Re: a comment on Fugitively Speaking by Dovina	22-Dec-04/5:04 AM
Wrong again. My insults (with the exception of your being an extremely failed thirty year old woman, which remains to be seen,) are grounded in poemranker users' poems and comments. Yours are grounded in nothing but your swelling desire to cry and kick things. This is what you've failed to get in all of this babble about internet flamers, aristocracy, and 'hopeless gay introverts.' Probably because getting it would require you to check yourself before you wreck yourself, while assuming we're simply arbitrary poet-assaulters is easy and gratifying. Besides, "This is a site for reading and critiquing POEMS, not for hurling around unfounded personal attacks and groundless suggestions" is the most splendid jape of 1997.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	19-Dec-04/6:37 AM
I love this part about how -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is "drumming up reaction from the common folk", like some sort of charismatic Adolf Jones wannabe. But are you sure you're not just saying that because he's kicking your tail and you want to cry? For one thing, who the fuck is getting 'drummed up'????? Look, I feel bad for you. I really do. And I want this to end, honestly. Why can't you just START MAKING SENSE, for Chrissakes? This is a site for reading and critiquing POEMS, not for hurling around unfounded personal attacks and groundless suggestions that someone is (or isn't) a superhero or Hitler. Jeez!
Re: a comment on Fugitively Speaking by Dovina	19-Dec-04/6:17 AM
It doesn't matter. And I haven't read it. Thought is necessarily productive, since it produces thoughts. But it is almost never worthwhile. You obviously think productive and worthwhile are the same thing. This, never mind that the ideas "to produce" and "to have worth" which are the bases of "productive" and "worthwhile", respectively, must be distinguishable even to you.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	19-Dec-04/6:13 AM
If you weren't such a newcomer to the whole anti-religion reaction, you'd probably get why Batman is such a cooler superhero than Superman and even Spiderman. As it is you almost certainly won't - and this, as I've mentioned, is terrifically sad in an thirty-year-old woman, especially one so otherwise-failed as well. Anyway, I must have been, like, six when I realized God didn't exist (for all practical purposes) and people still believed in Him and would probably go on believing in Him forever. When you get to the point where God might as well exist (for all practical purposes), give me a call. That's also the point where the hotties are, so you get laid a lot more.
Re: a comment on Pinhole by Dovina	19-Dec-04/5:53 AM
From the Tale of Good King Bumblemeat: The Death of King Bumblemeat -- 'Harried and hunted by orc-soldiers to the very brink of Bum's Hole, as it was called by the men of the land, King Bumblemeat turned at bay and gathered his Bumlings for one last wild stand. "Fly, Bumlings!" he cried, "Fly to the flag of Bumlingnor!" And lo! The emblem of the Bumlings, three sausages on a field of brown, waved valourously over the fray, and the men of his house took heart. And King Bumblemeat, head swinging even as an enormous meaty club, entered into the thickest part of the orc-horde. Fell were the blows he dealt them! Fey was the gaze of his squinty eyes, and orcs innumerable fell before it. "Surely," spoke Prince Bumrod, his son, "Yea, verily the King's doings today shall be known in song for as long as men wear meat!" But the Prince's foretelling (for fortelling it was; the Prince was wearing the Sausagy Helm of Insufficient Prognostication) was premature. The orcs girt the King in, hacking and hewing at his proud meaty hat, till the luncheon meats lay piled and sliced among the orc-corpses. For the hat was of Men's making, and only a shadow of the great elven meat-helms of ages long carelessly mislaid. And at last, the power of his hamhocky helmet spent, the King lay on the stain'd turf and began to sing a death-lay, while for some reason they couldn't adequately explain, the orcs waited for him to finish. Maybe it was his surprisingly worthy voice, coming from a head so large and clubby. Or maybe it was that the words of the song, in the Bumling tongue and unintelligible to them, yet stirred some far-off recollection of bygone meats. We just don't know. Anyway, this was the lay of King Bumblemeat: 'Whither the meatly hats of yesterlunch? Whither the sausage helmets, the hammy porkpies, the berets Shimm'ring in sunlight, so meatly, All smelling sweetly Of honey and jelly-glaze? Whither King Bumfirst's hamhock, that bunched So gloriously on his ears as he rode that day Swinging his wet truncheon: To luncheon! To luncheon! With a sound so embarassingly gay? Alas! No more the meat! Alas! No more those hats! The ham-fedoras flapping their silly brims among the leaves Of Bumwood! Lost completely Are those bright helms, so meatly, Collapsed with somewhat sickly splats Onto the tops of our Wellingtons (Beeves)!' And so speaking, he died."
