene
2025-02-15 17:38:34 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Sat, 15 Feb 2025 0:57:51 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
"contingent" on whether the line was attributed or not. You have not
explained, for instance, why you or anyone would think that using one
line, unattributed, from another poet's work, would be considered
"plagiarism".
Note that we are not Michael but have been accused of having plagiarizedOn Sat, 15 Feb 2025 0:57:51 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
than such an accusation.
No, Lying Michael, you have not; you merely noted that what I said wasPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
no proof is required?
I've already explained how your post could not be read as anything otherOn Wed, 12 Feb 2025 4:10:42 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
But if you wanted to accuse someone of accusing someone of plagiarism,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
no proof is required?
than such an accusation.
"contingent" on whether the line was attributed or not. You have not
explained, for instance, why you or anyone would think that using one
line, unattributed, from another poet's work, would be considered
"plagiarism".
a line in a poem that does not seem to exist. Using even one line from
another's work, without attribution, is plagiarism. It is plagiarism
because it is not one's own work. Robert Creeley's poems are also not in
the public domain. George Dance, do you understand now? If you don't,
ask your "trusted source."
Michael, you know that won't happen. There will be many excuses and
diversion tactics.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Excuse me? You're asking me to apologize for your paraphrase of a line
you apparently misread? How would you like me to phrase it? "I apologize
for the fact that you heard about what I said from someone who was
either too stupid or too dishonest to get it right." Does that work for
you?
If you didn't think that we plagiarized the first line from RobertExcuse me? You're asking me to apologize for your paraphrase of a line
you apparently misread? How would you like me to phrase it? "I apologize
for the fact that you heard about what I said from someone who was
either too stupid or too dishonest to get it right." Does that work for
you?
Creeley's poem, why did you bring it up in the first place? Jealousy?
Ignorance of the law? Because your source made you do it?
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-13 14:01:45 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Post by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
NancyGene
2025-02-13 14:42:05 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
It's more than you did.Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
George Dance, you are using extraordinary explanations for somethingFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
a poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself, compared that one line with
our poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley. Alternate
explanation: you made up the line. You never had the book that [your
wife or daughter said] contained the poem.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
George Dance, you can look at the pdfs that we posted, which include the\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
first page of the book and the relevant index pages. If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Neither we nor Michael asked you to post the entire poem, and you wellPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
know that. Your source should have been able to send you the entire
poem for your perusal.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Yet you trusted your "source" without proof? We would label that sourceHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
as unreliable. The poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
The proof is that the poem does not seem to exist, is not listed in anyPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
volume of Creeley poetry, you would not name the book that it was
supposedly published in, you could or would not supply even the second
line of the poem, and you obfuscated with various attacks on us. The
logical conclusion is that you made it up (or your wife or daughter
did). It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Someone seemingly did. Who was that?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
BTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-13 16:07:02 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
NastyGoon, why are you imagining that my "wife or daughter" are thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
It's more than you did.Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
George Dance, you are using extraordinary explanations for somethingFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
Post by NancyGene
a poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
No, NastyGoon. As I already told you, even though I asked a trusteda poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
Post by NancyGene
our poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
No, that was your only "explanation" - that I made up a line and aour poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
I never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
Post by NancyGene
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
I haven't commented on the pdfs you posted, nor looked at them. When IPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
George Dance, you can look at the pdfs that we posted, which include thethe next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
Post by NancyGene
If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
There's no reason to "doubt the authenticity" of the pdfs on the sites.If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
Post by NancyGene
and you well
know that.
No, I know MMP gave me a second option, to post "four lines", afterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Neither we nor Michael asked you to post the entire poem,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
and you well
know that.
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
But, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
Now you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
Post by NancyGene
Sure; I told you I trusted that source. Though, after you decided toPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Yet you trusted your "source" without proof?HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
Of course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
Post by NancyGene
The poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
No, NastyGoon. All your research (assuming it's accurate, since IThe poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
Post by NancyGene
volume of Creeley poetry
No, NastyGoon; that is not something that you proved. You didn't checkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
The proof is that the poem does not seem to exist, is not listed in anyPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
volume of Creeley poetry
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack". I do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
Post by NancyGene
It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Now you're making up more strawmen to attack.It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Post by NancyGene
Both you and MMP. All you've claimed is that I forged the title and onePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Someone seemingly did. Who was that?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line or the poem ISince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
Post by NancyGene
BTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
I think you should get over your bad habit (which you've apparentlyBTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
picked up from your "collegue" MMP) that those who disagree with you are
jealous of you. As I've told you before, it makes you sound like a
narcissist.
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 17:05:37 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
I never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
But, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
Now you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
Of course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack". I do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
picked up from your "collegue" MMP) that those who disagree with you are
jealous of you. As I've told you before, it makes you sound like a
narcissist.
This is really getting interesting.Post by NancyGene
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
NastyGoon, why are you imagining that my "wife or daughter" are thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
It's more than you did.Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
George Dance, you are using extraordinary explanations for somethingFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
Post by NancyGene
a poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
No, NastyGoon. As I already told you, even though I asked a trusteda poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
Post by NancyGene
our poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
No, that was your only "explanation" - that I made up a line and aour poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
I never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
Post by NancyGene
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
I haven't commented on the pdfs you posted, nor looked at them. When IPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
George Dance, you can look at the pdfs that we posted, which include thethe next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
Post by NancyGene
If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
There's no reason to "doubt the authenticity" of the pdfs on the sites.If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
Post by NancyGene
and you well
know that.
No, I know MMP gave me a second option, to post "four lines", afterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Neither we nor Michael asked you to post the entire poem,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
and you well
know that.
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
But, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
Now you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
Post by NancyGene
Sure; I told you I trusted that source. Though, after you decided toPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Yet you trusted your "source" without proof?HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
Of course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
Post by NancyGene
The poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
No, NastyGoon. All your research (assuming it's accurate, since IThe poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
Post by NancyGene
volume of Creeley poetry
No, NastyGoon; that is not something that you proved. You didn't checkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
The proof is that the poem does not seem to exist, is not listed in anyPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
volume of Creeley poetry
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack". I do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
Post by NancyGene
It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Now you're making up more strawmen to attack.It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Post by NancyGene
Both you and MMP. All you've claimed is that I forged the title and onePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Someone seemingly did. Who was that?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line or the poem ISince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
Post by NancyGene
BTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
I think you should get over your bad habit (which you've apparentlyBTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
picked up from your "collegue" MMP) that those who disagree with you are
jealous of you. As I've told you before, it makes you sound like a
narcissist.
I'm tempted to buy a copy of the book myself so I can finally read and
compare the Robert Creeley poem.
😏
HarryLime
2025-02-13 18:31:39 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
They would seem to be the most likely candidates.Post by NancyGene
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
NastyGoon, why are you imagining that my "wife or daughter" are thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
It's more than you did.Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
George Dance, you are using extraordinary explanations for somethingFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
AAPC is a ghost town, so I doubt that some "lurker" contacted you after
reading my post.
I also doubt that anyone other than your closest family members would
feign any interest in your petty little Usenet wars.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
No one accused you of forgery, George. Forgery was just the only, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
Post by NancyGene
a poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
No, NastyGoon. As I already told you, even though I asked a trusteda poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
Post by NancyGene
our poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
No, that was your only "explanation" - that I made up a line and aour poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
logical conclusion one could make based on the poem's *apparent*
nonexistence and your hesitance to reveal the source material on which
your charges of plagiarism had been based.
Now, of course, it turns out that you hadn't any source material, but
were basing your charges on hearsay evidence alone.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
The fact that you trust your source, doesn't automatically themI never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
"trusted" on a universal basis. And, since you refuse to identify your
"trusted source," one has absolutely no reason to believe that they
exist (much less to trust them).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
Since you have accused NancyGene of plagiarism, I should think that yourPost by NancyGene
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
I haven't commented on the pdfs you posted, nor looked at them. When IPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
George Dance, you can look at the pdfs that we posted, which include thethe next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
examination of the resources *available to her* would be crucial to your
case.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
The books in question were the "Collected Poems" of Mr. Creeley.Post by NancyGene
If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
There's no reason to "doubt the authenticity" of the pdfs on the sites.If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
"Collected" means that it is as complete a collection as possible. If
Mr. Creeley's "Days Pile Up" poem is not included in his Collected
Poems, it would have to be both unpublished and so generally unknown as
to have escaped the attention of the collection's editors.
In which case, the odds of NancyGene having been aware of it are little
to none.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
The second option of posting the first four lines initially came fromPost by NancyGene
and you well
know that.
No, I know MMP gave me a second option, to post "four lines", afterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Neither we nor Michael asked you to post the entire poem,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
and you well
know that.
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
NancyGene. I noted that, as well, the first time that I repeated it.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
But, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
IOW, you have finally figured out that the odds of Creeley's poemBut, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
bearing any resemblance to NancyGene's (apart from a handful of words in
the opening line are also few to none.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Now you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
You should know better than to trust any source without proof whenNow you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
Post by NancyGene
Sure; I told you I trusted that source. Though, after you decided toPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Yet you trusted your "source" without proof?HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
leveling a serious accusation against a fellow writer, George.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Of course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
Regardless of how implicitly you trust your wife, daughter, or fellowOf course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
retired book packager, you should never make serious accusations against
anyone without first having obtained proof.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
Again, *Collected* poems generally denotes *complete.*Post by NancyGene
The poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
No, NastyGoon. All your research (assuming it's accurate, since IThe poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
Which would be a proven lie: seeing how NancyGene and I would have been\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
Post by NancyGene
volume of Creeley poetry
No, NastyGoon; that is not something that you proved. You didn't checkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
The proof is that the poem does not seem to exist, is not listed in anyPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
volume of Creeley poetry
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
proven correct, we would necessarily be *more* reliable than your
"trusted source."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
IOW: The second line bore no similarity to NancyGene's.I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack".
LOL!Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack".
That's what I've been saying about you for years!
I, OTOH, have been involved in many *friendly* arguments with PJR and
others, wherein they disagreed with my position, facts, etc. I never
accused them of personally attacking me.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
What colors your statements is your perception that your accusation wasI do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
a "Tit" for some "Tat" (some charge of plagiarism we had supposedly made
about you in the past) that you mentioned in your previous post (to me)
in this thread.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
If a poem doesn't exist in a poet's "Collected Poems" volume, theThat's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
logical thing to conclude is that someone (whether intentionally or
through faulty memory) made it up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Seriously??? Do you really think NancyGene is arguing that angels havePost by NancyGene
It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Now you're making up more strawmen to attack.It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
been known to descend to earth with the express purpose of researching
poetry for you?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
You seem to be wheedling for a promise that we will not do soPost by NancyGene
Both you and MMP. All you've claimed is that I forged the title and onePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Someone seemingly did. Who was that?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line or the poem ISince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
beforehand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
picked up from your "collegue" MMP) that those who disagree with you are
jealous of you. As I've told you before, it makes you sound like a
narcissist.
Your jealously of, and corresponding animosity toward, NancyGene hasPost by NancyGene
BTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
I think you should get over your bad habit (which you've apparentlyBTW, you should try to get over your jealousy and fear of us. It's not
good for your well-being.
picked up from your "collegue" MMP) that those who disagree with you are
jealous of you. As I've told you before, it makes you sound like a
narcissist.
been evident since shortly after she joined AAPC. You have continually
launched new attack threads against her, or attacked her in existing
discussions in which she wasn't a participant. Even after I pointed out
that she was abstaining from the discussions, you proceeded to continue
with your attacks.
