Join the Neopoet online poetry workshop and community to improve as a writer, meet fellow poets, and showcase your work. Sign up, submit your poetry, and get started.
I am forced to make an apology to my fellow poets Jess and Eumoplus. I will not stutter like the Fonz and say "I was wwww- wwwrrr- wwwrrrooonng. " I was wrong!
I confused their right to comment on the poem's content with a personal attack on another poet.
Such was not the case! I can only admit that I was bitten by a bug of self-righteous morality, and rushed to defend an out dated and indefensible code. However... From now forward, I will ask no quarter and there will be none given! I will play by the new rules. ~ Geezer
weirdelf
7 years 5 months ago
I appreciate this but don't understand
What are the 'new rules'?
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
The ones that...
I was raised with and on, that you shouldn't disparage anyone's religion or set of beliefs. I realize now that I was wrong, and I apologized; thanks to the links that you sent me. Thank you!
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
In case...
I am taken to task for not answering your question directly. The new rules are, that one can say anything they like about anything they like, [or don't like]. I guess that technically, there is only one and so I revise the statement of "new rules" to rule. Again, thanks for the links that you sent me. They helped me immensely.
weirdelf
7 years 5 months ago
Not quite.
I would personally come down heavily on race hate or child porn content, anyone disagree with that?
It still applies that we don't attack the writer, of course, this is just about content, although in the two instances I just mentioned I would also slam hell out of the writer and do everything I could to drive them from the site and fuck the rules or guidelines. In fact in the case of child abuse content I would wait to give Andrew a chance to track down the writer and report them to police.
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
No diagreement here....
there are some things that will not be tolerated at all, those being two of them. I again, spoke with my brain not engaged. [Which is one thing that a person should not do when dealing with someone as astute and sharp as yourself.] I am content to let the matter rest. I do not profess to be religious in any sense of the word and have no stake in this at all. Let us agree that further discussion is not needed.
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
I hope that...
my answer to Jess, was sufficient?
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
Why thank you sir...
I know that it is a big undertaking, I hope that I am up to it!
swamp-witch
7 years 5 months ago
Hey Guy,
Forced? Please tell me you mean you feel obligated and not that someone forced you. One I deeply commend you for (since from what I have seen, you were trying to defend the poet), the other worries me.
I am much too late to the discussion. Forgive me for that. I would have tried to mediate the discussion on the poem immediately if had been around.
Kelsey
weirdelf
7 years 5 months ago
Just look at it in context, Kelsey.
The three poems posted three months ago then the one in question just a few days ago.
It was the links to the first three poems that changed Gee's mind about this.
swamp-witch
7 years 5 months ago
Got it!
Didn't see the links so I thought I was missing something major.
Kelsey
Geezer
7 years 5 months ago
Boy, can't open...
my mouth without putting my foot squarely into it.! OF COURSE, I mean obligated. I felt OBLIGATED to make an apology Seeing as how I had been proven wrong in the case of mistaking a comment on the content of a poem for a personal attack. ~ Gee.
.
swamp-witch
7 years 5 months ago
Gee, no foot in mouth at all
I was just worried about you, is all! Didn't want you feeling targeted just like no one else should be. I don't want anyone to ever feel forced to apologize when it comes to folks defending other folks or having disagreements.
All my best,
Kels