Re: Love-A=? by sir_heff	17-Dec-04/10:54 PM
re: "There is no logic to explain the way A feels". There is. If A is profoundly dim. -10-
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	17-Dec-04/10:47 PM
I'm lost. Are you admitting that mouth-plums are real plums? Or that slang-use is irrespective of class (or the opposite of what you thought)? Or that it's meant to be unintelligible to most? Or that someone of greater worth can, but doesn't need to, assert it? Or that your "arguements", like so many sunwilted and spoiled-smelling meat-hats, have collapsed around your greasy ears, so the only thing you can think to do is Poot loudly enough to cover the sickly squelch?
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	17-Dec-04/10:36 PM
Oh God, your so lost. It's touching, really. Try this: The difference between Superman and Spiderman is Superman was born on Krypton, Spiderman was born on Earth. And Superman works for the Daily Planet, Spiderman works for the Daily Bugle. The difference between Batman and most heroes is Batman is a millionaire recluse who gets out of tough spots by using the gadgets on his toolbelt. In his latter days, he's a wheelchair bound superrecluse mentor to a string of protege Batpeople. and he's not even a reporter at all. Are you suggesting -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I., is seeking betterment through either an alien or a genetically-enhanced human? Of course not! You just think it's cool to seem to make more-or-less irrelevant distinctions between virtually indistinguishable things, and not get real distinctions between discrete things. In your real, outside life, people probably nod politely and say "Oh, yeah your right," and then conveniently neglect to invite you to St Crispin's Day parties.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	17-Dec-04/10:16 PM
Excuse the bumblings of an admitted simpleton, but I'd say the epitome of pretentious self-deception is something like "I'm not a pretentious self-deceiver". You could even say that's a meta-epitome of meta-pretentious meta-self-deceit, which would probably appeal to you, things like "meta" seeming to appeal to you. Of course, I would never dare suggest I wasn't a pretentious self-deceiver. Would you?
Re: a comment on The wreck of a Memphis-Atlanta Greyhound by zodiac	17-Dec-04/10:07 PM
Obviously, I didn't really fly through a window. I obviously wasn't in Tennessee, either, but I needed a bathroom for the old man, and there's nothing doing of the kind here. Incidentally, the reason I'm defending this poem so much is I think it's the first thing I've written in ages that doesn't contradict itself every three lines. You'd have done better to start with an earlier one, I think.
Re: a comment on Fugitively Speaking by Dovina	17-Dec-04/9:59 PM
Both of you are wrong. Thinking produces thoughts, ergo productive. To Dovina: Yes, the earlier, deleted version of this comment IS funnier. Repost it and make me a laughing-stock if you want. My hands were cold.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	16-Dec-04/6:07 AM
This comment fits with my image of you as an extremely failed thirty-year-old woman. Your poem "Better Sex" doesn't, except in an extremely terrifying way.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	16-Dec-04/6:05 AM
I imagine you suggesting if someone DOESN'T have greater worth, he DOES have need to assert it. Which is probably the principle behind every poemranker post.