For the moment, I shall similarly abstain from telling you how your
posts make you appear -- as I intend to continue addressing you in a
civil a manner as possible.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 18:57:08 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
AAPC is a ghost town, so I doubt that some "lurker" contacted you after
reading my post.
I also doubt that anyone other than your closest family members would
feign any interest in your petty little Usenet wars.
logical conclusion one could make based on the poem's *apparent*
nonexistence and your hesitance to reveal the source material on which
your charges of plagiarism had been based.
Now, of course, it turns out that you hadn't any source material, but
were basing your charges on hearsay evidence alone.
"trusted" on a universal basis. And, since you refuse to identify your
"trusted source," one has absolutely no reason to believe that they
exist (much less to trust them).
examination of the resources *available to her* would be crucial to your
case.
"Collected" means that it is as complete a collection as possible. If
Mr. Creeley's "Days Pile Up" poem is not included in his Collected
Poems, it would have to be both unpublished and so generally unknown as
to have escaped the attention of the collection's editors.
In which case, the odds of NancyGene having been aware of it are little
to none.
NancyGene. I noted that, as well, the first time that I repeated it.
bearing any resemblance to NancyGene's (apart from a handful of words in
the opening line are also few to none.
leveling a serious accusation against a fellow writer, George.
retired book packager, you should never make serious accusations against
anyone without first having obtained proof.
Fair enough.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
They would seem to be the most likely candidates.Post by NancyGene
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
NastyGoon, why are you imagining that my "wife or daughter" are thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
It's more than you did.Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
George Dance, you are using extraordinary explanations for somethingFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
that should be quite simple. Someone (presumably your wife or daughter)
sent you a line
"trusted source" I asked. You're getting as bad as MMP ("HarryLiar" as I
call his new sock) in the way you leap to conclusions. You can do better
than that.
AAPC is a ghost town, so I doubt that some "lurker" contacted you after
reading my post.
I also doubt that anyone other than your closest family members would
feign any interest in your petty little Usenet wars.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
No one accused you of forgery, George. Forgery was just the only, after Michael praised our poem, that they said was from
Post by NancyGene
a poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
No, NastyGoon. As I already told you, even though I asked a trusteda poem by Robert Creeley called "The Days Pile Up." You accepted that
was true without checking it out yourself
source and got that information, I decided to check it out myself by
buying a copy of the book. You are getting to be as bad a liar as your
slurpmonkey, MMP or
, compared that one line with
Post by NancyGene
our poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
No, that was your only "explanation" - that I made up a line and aour poem, and decided that we had plagiarized Robert Creeley.
Alternate
explanation: you made up the line.
title, and attributed it to Creeley. That's what you "assumed" and what
your slurpmonkey "concluded." You both accused me of writing something
and falsely attributing it to Creeley; which in literary circles is
called "forgery."
logical conclusion one could make based on the poem's *apparent*
nonexistence and your hesitance to reveal the source material on which
your charges of plagiarism had been based.
Now, of course, it turns out that you hadn't any source material, but
were basing your charges on hearsay evidence alone.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
The fact that you trust your source, doesn't automatically themI never claimed to have the book - I've told you asked a "trusted
source". And, despite your new assumption that source was not my wife or
daughter - you just made that up with no proof, no evidence, and no
reason.
"trusted" on a universal basis. And, since you refuse to identify your
"trusted source," one has absolutely no reason to believe that they
exist (much less to trust them).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
Since you have accused NancyGene of plagiarism, I should think that yourPost by NancyGene
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
I haven't commented on the pdfs you posted, nor looked at them. When IPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
George Dance, you can look at the pdfs that we posted, which include thethe next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
first page of the book and the relevant index pages.
examine the book I was told it was in, and if I find it, then I might
look at your pdfs. But not for proof, either way, since none of them are
pdfs of the book I was told the poem appeared in.
examination of the resources *available to her* would be crucial to your
case.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
The books in question were the "Collected Poems" of Mr. Creeley.Post by NancyGene
If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
There's no reason to "doubt the authenticity" of the pdfs on the sites.If you doubt the
authenticity of the pages, you can search for some of Creeley's poems
that are listed on the page.
Since none of them are books I believe the poem was in, why would I
doubt that? Why would you suggest that I might, except as a strawman?
"Collected" means that it is as complete a collection as possible. If
Mr. Creeley's "Days Pile Up" poem is not included in his Collected
Poems, it would have to be both unpublished and so generally unknown as
to have escaped the attention of the collection's editors.
In which case, the odds of NancyGene having been aware of it are little
to none.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
The second option of posting the first four lines initially came fromPost by NancyGene
and you well
know that.
No, I know MMP gave me a second option, to post "four lines", afterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Neither we nor Michael asked you to post the entire poem,Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
and you well
know that.
first demanding that I "Post the entire poem". You are lying when you
said he didn't ask me something that he clearly did ask; and a stupid
liar since you left in the backthread where he did clearly ask that.
NancyGene. I noted that, as well, the first time that I repeated it.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
But, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
IOW, you have finally figured out that the odds of Creeley's poemBut, to not let your lie divert to much attention: I won't be posting
"four lines" of it either, since given your behavior you'll just accuse
me of forging those as well. Instead, I'll just cite the book, and the
page number, and if you question that you're free to order the book and
verify it first-hand for yourself.
bearing any resemblance to NancyGene's (apart from a handful of words in
the opening line are also few to none.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Now you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
You should know better than to trust any source without proof whenNow you're just making up shit, NastyGoon. Since you have no idea who my
source is (but just made up who it was), you have no idea what my source
is able to send me. OTOH, Amazon is able send me the entire poem, so
that's who I asked for that.
Post by NancyGene
Sure; I told you I trusted that source. Though, after you decided toPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Yet you trusted your "source" without proof?HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up" (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
challenge the information, I decided to check the book myself. As I've
repeatedly told you by now.
leveling a serious accusation against a fellow writer, George.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Of course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
Regardless of how implicitly you trust your wife, daughter, or fellowOf course you would, since my source's conclusions differ from yours.
But I would label that source more reliable than either you or your
monkey.
retired book packager, you should never make serious accusations against
anyone without first having obtained proof.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
Again, *Collected* poems generally denotes *complete.*Post by NancyGene
The poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
No, NastyGoon. All your research (assuming it's accurate, since IThe poem does not seem to exist as it is not in any
published volume of Creeley's poems.
haven't checked it and you three are unreliable) has proved is that
Creeley's poem is not in the Berkeley editions of Creeley's work. Since
that's all you checked, that's all your research can prove.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
\>>>>> Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it
is safe
Post by NancyGene
volume of Creeley poetry
No, NastyGoon; that is not something that you proved. You didn't checkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
The proof is that the poem does not seem to exist, is not listed in anyPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
volume of Creeley poetry
every volume of Creeley's poetry (only the Berkeley editions of the
Selected and Collected Poems), so all you've proved (assuming your
claims are accurate) is that the poem is not in those three books.
, you would not name the book that it was
I already told you I'll give you the name of the book after I've
received my copy. I've also explained why I'm holding back: I'd like to
look at it myself first. Then, if it's there, I'll post the name of the
book and the page number; if it isn't, I'll post that and admit that my
source is no more reliable than you or MMP.
Post by HarryLime
Which would be a proven lie: seeing how NancyGene and I would have been
proven correct, we would necessarily be *more* reliable than your
"trusted source."
Still, hopefully with these discussions about the poem a complete copyWhich would be a proven lie: seeing how NancyGene and I would have been
proven correct, we would necessarily be *more* reliable than your
"trusted source."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
I probably could - my source gave it to me, but I didn't write it down
and would have to go back and ask again. But that's irrelevant, as no
one has been discussing the second lines of the two poems. There's no
reason to post any more lines of Creeley's poem, including L2.
will eventually emerge online so we can all read and enjoy it.
Again, I'm looking forward to finally seeing the Robert Creeley poem.
Post by HarryLime
That's what I've been saying about you for years!
I, OTOH, have been involved in many *friendly* arguments with PJR and
others, wherein they disagreed with my position, facts, etc. I never
accused them of personally attacking me.
PJR never told you to "get cancer and die?"Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack".
LOL!Like MMP, you have a bad habit of calling any disagreement with you an
"attack".
That's what I've been saying about you for years!
I, OTOH, have been involved in many *friendly* arguments with PJR and
others, wherein they disagreed with my position, facts, etc. I never
accused them of personally attacking me.
Post by HarryLime
a "Tit" for some "Tat" (some charge of plagiarism we had supposedly made
about you in the past) that you mentioned in your previous post (to me)
in this thread.
Definitely not.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
What colors your statements is your perception that your accusation wasI do consider you both trolls that can't be trusted, but that
hasn't colored anything I've said about the points in question: my
alleged "accusation of plagiarism" and your counter-accusation of
forgery.
a "Tit" for some "Tat" (some charge of plagiarism we had supposedly made
about you in the past) that you mentioned in your previous post (to me)
in this thread.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
That's not logical at all. I can understand why you'd like to conclude
that Creeley's "poem" was made up by me (or by my wife or daughter), but
you certainly have not proved that in any logical way.
Post by HarryLime
If a poem doesn't exist in a poet's "Collected Poems" volume, the
logical thing to conclude is that someone (whether intentionally or
through faulty memory) made it up.
Or more likely, Robert Creeley decided not to include that poem in hisIf a poem doesn't exist in a poet's "Collected Poems" volume, the
logical thing to conclude is that someone (whether intentionally or
through faulty memory) made it up.
later collection for whatever reason.
Post by HarryLime
been known to descend to earth with the express purpose of researching
poetry for you?
Pendragon, you believe in Muses and little fairy men already, why notPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Seriously??? Do you really think NancyGene is arguing that angels havePost by NancyGene
It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
Now you're making up more strawmen to attack.It was not sent to you magically, the angels did not float down
one line to you, and the book did not fall open to the poem.
been known to descend to earth with the express purpose of researching
poetry for you?
angels?
Post by HarryLime
At this point it's definitely best to wait for the Robert Creeley poetryPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
Post by NancyGene
Both you and MMP. All you've claimed is that I forged the title and onePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Someone seemingly did. Who was that?Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line or the poem ISince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
line, but then again, it's all I've posted so far - it I posted the
complete poem, or any more lines, you're likely to accuse me of forging
that as well.
book the poem is included in to discuss this.
I'm looking forward to reading this poem.
😏
HarryLime
2025-02-13 17:14:37 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
AFAICS you charge of plagiarism hinges on the following:Post by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely on
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did your Donkey plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
strongly implies that you are familiar with Mr. Creeley's poem:
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
At best, you have admitted that you only know about the poem from
hearsay, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory, and accused
NancyGene of having copied it.
Do you really think that's any better than if you had actually forged
it?
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 18:24:49 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
No, I had read about Robert Creeley in Jack Kerouac biographies but asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onPost by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
far as I can tell I haven't read any of his poetry until recently.
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Yes, I didn't use newspapers in my poem at all.He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
I'll just wait until Georgia Dance receives the Robert Creeley poetry
book and see how it goes from there.
Post by HarryLime
Good plan.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Post by HarryLime
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initial
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Granted, that's sure one elusive work of poetry, so far.Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initial
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Post by HarryLime
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
George Dance didn't actually accuse Nancy Gene, he just pointed out theIt turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
similarities with the Robert Creeley line.
Post by HarryLime
I noticed that, "newspapers" is definitely a key word here.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Post by HarryLime
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Again, I'm looking forward to seeing more details on the Robert CreeleyPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
poem, in the near future.
HarryLime
2025-02-13 19:13:23 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
far as I can tell I haven't read any of his poetry until recently.
