Sonnet #119 / William Shakespeare

[Will Dockery]

Sonnet #119

What potions have I drunk of Siren tears,
Distill'd from limbecks foul as hell within,
Applying fears to hopes and hopes to fears,
Still losing when I saw myself to win!
What wretched errors hath my heart committed,
Whilst it hath thought itself so blessed never!
How have mine eyes out of their spheres been fitted
In the distraction of this madding fever!
O benefit of ill! now I find true
That better is by evil still made better;
And ruin'd love, when it is built anew,
Grows fairer than at first, more strong, far greater.
So I return rebuked to my content
And gain by ill thrice more than I have spent.

-William Shakespeare

Well, this is a rather creepy one... more like something I'd expect from
Baudelaire or Rimbaud in a grim funk.

An enjoyable change of pace from the old Bard.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Will Dockery
Sonnet #119
What potions have I drunk of Siren tears,
Distill'd from limbecks foul as hell within,
Applying fears to hopes and hopes to fears,
Still losing when I saw myself to win!
What wretched errors hath my heart committed,
Whilst it hath thought itself so blessed never!
How have mine eyes out of their spheres been fitted
In the distraction of this madding fever!
O benefit of ill! now I find true
That better is by evil still made better;
And ruin'd love, when it is built anew,
Grows fairer than at first, more strong, far greater.
So I return rebuked to my content
And gain by ill thrice more than I have spent.
-William Shakespeare
Well, this is a rather creepy one... more like something I'd expect from
Baudelaire or Rimbaud in a grim funk.
An enjoyable change of pace from the old Bard.

Shakespeare can be very dark (Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear), but I think this sonnet ends on an upbeat, redemptive note. The poet has erred, but through his errors come to realize the true worth of a good person's love (be it a lover/wife, self love/respect, God, or a combination of all three).

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Will Dockery
Sonnet #119
What potions have I drunk of Siren tears,
Distill'd from limbecks foul as hell within,
Applying fears to hopes and hopes to fears,
Still losing when I saw myself to win!
What wretched errors hath my heart committed,
Whilst it hath thought itself so blessed never!
How have mine eyes out of their spheres been fitted
In the distraction of this madding fever!
O benefit of ill! now I find true
That better is by evil still made better;
And ruin'd love, when it is built anew,
Grows fairer than at first, more strong, far greater.
So I return rebuked to my content
And gain by ill thrice more than I have spent.
-William Shakespeare
Well, this is a rather creepy one... more like something I'd expect from
Baudelaire or Rimbaud in a grim funk.
An enjoyable change of pace from the old Bard.

Shakespeare can be very dark (Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear), but I think this sonnet ends on an upbeat, redemptive note. The poet has erred, but through his errors come to realize the true worth of a good person's love (be it a lover/wife, self love/respect, God, or a combination of all three).

My favorite version of Macbeth is the Orson Welles adaptation, which I'd wager you've seen, black and white and so dark that the actors can barely be seen, while Welles does a mushmouthed recital of the Macbeth role in a "realisitic" accent that almost need subtitles to be understood. Shakespeare pretty much invented the film noir, as well:

Michael, had a funny moment this morning watching "I Love Lucy" when the guest star on the episode shown turned out to be Orson Welles.

This was early 1950s Welles, got a bit chubby but still fit and still very much the "superstar" on the level of Lucy and Desi, and he was there to do a charity show with Desi... with a special request to have Lucy as his assistant for his magic act, a great episode that mixes the "real life" people with the actors playing characters on a sitcom.

Funny to see Lucy swoon while talking with Welles... that chick sure had some weird taste in men!

But yeah, that ending where Shakespeare dusts himself off and prepares to carry on is good, all in all sonnet #119 is one of his more successful ones, imo.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Will Dockery
Sonnet #119
What potions have I drunk of Siren tears,
Distill'd from limbecks foul as hell within,
Applying fears to hopes and hopes to fears,
Still losing when I saw myself to win!
What wretched errors hath my heart committed,
Whilst it hath thought itself so blessed never!
How have mine eyes out of their spheres been fitted
In the distraction of this madding fever!
O benefit of ill! now I find true
That better is by evil still made better;
And ruin'd love, when it is built anew,
Grows fairer than at first, more strong, far greater.
So I return rebuked to my content
And gain by ill thrice more than I have spent.
-William Shakespeare
Well, this is a rather creepy one... more like something I'd expect from
Baudelaire or Rimbaud in a grim funk.
An enjoyable change of pace from the old Bard.

Shakespeare can be very dark (Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear), but I think this sonnet ends on an upbeat, redemptive note. The poet has erred, but through his errors come to realize the true worth of a good person's love (be it a lover/wife, self love/respect, God, or a combination of all three).

I first watched this one when I was about 16 or so. I last watched it about a year ago on youtube. I've probably seen it a half dozen times or so altogether.

I was fortunate enough to catch his Othello in its theatrical rerelease 20-ish years ago. Welles on the big screen is a glorious experience. Caught the reconstruction of "It's All True" on the big screen as well.

"Chimes at Midnight" is the ultimate Welles-Shakespeare film, though. I wasn't able to find a screening or vhs copy of it for many years, but one night on youtube, there it was. If it's still up, it's an absolute must see. Welles used scenes from 5 different Shakespeare plays to create the story of Falstaff (played, of course, by himself). He often cited it as his favorite of his films.

