Re: NastyGoon lifts a line

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 1:46:44 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:

On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 17:28:45 +0000, W.Dockery wrote:
>

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 0:04:15 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>

https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article.php?id=255731&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 16:15:27 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MPP) aka
"HarryLime" wrote:
>

I realized from the content of NancyGene's posts that they were
intelligent, well-educated, and better written than anyone here.
Naturally, I asked them to start contributing to the "Sampler."  And I
was right in doing so.
>
Here are the opening lines of NancyGene's latest poem:
>
"Yesterdays stack up like piles of read newspapers,
Cluttering my mind and obstructing my day."
>
That's poetry of the highest quality.

>
The opening line is very good. It's almost as good as the opening line
of Robert Creeleys poem, "The Days Pile Up":
>
"The days pile up like unread newspapers,"
>
I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise that would be
something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism".

>
Note that George Dance didn't make any accusations, only an observation.

>
Thank you, Will, for bringing us back to the start of the flamewar and
reminding me of what it's about. It's easy to forget such things in the
heat of battle, but you're right: I didn't accuse NastyGoon of anything.
I said that giving a line without crediting the source was something
NastyGoon would call plagiarism. So even that, the excuse HarryLiar used
to launch this latest salvo in his little war was a lie.

I realize that your understanding of context is as bad as, if not worse
than, your Donkey's; so I'll kindly explain it to you again.
You wrote: "I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise
that would be something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism"."
Your use of "otherwise" imposes conditions on your statement (If this,
then that).  In this case, if NancyGene didn't credit Creeley, then
NancyGene is guilty of plagiarism.
You imposed these conditions fully knowing that NancyGene would not have
credited Creeley (or anyone else) for her own, original work.
In doing so, you have accused NancyGene of plagiarism.

I'll be sure to mention that if they repeat that story again, and credit
you unless you don't want me to.
>
I'm not trying to defend NastyGoon, but they're probably not in on the
lie. It looks to me like HarryLiar was getting desperate for backup, so
he went to his facebook group and told NastyGoon that I'd accuse them of
plagiarism, and they believed him. They may not have even read the OP.
>
Of course they can be faulted for believing the biggest liar on aapc,
but, hell, they'd almost talked me into believing I'd accused NastyGoon
of plagiarism. Which is completely silly; it isn't plagiarism to take
one line, with changes or not, from another poet's poem and use it in a
poem of one's own.

Here again is what you wrote: "I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr.
Creeley; otherwise that would be something they would call, you know --
"plagiarism"."
As you can see, you are the one who brought the word "plagiarism" into
this discussion.
I am glad to hear you admit that your charges of plagiarism were
"completely silly."
Perhaps it is best to leave it go at that.
--