What makes you think that NancyGene has?Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
No, I had read about Robert Creeley in Jack Kerouac biographies but asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onPost by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
far as I can tell I haven't read any of his poetry until recently.
Post by W.Dockery
Are the ghosts of Abbott and Costello ghost writing your posts?Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Yes, I didn't use newspapers in my poem at all.He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by W.Dockery
I'll just wait until Georgia Dance receives the Robert Creeley poetry
book and see how it goes from there.
Is Georgia Dance a relative of George's? Or has George recently had hisI'll just wait until Georgia Dance receives the Robert Creeley poetry
book and see how it goes from there.
gender realigned?
Post by W.Dockery
similarities with the Robert Creeley line.
I call Donkeyshit.Post by HarryLime
Good plan.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Post by HarryLime
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initial
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Granted, that's sure one elusive work of poetry, so far.Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initial
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Post by HarryLime
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
George Dance didn't actually accuse Nancy Gene, he just pointed out theIt turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
similarities with the Robert Creeley line.
George made his accusation contingent upon whether NancyGene had
credited Creeley for her original work.
Post by W.Dockery
How profound, Wizard!Post by HarryLime
I noticed that, "newspapers" is definitely a key word here.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Post by W.Dockery
poem, in the near future.
--Post by HarryLime
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Again, I'm looking forward to seeing more details on the Robert CreeleyPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
poem, in the near future.
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 21:27:11 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Actually, George Dance didn't exactly make a plagiarism accusation, hePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
Post by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
simply pointed out that the first lines of both Nancy Gene and Robert
Creeley are very similar.
He did state "some people" might call it plagiarism, or words to that
effect.
Post by HarryLime
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely on
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
Right, as far as we know just two similar opening lines.1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely on
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
Post by HarryLime
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
I for one am looking forward to reading the Robert Creeley poem2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
eventually.
Post by HarryLime
Yes, I see a copy of the Robert Creeley book with the poem is in aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
library near me, or rather about 30 miles away.
I might go to the library and read the Robert Creeley poetry for my own
personal enjoyment, but I'll not reveal the title or the contents until
George Dance is ready to report on his findings.
For poetry lovers it's not that much, enjoyable, in fact.
We'll just have to wait and see about that
Similar first line, actually.
Post by HarryLime
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
I've read you say the same about yourself, Pendragon.But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by HarryLime
I'm sure George Dance will, when the time is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Post by HarryLime
Fair enough, looking forward to reading about your findings.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Post by HarryLime
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'll
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The Robert Creeley book is available in 916 libraries around the world,If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'll
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
so after George Dance posts his findings and the title is made
available, any of us can check out the poetry book from their local
library through the interlibrary loan program.
Go to the World Cat website for full details.
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Yes, my Shattered poem, written in 1976, published in 1977.The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
(Recently reposted on this newsgroup)
No, in 1976 I hadn't read any poetry yet by Robert Creeley.
"The seconds have piled up at the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past..."
Mine also touches on memory, "lost here in some other guy's past."
That's a little drastic don't you think?
😏
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
We're all familiar with Robert Creeley's poetry now.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
Post by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Key words" opening line.""The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Key words "opening line."
George Dance write that some people would call it that, probably meaning
Nancy Gene herself.
Post by HarryLime
*before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Although Robert Creeley certainly had the right to omit certain poems if*before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible,"
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible,"
he wanted to, and possibly did.
Post by HarryLime
I don't think any actual accusations have been made yet.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Post by HarryLime
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
And did so before all the evidence came in.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me of
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longYet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me of
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
HarryLime
2025-02-13 23:30:27 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
simply pointed out that the first lines of both Nancy Gene and Robert
Creeley are very similar.
He did state "some people" might call it plagiarism, or words to that
effect.
Again, he specified that such a charge was contingent upon whetherPost by HarryLime
Actually, George Dance didn't exactly make a plagiarism accusation, hePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
Post by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
simply pointed out that the first lines of both Nancy Gene and Robert
Creeley are very similar.
He did state "some people" might call it plagiarism, or words to that
effect.
NancyGene had credited Creeley for the line. Since the line was
original, she obviously did not credit anyone for it. And since she
hadn't credited anyone for it, George's contingency isn't met --
therefore making NancyGene (according to George) a plagiarist.
Post by W.Dockery
eventually.
library near me, or rather about 30 miles away.
I might go to the library and read the Robert Creeley poetry for my own
personal enjoyment, but I'll not reveal the title or the contents until
George Dance is ready to report on his findings.
For poetry lovers it's not that much, enjoyable, in fact.
As a poetry lover, I buy poetry books based on my wanting to read poetryPost by HarryLime
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely on
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
Right, as far as we know just two similar opening lines.1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely on
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
Post by HarryLime
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
I for one am looking forward to reading the Robert Creeley poem2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
eventually.
Post by HarryLime
Yes, I see a copy of the Robert Creeley book with the poem is in aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
library near me, or rather about 30 miles away.
I might go to the library and read the Robert Creeley poetry for my own
personal enjoyment, but I'll not reveal the title or the contents until
George Dance is ready to report on his findings.
For poetry lovers it's not that much, enjoyable, in fact.
by an author who I love other poems by. I don't buy them to try to
prove an accusation based on the flimsiest shreds of evidence.
Not that much, in my opinion. The different subject matter is far more
significant than the 4 matching words.
Post by W.Dockery
LOL! I know you have. George Dance has been spewing it over AAPC forPost by HarryLime
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
I've read you say the same about yourself, Pendragon.But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
years.
But George has quoting me out of context. I had said that doing
anything to win an argument was George's M.O.
George considered that a "Tat" and has been "Titting" it ever since.
Post by W.Dockery
so after George Dance posts his findings and the title is made
available, any of us can check out the poetry book from their local
library through the interlibrary loan program.
Go to the World Cat website for full details.
(Recently reposted on this newsgroup)
No, in 1976 I hadn't read any poetry yet by Robert Creeley.
Have you asked NancyGene whether she has read any Creeley poetry?Post by HarryLime
I'm sure George Dance will, when the time is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Post by HarryLime
Fair enough, looking forward to reading about your findings.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
Post by HarryLime
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'll
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The Robert Creeley book is available in 916 libraries around the world,If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'll
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
so after George Dance posts his findings and the title is made
available, any of us can check out the poetry book from their local
library through the interlibrary loan program.
Go to the World Cat website for full details.
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Yes, my Shattered poem, written in 1976, published in 1977.The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
(Recently reposted on this newsgroup)
No, in 1976 I hadn't read any poetry yet by Robert Creeley.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up at the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past..."
Mine also touches on memory, "lost here in some other guy's past."
That's a little drastic don't you think?
Not really. I gave George the benefit of the doubt until after he"The seconds have piled up at the floor, lost here in some other guy's
past..."
Mine also touches on memory, "lost here in some other guy's past."
That's a little drastic don't you think?
continually refused to name the book it appeared in, provide a link to
the poem, repost the first 4 lines, or reveal the identity of the "Deep
Throat" style informant who provided him with the line he claims to be
quoting.
Post by W.Dockery
That's debatable. I've read a few samples... and have already forgottenPost by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
We're all familiar with Robert Creeley's poetry now.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
them.
Post by W.Dockery
How many fairytales open with "Once upon a time"? Many poems open byPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
Key words" opening line.""The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
presenting the primary metaphor the rest of the poem will be backing
up/elaborating on.
Post by W.Dockery
Key words "opening line."
George Dance write that some people would call it that, probably meaning
Nancy Gene herself.
I'm sure.Key words "opening line."
George Dance write that some people would call it that, probably meaning
Nancy Gene herself.
But again, George's accusation (whether by him or by "some people")
remains contingent upon a credit that he knows would not be there.
Post by W.Dockery
he wanted to, and possibly did.
Key word: possibly.Post by HarryLime
*before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Although Robert Creeley certainly had the right to omit certain poems if*before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible,"
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible,"
he wanted to, and possibly did.
Post by W.Dockery
I do.Post by HarryLime
I don't think any actual accusations have been made yet.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Post by W.Dockery
Had George been more forthcoming with his evidence, I would not havePost by HarryLime
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
And did so before all the evidence came in.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me of
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longYet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me of
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
Post by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
made that conclusion.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 22:13:24 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did your Donkey plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
interacted with you here.
At best, you have admitted that you only know about the poem from
hearsay, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory, and accused
NancyGene of having copied it.
Do you really think that's any better than if you had actually forged
it?
--
Probably, since you seem to have no problem with forgery and identityPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onPost by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did your Donkey plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
At best, you have admitted that you only know about the poem from
hearsay, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory, and accused
NancyGene of having copied it.
Do you really think that's any better than if you had actually forged
it?
--
theft when it's happening to your enemies, Pendragon.
Just saying.
HarryLime
2025-02-14 00:11:35 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
theft when it's happening to your enemies, Pendragon.
Just saying.
Hey Drama Queen! Your royal petticoats are showing.Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did your Donkey plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
interacted with you here.
At best, you have admitted that you only know about the poem from
hearsay, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory, and accused
NancyGene of having copied it.
Do you really think that's any better than if you had actually forged
it?
--
Probably, since you seem to have no problem with forgery and identityPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onPost by HarryLime
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of thePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the poem in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't mean that
the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things). Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
Did your Donkey plagiarize Creeley's poem as well?
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
You had posted an obscure poem by Leonard Cohen, without identifying it
(asking only something to the effect of "What do you think of this
poem?"). In context of the discussion in which it appeared; one of the
members had just negatively critiqued one of your poems, and you made it
seem as if the Cohen poem was being offered as another of your original
works.
Whether you stole it or not is moot, as you didn't specifically
attribute it to your hand.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
Are either of these incidents what you are referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line poem I cited, youSince you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
At best, you have admitted that you only know about the poem from
hearsay, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory, and accused
NancyGene of having copied it.
Do you really think that's any better than if you had actually forged
it?
--
theft when it's happening to your enemies, Pendragon.
Just saying.
First how does George's opinion on the evils of forger vs the evils
false accusation hinge upon (what you perceive to be) my own?
Second, no one stole your identity, Donkey.
The use of a fake Will Dockery sock (especially with names like "Will
Donkey") for the purposes of parody and satire are *not* examples of
identity theft.
Identity theft is when someone steals your personal information and uses
it to open various credit accounts, borrowing money, purchasing
expensive online items, etc., and having the bills charged to you.
Having an anthropomorphic Donkey sing "The call me Old Will Donkey, and
they say that I'm well fed..." is not identity theft by any stretch of
the imagination.
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-13 22:19:44 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claimPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Post by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's noEven if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
Post by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. YouThe most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
Post by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence wasHe might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
snip
Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting aI have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
No, I'm referring to your accusation, in this thread, that I wrote
something and tried to pass it off as Robert Creeley's work.
Post by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forgingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you. Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
HarryLime
2025-02-14 01:29:04 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Why are you telling me what you think NancyGene said via an out ofPost by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claimPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
context paraphrase?
I told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact). The similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
In my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
And that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Wrong. The book will not provide any answers. It may or may notPost by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's noEven if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matterPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until afterPost by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
Let NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines thatPost by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. YouThe most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
What I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Earth to George! Pickles claimed that he deflowered two 14-year oldPost by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments ofPost by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence wasHe might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike thePost by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
the book, which is a completely different thing.