Re: a comment on The wreck of a Memphis-Atlanta Greyhound by zodiac	16-Dec-04/5:55 AM
re: your other comments. 1) It could if time was somehow telescoped, which is what the proem proposes, anyway. No, I don't know how that would happen. Some kind of device that shoots figs at near-lightspeed in a direction roughly opposite the bus's motion, maybe. Diagrams to follow. Also, I'll change the title, which I don't like much. 2) Sure, why not? I find there's missing punctuation all over the place. 3) I don't understand. Or at any rate, I respectfully disagree, especially about the logically sound part. 4) Not uncynically, they don't. But point taken. 5) The narrator didn't see the descent; he just guesses. Anyway, there are many ways the impact could have been slow enough to only make a man fly while leaving everybody else unharmed. Considering that this is based on a real event (in Jordan, not the U.S., and I was the flying man), you'll just have to take my word for it. 6) The impression's not the narrator's, it's his idea of the opinion of someone who believes in that stuff (i.e., the flying man), so I don't think he (the narrator) is required much to explain. Also - six lengths of someone's body was too long for a bus, unless the guy was, like, four feet tall or something. This is the longest comment I've ever posted on one of my own poems. I'm mildly ashamed.
Re: a comment on The wreck of a Memphis-Atlanta Greyhound by zodiac	16-Dec-04/5:40 AM
All my poems are for you. And about you.
Re: Better Sex by Dovina	16-Dec-04/5:36 AM
The best part is "but something at trouser level seemed to make him joyful." -10-
Re: a comment on Where's Jeremi B. Handrinos? by wFraser Allonby Q.C.w	13-Dec-04/5:39 AM
Just out of curiosity, which of the above is your pseudonym? I hope it's "Damian Gaelic".
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	13-Dec-04/5:14 AM
"Plum" as used on poemranker is only nebulous inasmuch as you are an extremely nebulous person incapable of getting it, which is a lot. Why don't you do yourself a favor and enter the term "plum" on the comment search-o-mat above? Oh, right, because your dumb. PS-Don't talk about slang anymore until you get some kind of idea about it. Slang is designed to be unintelligible to everyone who's not "special" enough to be let in on it. Consider: when enough people start getting a slang term, the originators usually change terms. Jargon is designed to be intelligible to everyone in the field to which it applies. Jargon is only useful if both parties in a dialogue know what it means. Slang is even cooler when one of the parties doesn't know what it means. In most other ways, the two words are unrelated except in your dim conception of them. And "plum" on poemranker actually means plum, you dimtard!!! In short, your totally backwards again. Be ashamed.
Re: a comment on Dancing in Memories: Slipping Away In The House On The Hill by Stacy Stewart	11-Dec-04/11:35 PM
Yawn.
Re: a comment on The Rockets’ Song by Dovina	11-Dec-04/11:23 PM
Now try this: If you think -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is some hopeless relic of the aristocracy because he uses obscure slangy expressions while you, Dovina, champion the proletariat by supporting dictionary definitions and disdaining slang, you're totally backwards. Besides, if you think that, you'll have utterly reversed/contraried yourself from your last month's bungled argument. As everyone in the world knows, most slang expressions are made up by the poorer classes. It's in their interest, since it's a stick in the eye of the aristocracy, and since they probably won't get really get real language usage anyway. It's in the upper-classes' interest to defend dictionary definitions; besides, the aristocracy and people controlled by the aristocracy write dictionaries, so it's in their interest to include their own special meanings in them. You'll notice that in cases of slang expressions invented by the aristocracy (i.e., "Jolly good!" or the way many Brits say "Right!" every couple of seconds), the words are mostly used according to their dictionary definitions, while most proletarian slang terms I can think of depend on using a word removed from (or only slightly related to) its original meaning - like "to shag", "fucking", or "dyke". In short, of course -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is a relic of the aristocracy. Everyone knows that. Unfortunately for you, that only means anything to someone who'd assign value to a person based on his class, which is called racist. And if you've proved anything here, it's just that -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is an aristocrat badly imitating proletarian slang expressions and you're a proletarian (or middle-classer, more likely,) badly imitating aristocratic dictionary-love, which everybody knows already. And you come out a lot worse for it.