Re: The Return of Michael Monkey

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:47:06 +0000, Harry "Monkey Boy" Lime wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:28:40 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>

On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 7:40:51 +0000, Will Dockery wrote:
>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 21:00:16 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:

>

from
https://www.novabbs.com/arts/article-flat.php?id=253903&group=alt.arts.poetry.comments#253903
>
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 15:22:04 +0000, Michael Monkey aka "HarryLime"
wrote:

>

MMP: My literary journal was created to highlight the best examples of
poetry from AAPC's various members.  The best poetry by Member G does
not necessarily measure up to the best poetry of Member J.
>
As Mr. Dance has so ably demonstrated above, his own poem left no traces
on my memory.

>
MMP's memory lapses are something I'm sure we're all familiar with by
now. But let us remember what else I just ably demonstrated: that back
in 2021 (when he was still hoping to recruit me as an ally) he
considered Possibilities one of "the best examples of poetry" on AAPC.

>
This deserves an underscore as an example of Michael Pendragon's biased
behavior.

>
Indeed. I'm not sure if you remeber that statement of his that I called
a statement of his editorial philosophy:
>
<quote>
"You divide everyone into two categories: potential allies and potential
adversaries. You slurp the writings of your potential allies and attack
those of your potential adversaries."
>
"When [someone] Jim is seen as a potential ally, you request his poetry.
When he
is seen as an adversary, you assign a childish name to him and claim he
can't write." </q>
>
source text:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/hDYKsC5l5Ew/m/IR5NzWPJBQAJ?hl=en
>
That also fully describes his critical philosophy. No more need be said,
but it can't be said often enough.

>
Why do you lie so much, George?
>
In the statement you are quoting, I was describing your behavior and
practices -- not mine.
>
And that statement holds true.
>
You requested Jim's poetry for your blog.  Jim agreed to let you post
it.  You posted it to your blog.
>
When Jim asked to have his poetry removed from your blog (I forget how
long, but it was at least a year after you posted it), you started
launching attacks on him.
>
Your attacks included unfounded claims that he can't write, and idiotic
challenges for him to pit his triolets (which he doesn't write) against
your own.
>
There was a reason why PJR referred to you and your allies as "Team
Dunce."  You view AAPC as "teams," and will support your untalented
teammates, while attacking your betters.
>
Nor has this practice of yours ever been remotely secret.  You have
detailed it numerous times in your posts regarding your "system of
ethics" known as "Tit for Tat."  Basically, if someone praises your
poetry, you will return the praise.  If someone belittles your poetry,
you will belittle theirs.
>
OTOH, I have always been fair and balanced in my reviews of poetry
posted to AAPC.  Go back and browse through the "comments" on the old
"Sunday Samplers."  I provided in depth critiques on all of the poems,
and pointed out when poems submitted by my so-called "allies" didn't
work.
>
The only "bias" in my reviews was that when critiquing an incompetent
"poem" by an incompetent, illiterate buffoon like Mr. Donkey, I adopted
a humorous tone.
>
And, FWIW, I have provided my feelings

You do seem a little bit butt hurt, Monkey Boy.
Hth and Hand.