I'm only trying to piece together the tiny bits of supposed truth thatPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
The last thing I want is another thread by you.Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
So cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
Thank you.Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting aI have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
That is not what I said, George. I said that based on my past (andPost by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forgingPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Just what did you say, George?I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
A copy needn't be exact, George.Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
Again, all of them attempts to make sense out of what little you didThat's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
tell us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I don't know what you're talking about, George? You are saying thatIsn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
Again, I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt -- contingentI think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
--
NancyGene
2025-02-14 14:23:11 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
Post by HarryLime
context paraphrase?
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excusesPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Why are you telling me what you think NancyGene said via an out ofcan go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
context paraphrase?
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Post by HarryLime
I told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
Also, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that areI told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
Post by HarryLime
The similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enoughThe similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
Post by HarryLime
In my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," butIn my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Post by HarryLime
And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
influenced by his.
Post by HarryLime
It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Post by HarryLime
And that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous ofAnd that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
the praise given to more talented writers.
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he haveThey came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
to eat his words.
Post by HarryLime
We speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rarePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
Post by HarryLime
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Wrong. The book will not provide any answers. It may or may notSince we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Post by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles used to do, with elaborate explanations forPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Post by HarryLime
We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
Post by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Post by HarryLime
Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Highly suspicious and needlessly obtuse.Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Post by HarryLime
However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
We think you are being too generous to Mr. Dance, but we have access toHowever, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
Post by HarryLime
According to the indices of the books, the first line starting withPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. ThePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
Post by HarryLime
Let NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
Newspapers stack or pile. However, our poem was inspired byLet NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
Post by HarryLime
What I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
And that is true. How many times does a person want to be reminded ofWhat I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
Post by HarryLime
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
He also went to dinner with Elie Wiesel and Michael Crichton, aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Earth to George! Pickles claimed that he deflowered two 14-year oldPost by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
Post by HarryLime
So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Damn straight!So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterdays" in our poem is a concept.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Post by HarryLime
Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Absolutely.Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Post by HarryLime
Another "gotcha" moment!Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Something they can relate to, to think about, to return to.A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Post by HarryLime
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
That would be a good idea, instead of entangling himself in morePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the book, which is a completely different thing.
I'm only trying to piece together the tiny bits of supposed truth thatPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
Post by HarryLime
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
There was the Pink Floyd song that Mr. Dance chopped up and presented asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
The last thing I want is another thread by you.Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
Post by HarryLime
So cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Pink Floyd's "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - The George Dance linkSo cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
is:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
Our uncovering of the theft is at:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Post by HarryLime
And we provided enough proof to make our case.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
Post by HarryLime
Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
"The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - Pure theft.Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
Post by HarryLime
From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
George Dance is sensitive when caught in his own web.From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
Post by HarryLime
Someone did.Post by HarryLime
Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
We don't.Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
Post by HarryLime
We don't have that long of an exposure to George Dance's postings, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
Post by HarryLime
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
And when he is wrong, he attacks the person who is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
That is not what I said, George. I said that based on my past (andYou concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
Post by HarryLime
George Dance said that his source told him (by some method) the firstPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Just what did you say, George?I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
Post by HarryLime
NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
George Dance is feeling the heat in Canada.NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
Post by HarryLime
Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
It would have saved what little "face" George Dance has.Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
Post by HarryLime
If we were going to paraphrase our line, we would have changed the wordsPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
A copy needn't be exact, George.Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
Post by HarryLime
tell us.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
We assume that George Dance will examine, word by word, page by page,Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
Again, all of them attempts to make sense out of what little you didThat's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
tell us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I don't know what you're talking about, George? You are saying thatIsn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
Again, I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt -- contingentI think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
--
HarryLime
2025-02-14 15:31:50 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Thanks, NancyGene.Post by HarryLime
Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
Post by HarryLime
context paraphrase?
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excusesPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Why are you telling me what you think NancyGene said via an out ofcan go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
context paraphrase?
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Post by HarryLime
I told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
Also, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that areI told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
Post by HarryLime
The similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enoughThe similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
Post by HarryLime
In my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," butIn my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Yes, "layered" is a more accurate word. My Muse, however, insists on
"piled" because She wants the alliterative plosives of "piled" and
"paint." She tends to have a fetish for alliteration. "Piled," in this
case, is used to compare the centuries layers of paint that have been
piled on top of each other countless times.
Post by NancyGene
influenced by his.
the praise given to more talented writers.
to eat his words.
I doubt it. George has that lean and hungry look.Post by HarryLime
And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
influenced by his.
Post by HarryLime
It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Post by HarryLime
And that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous ofAnd that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
the praise given to more talented writers.
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he haveThey came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
to eat his words.
Post by NancyGene
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
It isn't that I'm generous to a fault or anything. I just can't imaginePost by HarryLime
We speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rarePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
Post by HarryLime
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Wrong. The book will not provide any answers. It may or may notSince we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Post by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles used to do, with elaborate explanations forPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Post by HarryLime
We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
Post by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Post by HarryLime
Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Highly suspicious and needlessly obtuse.Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Post by HarryLime
However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
We think you are being too generous to Mr. Dance, but we have access toHowever, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism
based on a non-existent poem. I think that George acted under the
belief that the line in question exists.
Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.
I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.
Post by NancyGene
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
Once again, George Dance falls back on his old high school debating teamPost by HarryLime
According to the indices of the books, the first line starting withPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. ThePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.
Post by NancyGene
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
Didn't he also discover a new species of dinosaur?Post by HarryLime
Let NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
Newspapers stack or pile. However, our poem was inspired byLet NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
Post by HarryLime
What I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
And that is true. How many times does a person want to be reminded ofWhat I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
Post by HarryLime
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
He also went to dinner with Elie Wiesel and Michael Crichton, aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Earth to George! Pickles claimed that he deflowered two 14-year oldPost by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
Post by NancyGene
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
LOL! I'd forgotten that one.Post by HarryLime
So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Damn straight!So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterdays" in our poem is a concept.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Post by HarryLime
Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Absolutely.Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Post by HarryLime
Another "gotcha" moment!Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Something they can relate to, to think about, to return to.A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Post by HarryLime
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
That would be a good idea, instead of entangling himself in morePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the book, which is a completely different thing.
I'm only trying to piece together the tiny bits of supposed truth thatPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
Post by HarryLime
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
There was the Pink Floyd song that Mr. Dance chopped up and presented asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
The last thing I want is another thread by you.Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
George certainly does have a problem with crediting the original
authors.
Post by NancyGene
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
Apparently you've had exposure enough, as you've described George to aPost by HarryLime
So cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Pink Floyd's "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - The George Dance linkSo cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Post by HarryLime
And we provided enough proof to make our case.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
Post by HarryLime
Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
"The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - Pure theft.Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
Post by HarryLime
From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
George Dance is sensitive when caught in his own web.From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
Post by HarryLime
Someone did.Post by HarryLime
Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
We don't.Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
Post by HarryLime
We don't have that long of an exposure to George Dance's postings, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
T.
Post by NancyGene
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
LOL! I'm guessing that he'll come to the conclusion that the elusivePost by HarryLime
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
And when he is wrong, he attacks the person who is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
That is not what I said, George. I said that based on my past (andYou concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
Post by HarryLime
George Dance said that his source told him (by some method) the firstPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Just what did you say, George?I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
Post by HarryLime
NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
George Dance is feeling the heat in Canada.NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
Post by HarryLime
Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
It would have saved what little "face" George Dance has.Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
Post by HarryLime
If we were going to paraphrase our line, we would have changed the wordsPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
A copy needn't be exact, George.Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
Post by HarryLime
tell us.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
We assume that George Dance will examine, word by word, page by page,Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
Again, all of them attempts to make sense out of what little you didThat's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
tell us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I don't know what you're talking about, George? You are saying thatIsn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
Again, I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt -- contingentI think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
line of poetry was written be someone else (unknown) and mistakenly
attributed to Creeley.
--
NancyGene
2025-02-14 16:40:15 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Yes, "layered" is a more accurate word. My Muse, however, insists on
"piled" because She wants the alliterative plosives of "piled" and
"paint." She tends to have a fetish for alliteration. "Piled," in this
case, is used to compare the centuries layers of paint that have been
piled on top of each other countless times.
However, "piled" implies horizontal, and paint is usually appliedPost by NancyGene
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Thanks, NancyGene.Post by HarryLime
Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
Post by HarryLime
context paraphrase?
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excusesPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Why are you telling me what you think NancyGene said via an out ofcan go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
context paraphrase?
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Post by HarryLime
I told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
Also, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that areI told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
Post by HarryLime
The similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enoughThe similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
Post by HarryLime
In my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," butIn my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Yes, "layered" is a more accurate word. My Muse, however, insists on
"piled" because She wants the alliterative plosives of "piled" and
"paint." She tends to have a fetish for alliteration. "Piled," in this
case, is used to compare the centuries layers of paint that have been
piled on top of each other countless times.
vertically. I would not say that I was removing piles of paint from
frescos.
Post by HarryLime
That's from always being last at the dinner table.Post by NancyGene
influenced by his.
the praise given to more talented writers.
to eat his words.
I doubt it. George has that lean and hungry look.Post by HarryLime
And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
influenced by his.
Post by HarryLime
It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Post by HarryLime
And that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous ofAnd that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
the praise given to more talented writers.
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he haveThey came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
to eat his words.
Post by HarryLime
anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism
based on a non-existent poem. I think that George acted under the
belief that the line in question exists.
You see that George Dance is trying to do a dance around what hePost by NancyGene
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
It isn't that I'm generous to a fault or anything. I just can't imaginePost by HarryLime
We speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rarePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
Post by HarryLime
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Wrong. The book will not provide any answers. It may or may notSince we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Post by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles used to do, with elaborate explanations forPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Post by HarryLime
We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
Post by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Post by HarryLime
Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Highly suspicious and needlessly obtuse.Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Post by HarryLime
However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
We think you are being too generous to Mr. Dance, but we have access toHowever, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism
based on a non-existent poem. I think that George acted under the
belief that the line in question exists.
actually posted. Who would be so malicious as to feed George Dance a
false quote?
Post by HarryLime
Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.
I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.
Is "not quite" like "a bit" or "just a bit?"Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.
I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.
Post by HarryLime
tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.
"He can't handle the truth!"Post by NancyGene
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
Once again, George Dance falls back on his old high school debating teamPost by HarryLime
According to the indices of the books, the first line starting withPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. ThePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.
Post by HarryLime
He wouldn't have known a chicken bone from a dinosaur keister. He wasPost by NancyGene
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
Didn't he also discover a new species of dinosaur?Post by HarryLime
Let NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
Newspapers stack or pile. However, our poem was inspired byLet NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
Post by HarryLime
What I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
And that is true. How many times does a person want to be reminded ofWhat I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
Post by HarryLime
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
He also went to dinner with Elie Wiesel and Michael Crichton, aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Earth to George! Pickles claimed that he deflowered two 14-year oldPost by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
soundly laughed at and ignored by everyone. Crazy hanger-on.
Post by HarryLime
Understandable, as there were so many instances of this.Post by NancyGene
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
LOL! I'd forgotten that one.Post by HarryLime
So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Damn straight!So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterdays" in our poem is a concept.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Post by HarryLime
Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Absolutely.Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Post by HarryLime
Another "gotcha" moment!Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Something they can relate to, to think about, to return to.A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Post by HarryLime
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
That would be a good idea, instead of entangling himself in morePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the book, which is a completely different thing.
I'm only trying to piece together the tiny bits of supposed truth thatPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
Post by HarryLime
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
There was the Pink Floyd song that Mr. Dance chopped up and presented asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
The last thing I want is another thread by you.Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
George Dance hasn't internalized the rule about keeping the attribution
with the poem.
Post by HarryLime
T.
