Re: NastyGoon lifts a line

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 14:52:03 +0000, HarryLime wrote:

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:

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 can keep repeating it all you want, but as I've told you before,
repeating something that isn't true does not make it true. Repetition
has nothing to do with truth.

You wrote: "I do hope "Dr." NastyGoon credited Mr. Creeley; otherwise
that would be something they would call, you know -- "plagiarism."

Exactly. If such a line, changed only "a bit", were uncredited, it would
be something that NastyGoon would have called "plagiarism". NastyGoon
was accused of calling other people "plagiarists" on flimsy evidence,
just the way you call other people "pedophiles" on flimsy evidence.
NastyGoon was not accused by me of plagiarism. Which should  put that to
rest.

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.

No, HarryLiar. Let me paraphrase the line correctly:
In this case, if NastyGoon didn't credit Creeley, then that would be
something "they" (NastyGoon) would call "plagiarism."
You imagined (made up) the "guilty of plagiarism" charge yourself, and
tried to attribute it to me.

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"."

Yes it is: not "that would be plagiarism," but "that it would be
something they  would call ... plagiarism."

As you can see, you are the one who brought the word "plagiarism" into
this discussion.

And you decided to twist my meaning, and tell NastyGoon your story that
I'd accused her, to get her back trolling on aapc.

I am glad to hear you admit that your charges of plagiarism were
"completely silly."

My alleged "charges of plagiarism" were and are as non-existent as you
claim Creeley's poem is.

Perhaps it is best to leave it go at that.

I'll only mention it if one of you repeata your false story.