It's true that we have had enough.Post by NancyGene
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
Apparently you've had exposure enough, as you've described George to aPost by HarryLime
So cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Pink Floyd's "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - The George Dance linkSo cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Post by HarryLime
And we provided enough proof to make our case.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
Post by HarryLime
Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
"The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - Pure theft.Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
Post by HarryLime
From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
George Dance is sensitive when caught in his own web.From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
Post by HarryLime
Someone did.Post by HarryLime
Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
We don't.Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
Post by HarryLime
We don't have that long of an exposure to George Dance's postings, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
T.
Post by HarryLime
line of poetry was written be someone else (unknown) and mistakenly
attributed to Creeley.
Perhaps he mistook it for Mr. Dockery's insightful poem, written whenPost by NancyGene
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
LOL! I'm guessing that he'll come to the conclusion that the elusivePost by HarryLime
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
And when he is wrong, he attacks the person who is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
That is not what I said, George. I said that based on my past (andYou concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
Post by HarryLime
George Dance said that his source told him (by some method) the firstPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Just what did you say, George?I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
Post by HarryLime
NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
George Dance is feeling the heat in Canada.NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
Post by HarryLime
Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
It would have saved what little "face" George Dance has.Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
Post by HarryLime
If we were going to paraphrase our line, we would have changed the wordsPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
A copy needn't be exact, George.Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
Post by HarryLime
tell us.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
We assume that George Dance will examine, word by word, page by page,Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
Again, all of them attempts to make sense out of what little you didThat's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
tell us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I don't know what you're talking about, George? You are saying thatIsn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
Again, I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt -- contingentI think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
line of poetry was written be someone else (unknown) and mistakenly
attributed to Creeley.
Dockery was a 22 year old junior in high school?
--
HarryLime
2025-02-14 17:08:35 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by NancyGene
vertically. I would not say that I was removing piles of paint from
frescos.
Agreed. However, I would say that I was removing (layers of) paint thatPost by HarryLime
Yes, "layered" is a more accurate word. My Muse, however, insists on
"piled" because She wants the alliterative plosives of "piled" and
"paint." She tends to have a fetish for alliteration. "Piled," in this
case, is used to compare the centuries layers of paint that have been
piled on top of each other countless times.
However, "piled" implies horizontal, and paint is usually appliedPost by NancyGene
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Thanks, NancyGene.Post by HarryLime
Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
1) the alleged similarity between the two poems (which, based solely onFortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
the opening line of Creeley's poem that you apparently "quoted" from
your "trustworthy source's" memory), and
2) the probability of NancyGene's having been aware of, and had access
to.
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally. So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
As for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
Post by HarryLime
context paraphrase?
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excusesPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
can go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
Why are you telling me what you think NancyGene said via an out ofcan go on to discuss (2) after we've seen whether the lines I quoted
were written by Robert Creeley, or were made up by me (or perhaps by my
wife or daughter). But of course that will all be speculative, if it
happens.
context paraphrase?
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Post by HarryLime
I told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
Also, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that areI told you that AFAICS your plagiarism charge hinges on two points --
neither of which you have established.
Ad per item 1) there is a superficial similarity between the two lines
(4 duplicate words, to be exact).
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
Post by HarryLime
The similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enoughThe similes in each compare different
things to piled up newspapers. "Things are really piling up on me," is
a very common phrase, and one that has countless variations. It's not
unusual for commonly used expressions to turn up in different people's
poetry.
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
Post by HarryLime
In my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," butIn my poem, "Faded," I mention "A piled century of caking paint." In
"Where the Wild Fern Grows," I say "Shall be dry as the centuries of
dust/Piled high o'er your head."
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Yes, "layered" is a more accurate word. My Muse, however, insists on
"piled" because She wants the alliterative plosives of "piled" and
"paint." She tends to have a fetish for alliteration. "Piled," in this
case, is used to compare the centuries layers of paint that have been
piled on top of each other countless times.
vertically. I would not say that I was removing piles of paint from
frescos.
had been piled on frescos.
A fresh coat of paint is always placed on top of an existing coat. This
applies regardless of whether we are repainting a horizontal floor or a
vertical wall.
Post by NancyGene
actually posted. Who would be so malicious as to feed George Dance a
false quote?
My guess is that George consulted a search engine. Even AI is out toPost by HarryLime
That's from always being last at the dinner table.Post by NancyGene
influenced by his.
the praise given to more talented writers.
to eat his words.
I doubt it. George has that lean and hungry look.Post by HarryLime
And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,And I'm sure that I can find at least a half dozen more. And, guess
what?
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
influenced by his.
Post by HarryLime
It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.It's incredibly easy to randomly pluck any line from a poem, then search
the internet to find that a mildly similar line has been written by
someone else.
Post by HarryLime
And that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous ofAnd that's really what is happening here.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
the praise given to more talented writers.
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he haveThey came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
to eat his words.
Post by HarryLime
anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism
based on a non-existent poem. I think that George acted under the
belief that the line in question exists.
You see that George Dance is trying to do a dance around what hePost by NancyGene
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
It isn't that I'm generous to a fault or anything. I just can't imaginePost by HarryLime
We speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rarePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
Even if the poem does miraculously turn up in your copy of the book, I
fully doubt that it will meet either of the criteria of items 1) and 2).
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
Post by HarryLime
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Since we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
Wrong. The book will not provide any answers. It may or may notSince we're discussing one line, rather than a complete poem, there's no
reason to wait for the poem to deal with that. As for how NG could have
got access to it, any theories about that will not be answered by
anything in the book.
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Post by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles used to do, with elaborate explanations forPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
When I'm wrong, I always admit it. I have conceded several points to
PJR and others in the past.
And no. Forgery is not more serious than plagiarism.
Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Post by HarryLime
We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
Post by HarryLime
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
As I said, my interest at this point in dealing with your accusations ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
If you're attempting to show that plagiarism occurred, I'm afraid you'llPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
Once I've completed that first-hand examination, I'll give my results.Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link.
If the poem is there, or not, I'll post to that effect. I certainly
won't be posting a copyrighted poem in its entirety; you should know me
better than that.
have to. At very least, you should make a copy available to NancyGene
or me via email.
forgery. Buying you two copies of the book has nothing to do with that.
Besides, (1) I don't have either of your addresses anyway, and (2) it's
a print copy which of course I can't "email" to you.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
Post by HarryLime
Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Highly suspicious and needlessly obtuse.Even after you've finally come clean, admitted that you have never read
(nor previously heard of) the poem, and that you're waiting on the
receipt of a book you purchased before making your big reveal... your
refusal to simply tell us where we can find the poem remains suspicious.
Post by HarryLime
However, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
We think you are being too generous to Mr. Dance, but we have access toHowever, since you have said that you were at least going to reveal the
title of book the poem is in (once you've received your copy and checked
for the poem in it), I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt.
all of Mr. Creeley's books, so once Mr. Dance makes the big reveal, we
will be able to check out his claim (if he has one).
anyone being so astoundingly stupid as to accuse someone of plagiarism
based on a non-existent poem. I think that George acted under the
belief that the line in question exists.
actually posted. Who would be so malicious as to feed George Dance a
false quote?
get the poor man.
Post by NancyGene
It's more of an "as big as a."Post by HarryLime
Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.
I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.
Is "not quite" like "a bit" or "just a bit?"Of course, this in no way justifies his "completely silly" accusations.
I'm just saying that he's not quite the dunce everyone takes him to be.
On a dunce scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being "a little bit duncy" and 10
being "the biggest dunce who ever lived," George is somewhere around a
6.5 -- as opposed to his reputation which places him at a 9 or a 10.
Post by NancyGene
soundly laughed at and ignored by everyone. Crazy hanger-on.
Unfortunately, Internet often bolsters the delusions of nutterbuttersPost by HarryLime
tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.
"He can't handle the truth!"Post by NancyGene
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
Once again, George Dance falls back on his old high school debating teamPost by HarryLime
According to the indices of the books, the first line starting withPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
The most likely outcome (assuming that such a poem exists) is that there
is some, superficial similarity between the opening line of each
(although they are describing very different things).
"The" doesn't even match the newspapers line that Mr. Dance and his
source claim was written by Creeley.
Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. ThePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
HarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
tactic of slightly modifying a statement in order to change its meaning.
Post by HarryLime
He wouldn't have known a chicken bone from a dinosaur keister. He wasPost by NancyGene
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
Didn't he also discover a new species of dinosaur?Post by HarryLime
Let NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
Newspapers stack or pile. However, our poem was inspired byLet NancyGene speak for herself, George. I only see two lines that
contain different variations on a common expression (which also appears
in poetry by your Donkey and myself).
decluttering our (large) house. We came upon saved Christmas and
birthday cards, newspapers that were saved of "historic" occasions, and
more which just to look at brought back memories, and many of those
memories were unhappy.
However, to speak on newspapers: We subscribe to the print edition of a
"major metropolitan newspaper" and also the county newspaper, which
subscriptions cost us about $600 a year for 7-day-a-week home delivery.
We would not waste the money by not reading them. Once they are read,
they are put in a bag for recycling. We do not wish to revisit stories
of mass killings or disasters, and to look at the bag does bring up
those thoughts of human trauma.
Post by HarryLime
What I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
And that is true. How many times does a person want to be reminded ofWhat I find praiseworthy in NancyGene's line is not the application of a
common expression to piled up newspapers, but the concept of piled up
newspapers as a symbol for the oppression of memory.
bad things that have happened to him? Memory can be debilitating.
There are some people who can remember everything in their lives
(hyperthymesia), but most people are spared that "gift."
Post by HarryLime
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
He also went to dinner with Elie Wiesel and Michael Crichton, aPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
Earth to George! Pickles claimed that he deflowered two 14-year oldPost by HarryLime
Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
"like newspapers"?Your Donkey has
reposted on of his own poems that has seconds piling up on the floor.
I wouldn't say so. But don't give NastyGoon any ideas. They're the part
of the team that goes around calling other people on the group
plagiarists (while you're the one who goes around calling other people
on the group pedophiles).
girls, that he supported incest, that he attended NAMBLA meetings, and
that he treated NAMBLA members to dinner.
professor gave Pickles a copy of his unpublished manuscript, and his
imaginary daughter was licensed to practice law in every state in the
U.S. and all the countries of the world. Pickles went to the Dylan
Symposium but just sat in the parking lot, not going in.
soundly laughed at and ignored by everyone. Crazy hanger-on.
like Pickles, as its relative anonymity allows one to goad others (like
George) into believing their delusions.
Post by NancyGene
George Dance hasn't internalized the rule about keeping the attribution
with the poem.
He probably mistook it for a literary loophole: as long as he attributesPost by HarryLime
Understandable, as there were so many instances of this.Post by NancyGene
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
LOL! I'd forgotten that one.Post by HarryLime
So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Damn straight!So, yes. I called him a pedophile and continue to maintain that he was.
When you claimed that NAMBLA had done the most for LGBT rights, and
supported their "right" to hold and express their beliefs, I called you
a child rapist by association. And I maintain that anyone who argues to
have "Legal Age" laws abolished is criminally responsible for any
children who are raped (with or without consent) as a result.
When you recanted your NAMBLA statement, I removed your
predator-by-proxy status.
As to "Jordy," when a homosexual man insists on being called by his
nephew's name (out of admiration for him), he is openly displaying his
feelings of sexual attraction to his nephew -- to such an extent that
they border on obsession. So, yes, I honestly believe that Jordy is
also a pedophile.
And, finally, based on Chuck Lysaght's "poem" which read something out
of "Penthouse Letter," depicting sex between a presumed adult with a
minor he's supposed to be babysitting, makes me suspect that he was a
pedophile as well.
I can't help it if you hang around (virtually) with a bunch of pedos.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
He might not have mentioned newspapers, but the subject of his sentence
is an increment of time (as is Creeley's), whereas that of NancyGene's
is memories.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterdays" in our poem is a concept.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
No, Harry Liar. The subject of both Creeley's poem his sentence was
"Days" while the subject of NastyGoon's was some days ("Yesterdays").
Both lines were similes comparing some days with newspapers. Reread
Will's line; it doesn't mention days and doesn't compare them with
anything.
Post by HarryLime
Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Absolutely.Again, Creeley's "Days" appears from that line to signify increments of
time; whereas NancyGene's "Yesterdays" is a metaphor for "memories."
Post by HarryLime
Another "gotcha" moment!Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
I thought I recognized it, which is why I turned to my source (whichPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
Actually, George, you did make up at least a part of your initialHarryLiar, you've *already* concluded that. Since I know I did not
"ma[k]e the whole thing up (see below), I prefer to examine the only
relevant evidence first-hand before leaping to any conclusions.
statement. The opening line of your initial post in this thread
wasn't my wife or daughter, BTW).
Post by HarryLime
A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Something they can relate to, to think about, to return to.A common characteristic of great literary lines is that they strike the
reader as something they've heard before... something they've always
known to be true.
Post by HarryLime
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
That would be a good idea, instead of entangling himself in morePost by George J. (George J. Dance)
the book, which is a completely different thing.
I'm only trying to piece together the tiny bits of supposed truth thatPost by HarryLime
"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
No, Lying Michael. It "turns out" that I don't currently have a copy of"The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":"
It turns out that you were only posturing.
the book, which is a completely different thing.
you grudgingly decide to reveal.
You now seem to be implying that you once owned a copy of Creeley's
poem. That's the first I've heard of it (assuming that this even counts
as having heard of it).
Why don't you just come clean and tell us the whole story?
explanations for why he "recognized" a line in a poem that doesn't seem
to exist but still insists that we somehow borrowed without attribution.
Post by HarryLime
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
There was the Pink Floyd song that Mr. Dance chopped up and presented asPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
The last thing I want is another thread by you.Post by HarryLime
You've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
I see you're trying to change the subject again. If you want, I can openYou've also accused NancyGene of having plagiarized it *before* having
even received (much less examined) the relevant evidence first-hand.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
IIRC the first plagiarism charge leveled against you occurred longPost by HarryLime
Yet you and your NastyGoon "colleague" had no trouble accusing me ofPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
forgery (a far worse accusation) on as little proof. So I have to say
that I don't believe you.
before either NancyGene or I became a part of the group.
a discussion of this new one on a different thread. Let me know.
You claimed that NancyGene and I have accused you of plagiarism in the
past. You didn't say *what* we claimed you'd plagiarized. Since you're
not coming forward with this information, as well, I told you the only
such incidences that I remember, and asked you if you were referring to
one of those.
his own poem, afterward claiming that he credited Pink Floyd on
Facebook!
George Dance hasn't internalized the rule about keeping the attribution
with the poem.
it somewhere on the internet, he can post it to as many other sites as
he wants to without said attribution.
Post by NancyGene
Dockery was a 22 year old junior in high school?
He was his teacher's (Mr. Barfield) pet.Post by HarryLime
T.
It's true that we have had enough.Post by NancyGene
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
Apparently you've had exposure enough, as you've described George to aPost by HarryLime
So cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Pink Floyd's "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - The George Dance linkSo cut the crap and just answer the question: What specific accusation/s
are your referring to?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
I have a vague impression that you may have posted some other poem
without attribution as well, after NancyGene and I had joined. I could
be mistaken on that count, and willingly admit as much.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/bzA1DrZGoSg/m/ldR4EOgMAgAJ
Note that George Dance presented the poem as his own and had even
published it!
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/23_1oXVwuvg/m/Ebsf7PBjAAAJ
Post by HarryLime
And we provided enough proof to make our case.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
I remember NastyGoon and you accusing me of plagiarism for posting a
cento, and giving the source information on the thread in another post
rather than on the poem itself. I also remember NastyGoon accusing a lot
of other people of plagiarism - as I say, that was their schtick.
Post by HarryLime
Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
"The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" - Pure theft.Thank you.
It's good to have some vague idea of what you're talking about. If you
remember the name of that cento, it would be much easier for me to
search for it, in order to refresh my memory regarding it.
Post by HarryLime
From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
George Dance is sensitive when caught in his own web.From what *you've* written (above), it sounds like it was similar to the
Cohen incident... and, therefore, most likely the second example that I
claimed to have a very vague recollection of.
IOW: I'd guessed correctly, only to be accused of attempting to change
the subject and to be threatened with your opening another thread.
Post by HarryLime
Someone did.Post by HarryLime
Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
We don't.Don't bother. As previously noted, since you have promised to reveal
the source of this supposed poem (regardless of whether it appears in
your forthcoming copy), I have decided to once more grant you the
benefit of the doubt.
Post by HarryLime
We don't have that long of an exposure to George Dance's postings, butPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Post by HarryLime
interacted with you here.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
No, George. I came to that conclusion based on 10 years of havingPost by HarryLime
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
As I've just noted: since you failed to find the line [and title of the]Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
poem I cited, you
(and your Nasty "colleague") have concluded that I forged it.
interacted with you here.
Mr. Dance paraphrases what other people write such that it changes the
meaning, has selective memory, argues to the side of a point, and uses
silly nicknames for people he doesn't like.
T.
Post by HarryLime
line of poetry was written be someone else (unknown) and mistakenly
attributed to Creeley.
Perhaps he mistook it for Mr. Dockery's insightful poem, written whenPost by NancyGene
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
LOL! I'm guessing that he'll come to the conclusion that the elusivePost by HarryLime
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
And when he is wrong, he attacks the person who is right.Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
You concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
That is not what I said, George. I said that based on my past (andYou concluded that I forged it based on 10 years of seeing me forging
poems? Oh, do please give me one example.
current) exchanges with you, I believe that you are capable of doing
*anything* to win an argument ("forgery") included.
Post by HarryLime
George Dance said that his source told him (by some method) the firstPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
Just what did you say, George?I did not, Lying Michael.
, yet have quoted it from someone else's memory,
Nor did I say that I quoted it from another person's memory, Lying
Michael.
line, title, and book in which a poem by Robert Creeley was published.
The source told George Dance the second line, but George Dance did not
write that down. We assume that George Dance wrote down the first line,
the title, and the author of the poem, along with the book. We conclude
that George Dance was given this information orally, as otherwise it
would already be available in print (if in an email or a site on-line).
Post by HarryLime
NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
George Dance is feeling the heat in Canada.NancyGene and I have been prying out your proverbial teeth to obtain
what little information you've revealed.
Post by HarryLime
Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
It would have saved what little "face" George Dance has.Like I said: if you just tell the truth about what happened, we wouldn't
have to try to weave the little shreds of material you've given us
together in an attempt to figure out what you're (not) talking about.
Post by HarryLime
If we were going to paraphrase our line, we would have changed the wordsPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
A copy needn't be exact, George.Nor did I accuse NastyGoon of having "copied" it (since it was not
copied, but changed), Lying Michael.
that were changed in the "Creeley" version.
Post by HarryLime
tell us.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
We assume that George Dance will examine, word by word, page by page,Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
That's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
Again, all of them attempts to make sense out of what little you didThat's three lies in a row from you, Lying Michael, all of them attempts
by you to change the meaning of something I did tell you.
tell us.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I don't know what you're talking about, George? You are saying thatIsn't that
what you were pre-emptively accusing me of doing in this thread just
today? Why, yes, it is. So go ahead and accuse me of playing "IKYABWAI"
again.
I've pre-emptively accused you of telling three lies in a row? WTF does
that even mean?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
I think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
Again, I am once more giving you the benefit of the doubt -- contingentI think the worst thing one can accuse another writer of s forgery. So
you go on milking that charge; you still have over a week till the book
arrives.
upon your revealing the source once your mysterious book arrives.
every inch of the tome to make the momentous discovery of a new Robert
Creeley poem!
line of poetry was written be someone else (unknown) and mistakenly
attributed to Creeley.
Dockery was a 22 year old junior in high school?
--
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-18 13:58:15 UTC
Reply
PermalinkOn Fri, 14 Feb 2025 1:29:00 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
This is the fifth day MMP has posted, multiple times a day, that IPost by HarryLime
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:14:33 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
Post by HarryLime
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 4:10:42 +0000,
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
accused NastyGoon of plagiarism; and by now he had pretty much everyone
on the group (including me, as we'll see) believing that's what I'd
donw. However, thanks to Will Dockery actually reading the thread, it
turns out that didn't happen: MMP simply made shit up, again.
snip
Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, but
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally.
No, NastyGoon. I wrote the first line down *here*, in my first post,he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally.
copied from another tab. This is a good illustration of how MMP and NG
make things up when they have no information.
So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Completely false. My source actually gave me the name of a book, whichsource, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
(as I've repeatedly told the group) I've ordered.
Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aAs for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
That makes no sense. Knowing that two lines are not the same does notthe phantom line.
mean you know which was written first.
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excuses
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Once again: there was no accusation of plagiarism, you silly puss.for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Also, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that are
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enough
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," but
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
In your Original line, NG, you had the newspapers stacked up "in plies".on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enough
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," but
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Isn't a ply the same thing as a layer?
Post by HarryLime
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
non-existent accusation. It's what I've called his "Big Lie" technique:
repeat a false claim enough, and eventually everyone will believe it,In
this thread, it worked, temporarily.
We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,
influenced by his.
Once again: I never said you got the line from Creeley, you sillyinfluenced by his.
rutabaga.
Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.
Hmmm yourself. I suspect that's how you write your poemsy, NG. MMP, aswell: we've actually seen poems that he has written using AI.
Post by HarryLime
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
slurping his allies. To the contrary, one expects him to slurp his
allies; it's part of his M.O.
Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous of
the praise given to more talented writers.
Google and Bing are search engines, you silly goose. Search enginesthe praise given to more talented writers.
don't write poetry; you need an AI (which you already apparently have)
for that
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
HarryLiar himself who's been repeating that on average more than once a
day (which would mean more than ten times by this date).
Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he have
to eat his words.
Unlike HarryLiar or Nasty Goon, my ego is not threatened by being wrongto eat his words.
about something. Being wrong is how we learn, which is how we gain
knowledge. Only narcissists see the possibility of being wrong as a
threat to their petty egos.
We speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rare
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
I hope not, since I ordered a trade edition of the book (which NG doesedition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
not have).
Not if the line's not there. However, if it is in the book, it will
answer NG's claim that they wrote it first, and I plagiarized, changing
it only "a bit" (as opposed to "only a bit" :)
Post by HarryLime
It may or may not
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.It may or may not
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Creeley, or of any other poets FTM. And no one has accused you of
plagirizing any, you silly cockroach.
Post by HarryLime
Post by HarryLime
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
or falsity). It's true that the line is in the poem that's in the book
iff the line is in the poem that's in the book - whereas, to HarryLiar
and NG, whether it's true or false depends on what other people are
saying.
Post by HarryLime
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
plagiarized (NG accused me of "plagiarizing" it from them).
Post by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles* used to do, with elaborate explanationsPost by HarryLime
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
for
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
promised. One can expect him to stay here, making the same arguments,
forever.
Usually, when MMP is caught out in a lie, he'll simply go silent on that
thread.
We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Ha! NG is now threatening Ko0KsOots.Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Biden) can even be elected President.
We (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Why would I ask for print copies of books no one claimed the poem wasWe are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
in? And why WTF would I ask you for them rather than Indigo or Amazon?
Think!
Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
accused me of this "accusation of plagiarism" in his very first post on
the subject, and has been repeating it since.
Mr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?
There's no point revealing the source before knowing whether theirinformation (line, poem, author, *and* book) was true or false. That
will be in a little more than a week.
Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. TheHarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
above) that "a bit" is larger than "only a bit", and we're waiting to
see your explanation.
snip
HarryLime
2025-02-18 15:06:44 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
accused NastyGoon of plagiarism; and by now he had pretty much everyone
on the group (including me, as we'll see) believing that's what I'd
donw. However, thanks to Will Dockery actually reading the thread, it
turns out that didn't happen: MMP simply made shit up, again.
Lie.On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 1:29:00 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
This is the fifth day MMP has posted, multiple times a day, that IPost by HarryLime
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:14:33 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MMP) aka
Post by HarryLime
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 4:10:42 +0000,
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
Fortunately, your "colleague" covered your ass and found a copy of the
Collected Poems you didn't, so (barring my checking what they found)
they can say that the search is complete; neither of you could find a
copy of the [line or title] in Creeley's Collected Poems. Which doesn't
mean that the poem doesn't exist; only that there's no second-hand
evidence that
it exists.
accused NastyGoon of plagiarism; and by now he had pretty much everyone
on the group (including me, as we'll see) believing that's what I'd
donw. However, thanks to Will Dockery actually reading the thread, it
turns out that didn't happen: MMP simply made shit up, again.
This is what you wrote in the opening post of this thread:
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Since the line was original, NancyGene would not have credited it to
Creeley. You were aware the line was original because I'd presented it
to you as such.
Since NancyGene did not credit Creeley, according to your statement, she
is guilty of "you know -- 'platiarism'."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
copied from another tab. This is a good illustration of how MMP and NG
make things up when they have no information.
What are you yammering about, George?Yes, Mr. Dance has stated that the source gave him the second line, but
he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally.
No, NastyGoon. I wrote the first line down *here*, in my first post,he (Dance) did not write it down. That implies that the first line,
title and author were given to him orally.
copied from another tab. This is a good illustration of how MMP and NG
make things up when they have no information.
NancyGene said that based on the words of your posts, she suspects the
opening line of Creeley's poem was related to you orally by your
"trusted source."
She also said that you claimed to have been given the first *two*lines
of the poem (from said "trusted source*), but only chose to write the
first of these *two* lines down.
She is not disputing that you wrote the *first* line down. In fact, she
is flat out saying that you *did.* She is saying that you failed to
write the *second* line down, even though it was given to you by your
"trusted source."
Had your Donkey so blatantly misread her statement, I would give him the
benefit of the doubt and blame it on his being functionally illiterate.
But you are not illiterate, and know very well what NancyGene actually
wrote.
In light of this, I can only conclude that you are falling back on your
bag of duplicitous tricks: claiming NancyGene said something which she
obviously did not.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
(as I've repeatedly told the group) I've ordered.
Context, George... context.So, Mr. Dance check with his
source, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
Completely false. My source actually gave me the name of a book, whichsource, and the source immediately (or so) remembered a line from Robert
Creeley's poem that isn't in any of his books?
(as I've repeatedly told the group) I've ordered.
The line in question is not coming up in any internet searches, and does
not appear in the contents of Creeley's Collected Poems (in 2 vols.,
1946-his death). It is certainly not appearing in any of his books
based on this information (which we have all been made privy to). As to
your claim that it appears in the book that you ordered, even you have
admitted that you're afraid to name this book in case it turns out that
you're wrong.
This is more of a "the check is in the mail" evasion, then proof of the
poem's existence.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
Oh, do please explain the difference in scale between only "a bit" and
"A bit" can mean "a great deal." "Only a bit" means "a tiny amount."Post by HarryLime
We speculated that the writer changed the line "a bit," not "only aAs for (1) (the alleged similarity of the *lines*), we have the claim
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
from your colleague NastyGoon that one of the lines was changed only a
bit from the other (when they thought their line was written first). We
bit." There is a difference in scale between those two descriptions.
It is the difference between having eaten more than one's share of a
pie, and only having taken the tiniest of slices.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
mean you know which was written first.
Once again, there was:We know that our line was written first because it is not the same as
the phantom line.
That makes no sense. Knowing that two lines are not the same does notthe phantom line.
mean you know which was written first.
Because what we actually wrote doesn't fit in with Mr. Dance's excuses
for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
Once again: there was no accusation of plagiarism, you silly puss.for why he accused us of plagiarizing a poem that does not seem to
exist?
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Isn't a ply the same thing as a layer?
I'm assuming that "ply" is a typo for "pile." In which case, no, aAlso, what other words can a literate person use for newspapers that are
on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enough
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," but
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
In your Original line, NG, you had the newspapers stacked up "in plies".on top of each other? Stack and pile are about it.
The ghostly line supposedly from Robert Creeley is not memorable enough
for a person to commit it to memory, at least without the rest of the
poem to support it. Which, of course, does not come up in any search of
Creeley's poems.
In that context, you could have used "layer" or "layered," but
newspapers are not in layers. Cakes are, though.
Isn't a ply the same thing as a layer?
"pile" is not a "layer."
There may be layers in a pile, but there are not piles in a layer.
As I (and others) have repeatedly told your Donkey, the Thesaurus is not
your friend.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Notice how many times MMP keeps repeating his claim about the
non-existent accusation.
Notice that MMP wrote "your recent accusation," not "your non-existentPost by HarryLime
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
I don't recall ever having read a Creeley poem until you made your
recent accusation.
non-existent accusation.
accusation."
Are you really such as dunce as to think you can fool anyone when my
actual statement is immediately above your falsified restatement of it?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
repeat a false claim enough, and eventually everyone will believe it,In
this thread, it worked, temporarily.
Well, yes... that's exactly what you just did. One can only concluderepeat a false claim enough, and eventually everyone will believe it,In
this thread, it worked, temporarily.
that you are describing your own patented technique.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
rutabaga.
Once again, you're lying, George:We had not either. Obviously, our writing is, and never will be,
influenced by his.
Once again: I never said you got the line from Creeley, you sillyinfluenced by his.
rutabaga.
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
well: we've actually seen poems that he has written using AI.
Which poems were those, duplicitous George?Or to feed a line into AI and ask it to write a similar line. Hmmm.
Hmmm yourself. I suspect that's how you write your poemsy, NG. MMP, aswell: we've actually seen poems that he has written using AI.
I recall having experimented with the poetry writing app during the
course of a discussion in order to see how it fared. I would never have
passed the end result off as my own work (as your above statement
strongly implies).
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Notice MMP repeating another line constantly: that I'm jealous of him
slurping his allies. To the contrary, one expects him to slurp his
allies; it's part of his M.O.
Notice how you've misquoted me (via paraphrase) yet again. I have neverPost by HarryLime
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous of my praise,
and asked a "trusted source" (which could, for all I know refer to
Google or Bing) if they knew any lines that sounded similar to it.
slurping his allies. To the contrary, one expects him to slurp his
allies; it's part of his M.O.
said that I "slurp[ed my] allies." I do not "slurp" anyone's poetry:
never have, never will. I also do not have any "allies." You've
managed to fit two flat-out lies about me into your paraphrased
restatement which bears little-to-no resemblance to what I actually
wrote.
I wrote that "I praised a line of poetry by NancyGene. You were jealous
of my praise..."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
don't write poetry; you need an AI (which you already apparently have)
for that
Actually, as noted, I haven't "cried 'Plagiarist!' even once. It's
HarryLiar himself who's been repeating that on average more than once a
day (which would mean more than ten times by this date).
Lie.Or to ask Google or Bing to write one, because someone was jealous of
the praise given to more talented writers.
Google and Bing are search engines, you silly goose. Search enginesthe praise given to more talented writers.
don't write poetry; you need an AI (which you already apparently have)
for that
Post by HarryLime
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
They came up with one that vaguely matched, so you've been crying
"Plagiarist!" ever since.
HarryLiar himself who's been repeating that on average more than once a
day (which would mean more than ten times by this date).
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
about something. Being wrong is how we learn, which is how we gain
knowledge. Only narcissists see the possibility of being wrong as a
threat to their petty egos.
Agreed.Mr. Dance might want to watch his language in the future, lest he have
to eat his words.
Unlike HarryLiar or Nasty Goon, my ego is not threatened by being wrongto eat his words.
about something. Being wrong is how we learn, which is how we gain
knowledge. Only narcissists see the possibility of being wrong as a
threat to their petty egos.
So why not admit that you were wrong, and apologize?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
not have).
The books NancyGene posted links to sure looked like pdfs of a tradeWe speculate that Mr. Dance will say that the poem appears in a rare
edition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
I hope not, since I ordered a trade edition of the book (which NG doesedition, not the commonplace ones that we have.
not have).
edition to me. What do you think they were, George?
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
answer NG's claim that they wrote it first, and I plagiarized, changing
it only "a bit" (as opposed to "only a bit" :)
Which won't alter the fact that the only similarity in the lines is thatNot if the line's not there. However, if it is in the book, it will
answer NG's claim that they wrote it first, and I plagiarized, changing
it only "a bit" (as opposed to "only a bit" :)
they use piled up newspapers as a representation of different concepts.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Once again, NastyGoon: no one has accused you of reading anything by
Creeley, or of any other poets FTM. And no one has accused you of
plagirizing any, you silly cockroach.
Someone certainly has:Post by HarryLime
It may or may not
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
We had never read anything by Creeley and don't intend to in the future.It may or may not
contain the poem in question. But unless you're purchasing a used copy
with NancyGene's signature on the inside cover, you have no evidence
(not even circumstantial evidence) that NancyGene had ever read the
poem.
Creeley, or of any other poets FTM. And no one has accused you of
plagirizing any, you silly cockroach.
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Aside: I see that George is going all out in this post, calling
NancyGene every negative animal/insect term he can think of. Apparently
this is a new form of "dunce logic" wherein whoever calls someone the
most childish names in a given exchange wins.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
To an empiricist like myself, it's the only way to establish the truth
or falsity). It's true that the line is in the poem that's in the book
iff the line is in the poem that's in the book - whereas, to HarryLiar
and NG, whether it's true or false depends on what other people are
saying.
No, duplicitous George. To NancyGene and I, a charge of "plagiarism" isPost by HarryLime
Post by HarryLime
\the next step (which I've already begun, though it will take time to
complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
That seems like a long way to go to prove a point/win an argument --complete) is to get some first-had evidence; to look at the book I was
told it appeared in, and see if the poem is there.
or falsity). It's true that the line is in the poem that's in the book
iff the line is in the poem that's in the book - whereas, to HarryLiar
and NG, whether it's true or false depends on what other people are
saying.
true, if a given poetry amounts to little more than a slight rewording
of another. It cannot be proved by finding a slightly similar line in
some previously published poem.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Once again, there was no claim (except by NastyGoon) that the line was
plagiarized (NG accused me of "plagiarizing" it from them).
Once again, George Dance claimed that:Post by HarryLime
Post by HarryLime
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
especially when the chances of the poem's existence are slim, and those
of its actually having been plagiarized, virtually nonexistent.
plagiarized (NG accused me of "plagiarizing" it from them).
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
for
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
* This from the NastyGoon who whines and cries when called a name.
If that were true, Michael Monkey would have left aapc weeks ago, as he
promised. One can expect him to stay here, making the same arguments,
forever.
Once again, duplicitous George lies about what I have supposedly saidPost by HarryLime
Very similar to what Pickles* used to do, with elaborate explanationsPost by HarryLime
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
But as I've noted in the past, you'll do anything to win an argument
(and still end up losing it).
for
why his lies did not stand up to any scrutiny.
Post by HarryLime
Being accused of forgery (even one line) is a far more serious matter
than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
"Last Man Standing" is your Donkey's game, not mine.than being accused of plagiarism. That's what I'm most interested in. As
a notorious last-worder, you'll never admit that you lost an "argument"
no matter what, so I'm not interested in that at all.
promised. One can expect him to stay here, making the same arguments,
forever.
and done.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
thread.
Lie.Usually, when MMP is caught out in a lie, he'll simply go silent on that
thread.
Since I don't lie, I don't get caught.
I "go silent" on a thread, when I have finished with it.
At that point, you and your Donkey can repeat your false claims till
you're blue in the face. I have already successfully refuted them.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
Lie.We would also say that what Mr. Dance's "source" did was literary fraud.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
Ha! NG is now threatening Ko0KsOots.Post by HarryLime
Had you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
The Regents of the University of California own the copyright for aHad you forged the "Days pile up" line, what's the worst that you've
done? You've wasted your, my, and NancyGene's time arguing over a troll
post.
significant portion of Creeley's writings. They could sue Mr. Dance's
source for forgery, literary forgery and fraud.
NancyGene hasn't threatened to do anything.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
I some career; not all. In the United States, a proven plagiarism (Joe
Biden) can even be elected President.
It is still a serious charge, and it can still ruin a writer's career.Post by HarryLime
OTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
We recall some writers and reporters losing their publishers andOTOH, a writer who is shown to plagiarize the work of others could end
up having their work boycotted. Who wants to publish a poem if it's
going to turn out to have been stolen? Not only do you look like a fool
for not having Googled for it, but you could end up getting sued.
newspaper jobs because of plagiarism. It is a serious charge.
Biden) can even be elected President.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
in? And why WTF would I ask you for them rather than Indigo or Amazon?
Think!
This entire post is just you restating what we've written (quotedWe (and Michael) have already seen pdfs of the books of Robert Creeley.
We are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
Why would I ask for print copies of books no one claimed the poem wasWe are surprised that George Dance didn't ask us to send him print
copies of the book so that he could look for the poem.
in? And why WTF would I ask you for them rather than Indigo or Amazon?
Think!
directly above your rewrite) to mean something that it obviously did
not. Why should you think that anyone should fall for that?
Since nothing you do makes any sense, one should expect you to behave
nonsensically.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
HarryLiar may have said that, but it is not true. In fact, he falsely
accused me of this "accusation of plagiarism" in his very first post on
the subject, and has been repeating it since.
Are you claiming not to have written this?Post by HarryLime
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
And as I've said, I had given you the benefit of the doubt until after
you had repeatedly refused to reveal where the supposed Creeley poem
could be found.
accused me of this "accusation of plagiarism" in his very first post on
the subject, and has been repeating it since.
"I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
information (line, poem, author, *and* book) was true or false. That
will be in a little more than a week.
Why not? If the book is still in print, it might be at a Barnes & NobleMr. Dance has to protect his sources like a newspaper reporter?
There's no point revealing the source before knowing whether theirinformation (line, poem, author, *and* book) was true or false. That
will be in a little more than a week.
where one could check it. It may also be in a local library where one
could check it.
You don't want to reveal the book's title, because you don't want anyone
to prove you wrong.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
Don't backtrack, NastyGoon. You've already told us (in this post - see
above) that "a bit" is larger than "only a bit", and we're waiting to
see your explanation.
Lie.Post by HarryLime
We never said "only a bit." "A bit" is not measurable. TheHarryLiar, we've all seen the opening lines we're discussing. You
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
claimed they're completely different, while your NastyGoon colleague
claimed that one is changed only a bit from the other. I agree with your
colleague.
lost-and-found line of the "source" is not what we wrote, and has a
different meaning.
above) that "a bit" is larger than "only a bit", and we're waiting to
see your explanation.
NancyGene wrote "a bit."
"Only a bit" was your falsified restatement of what she wrote.
And as explained above, "a bit" can mean "a large amount," whereas "only
a bit" can only mean a very small amount.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 06:18:23 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
Again, as you know, George Dance is waiting on the Robert Creeley bookPost by George J. (George J. Dance)
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
I'm done searching for it, George.On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 4:36:19 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain aka
Post by HarryLime
https://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
No, Lying Michael, those links are not "the Collected Poems of Roberthttps://dokumen.pub/selected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19452005-9780520940949-9780520251960.html
https://dokumen.pub/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-19752005-9780520941670.html
Creeley in 2 volumes". The second one is a link to volume 2 (/Collected
Poems 1975-2005/), but the first one is a link to a /Selected Poems/
(Selected Poems 1945-2005/).
Not finding the poem in the your second link would show only that the
poem was not published after 1974, while not finding it using your first
link would show only it was not included in a a Selected Poems.
What you needed to do is what you claimed to be doing; providing links
to both the first and second volumes of his Collected Poems.
At least you've provided a link to the a site that one can crawl around
looking for that missing first volume, so I guess that's something.
Either post the entire poem (or at least the first four lines) here, or
provide a link. Otherwise, I'm just going to conclude that you've made
the whole thing up.
Post by George J. (George J. Dance)
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
If I wanted to accuse someone of plagiarism, I would provide proof.Post by HarryLime
A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
So you're "concluding" the same thing your online friend was "assuming"A document search for "newspaper" turned up 2 results -- neither of
which is even remotely similar to the line George Dance quoted.
Since "collected" usually implies "as complete as possible," it is safe
to conclude that George Dance modified a line of NancyGene's poetry in
order to falsely accuse her of plagiarism.
yesterday. My, my, who'd have expected that?
Since you repeatedly refuse to do so, I can only conclude that no such
proof exists.
that is said to have the poem aka proof.
HTH and HAND.
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 14:13:47 UTC
Reply
Permalinkincluding obituary reposts and comments after his passing in 2005:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 05:07:22 UTC
Reply
PermalinkSince Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
In other words this case is far from closed:
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
HarryLime
2025-02-11 14:19:48 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume One, Donkey.The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
From this, one must draw the following conclusions:
1) George Dance is lying through his teeth.
2) Even if such a poem did exist, it would have to be exceedingly
obscure; in which case it would be nearly impossible for NancyGene to
have copied it.
We can also make the following suppositions:
1) George Dance made up the line of poetry by altering most of the words
in NancyGene's line.
2) George Dance did so out of jealousy (because I had praised
NancyGene's opening line).
3) George Dance is desperate for my praise, and deeply resentful of
anyone who receives it.
4) George Dance will not only lie, but *libel* other AAPC members who he
views as his enemies -- even if they haven't posted here in over a year.
5) George Dance will even go so far as to create false evidence to back
up his accusations.
6) George Dance lacks both ethics and morals, and is capable of
committing crimes (libel) in an attempt to belittle the achievements of
others.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 14:35:34 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went toPost by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume One, Donkey.The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
Groups on Robert Creeley:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
HarryLime
2025-02-11 16:23:48 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGenePost by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went toPost by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume One, Donkey.The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-11 18:21:38 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I did find my poem from 1977 which opens with the line:
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
HarryLime
2025-02-11 21:30:42 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 14:56:06 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
That's just a matter of interpretation.Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
HTH and HAND.
HarryLime
2025-02-12 15:25:18 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
No, Donkey, it isn't.Post by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
That's just a matter of interpretation.Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
People don't say things like "Six yesterdays ago, I went to the beach."
They say "Six days ago."
"Days" denotes specific amounts of time. "Six days" denotes a specific
length of time.
"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
These are basic English rules that you should have mastered at some
point before the 4th Grade. Again, I cannot imagine how you were
allowed to pass the 4th Grade when your language skills are so
abominably bad.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-12 15:43:36 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
NoPost by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
That's just a matter of interpretation.Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
HarryLime
2025-02-12 16:10:59 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
NoPost by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
That's just a matter of interpretation.Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
having been left back twice.
To those of us who aren't functionally illiterate, there is no question
about its meaning.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 03:32:06 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
True but Robert Creeley used the idea back in the 1950s.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
If course it is, Harry.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Okay, so what?"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Someone borrowing a line from another poet would be expected to make
such changes.
HarryLime
2025-02-13 04:02:58 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
If course it is, Harry.
Someone borrowing a line from another poet would be expected to make
such changes.
Differnt words, different topic, different poem.Post by HarryLime
True but Robert Creeley used the idea back in the 1950s.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
If course it is, Harry.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Okay, so what?"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Someone borrowing a line from another poet would be expected to make
such changes.
--
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 05:06:23 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
--
Actually, I haven't even seen either Robert Creeley's or Nancy Gene'sPost by W.Dockery
If course it is, Harry.
Someone borrowing a line from another poet would be expected to make
such changes.
Differnt words, different topic, different poem.Post by HarryLime
True but Robert Creeley used the idea back in the 1950s.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
If course it is, Harry.
Post by HarryLime
"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Okay, so what?"Yesterday" (singular) denotes a specific day. It is not used as a
measurement of passing time.
Someone borrowing a line from another poet would be expected to make
such changes.
--
poem yet, I'm waiting to see them both so we can make comparisons.
W.Dockery
2025-02-13 05:30:24 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
NoPost by HarryLime
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
That's just a matter of interpretation.Post by W.Dockery
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
I sent you the links for both volumes, Donkey. They're on the same sit,Post by HarryLime
Again, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
Post by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
Post by HarryLime
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
Since I don't yet have a copy of the Robert Creeley collection or a copyPost by W.Dockery
Okay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
It would be a nice gesture at this point for you to admit that NancyGeneOkay, the information I saw looked like the collected poems only went to
1975.
I'll look again.
I posted this earlier, the Usenet newsgroup archives listing at Google
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22Robert%20Creeley%22%20
did not copy the line from Creeley. Even if the line were to exist in
some uncollected poem of his, the chances of NancyGene's having been
aware of it are practically non-existent.
It would be even more impressive if you were to also admit that her line
is an immediate classic (which I sincerely believe it is)... but I
suppose that's too much to expect from you.
--
of his poem, I can't make a good call on this one.
so if you've got the one you can probably just pull up the other without
leaving it.
Either way, you should have more than enough information to realize that
NancyGene did not copy a poem that was too obscure to be included in
Creeley's Collected Poems.
Man up and apologize for calling her a second hander, etc.
Post by W.Dockery
"The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
Like I said, the image of time piling up is a common one."The seconds have piled up on the floor, lost in some other guy's
past..."
https://shadowville-mythos.blogspot.com/2023/09/shattered.html?m=1
But, of course, NancyGene was referring to oppressive memories -- not
increments of time.
--
HTH and HAND.
W.Dockery
2025-02-16 06:24:25 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by HarryLime
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
Okay, I'll have another look.Post by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
That's Volume OneThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
***
I posted a link for Volume Two as well.
Volume Two covers the period from 1975-2005.
That's ZERO years of poetry not collected.
George J. (George J. Dance)
2025-02-18 19:48:35 UTC
Reply
PermalinkPost by W.Dockery
The Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
Oh, no. There's a second volume, /Collected Poems 1975-2005. But theThe Collected Poetry of Robert Creeley covers 1945-1975.
Since Creeley passed away in 2005 that's thirty more years if poetry not
collected.
https://www.ucpress.edu/books/the-collected-poems-of-robert-creeley-1945-1975/paper
book I was told the poem was in was in the period of the first one.
but your conclusion is correct: this case is not closed, until someone
examines that book.