Post by Will Dockery
http://youtu.be/Z1_I36qHDts
Michael, had a funny moment this morning watching "I Love Lucy" when the guest star on the episode shown turned out to be Orson Welles.
This was early 1950s Welles, got a bit chubby but still fit and still very much the "superstar" on the level of Lucy and Desi, and he was there to do a charity show with Desi... with a special request to have Lucy as his assistant for his magic act, a great episode that mixes the "real life" people with the actors playing characters on a sitcom.
Funny to see Lucy swoon while talking with Welles... that chick sure had some weird taste in men!

Hey, Orson Welles got his share of babes. Even when he was old and morbidly obese. Dolores Del Rio, Rita Hayworth, Eartha Kitt, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Judy Garland, Paola Mori, Oja Kodar, half the NYC Ballet ...

Post by Will Dockery
But yeah, that ending where Shakespeare dusts himself off and prepares to carry on is good, all in all sonnet #119 is one of his more successful ones, imo.

Definitely a cut above.

[Hieronymous707]

Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.

I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

[Hieronymous707]

I don't think so, no. Definitely not.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Hieronymous707
I don't think so, no. Definitely not.

Thanks for clarifying that (cough).

[Hieronymous707]

Of course I don't have my underwear.
I'm definitely not wearing my underwear.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.

I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

Corey's posts are like trying to read tea leaves.

They could mean anything... or nothing.

Or both.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.

I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

Maybe Corey should define what his idea of a classic is?

I remember a similar discussion when he insisted that Harlan Ellison and Jack Kerouac were not writers of classics, either.

So maybe the word needs to be codified and entered into the Usenet poetry FAQ.

[Hieronymous707]

Whoosh. Can't talk right now. Treadmill. Later.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
If that's the case, then I don't understand
what your reference to being gullible meant
if not to suggest that Geno was correct, and
that I had duped you into thinking I had other
than homosexual intentions in your regard.

I thought you were my friend, so I've been wrong before.

Just sayin'.

--
Though I would never presume to compete with either Joe Cocker or John
Belushi, I have been doing my Joe Cocker tribute with The Conley Brothers
Band (& Sandy Madaris) at live shows for a number of years. Here, for your
consideration, is "Feelin' Alright" / A tribute to Joe Cocker:
http://www.reverbnation.com/open_graph/video/4971478

[Hieronymous707]

I am friendly. You know that from personal experience.
I am not your friend as I define the word friend. I've
told you that repeatedly. I am capable of being generally
and genuinely friendly without being your friend specifically.
It's a special skill I've developed over time as a professional
friendly person, which is essentially all a minister is anyway.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 04:41:51 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.

I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

Maybe Corey should define what his idea of a classic is?

Maybe your husband should also say how many of them he's plagiarised
and what illegal drugs he was taking while doing so.

Post by Will Dockery
I remember a similar discussion when he insisted that Harlan Ellison
and Jack Kerouac were not writers of classics, either.

I could image using such phrases as "a classic example of trivial pulp
fiction" or "a classic example of drug-addled tripe", so perhaps
there's a sense in which those two people wrote classics.

Post by Will Dockery
So maybe the word needs to be codified and entered into the Usenet poetry FAQ.

What Usenet poetry FAQ?

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 04:41:51 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery
I remember a similar discussion when he insisted that Harlan Ellison
and Jack Kerouac were not writers of classics, either.

I could image using such phrases as "a classic example of trivial pulp
fiction" or "a classic example of drug-addled tripe", so perhaps
there's a sense in which those two people wrote classics.

Look it up, and set your jealousy of better writers than you aside, PJR.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 04:41:51 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.
I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

Maybe Corey should define what his idea of a classic is?

Maybe your husband should also say how many

My "husband"? Try to have your attempted insults make sense, PJR.

Are you confused, been sipping too much of the holiday booze, or both?

My bet is on "both".

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Mon, 22 Dec 2014 01:40:35 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 04:41:51 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
Not a classic. Definitively not a classic. Definitely. Definitely not a classic.
I hope you're talking about #119 and *not* one of Mr. Welles' films.

Maybe Corey should define what his idea of a classic is?

Maybe your husband should also say how many

My "husband"? Try to have your attempted insults make sense, PJR.

If you prefer me to call Mrs Douchebag your "wife", I'll be happy to
do so, but there's no doubt that Mrs Douchebag is the one who wears
the trousers in the Douchebag household.

Post by Will Dockery
Are you confused, been sipping too much of the holiday booze, or both?
My bet is on "both".

Try not to judge everybody by your own standards, lwd.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version
depicted in the video.

Are you now claiming that two or more people were holding the camera?

My camera was on a tripod, and I simply had a friend click the start button
when the song began.

Not that any of this is your business, of course, so your subtle stalking is
noted.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version
depicted in the video.

Are you now claiming that two or more people were holding the camera?

My camera was on a tripod, and I simply had a friend click the start button
when the song began.
Not that any of this is your business, of course, so your subtle stalking is
noted.

Right now it's Piggy who's pushing the buttons.

This sort of piggery doesn't deserve a serious reply.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
You don't have the right to title my video,
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

As you know, the quality of the recording is too poor to get much use out of
anyway, but I have thanked you for filming it.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL. Yeah, right. That's not what you
said before, but whatever. I'm over it.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:03:28 -0500, Will

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
You don't have the right to title my video,
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

As you know, the quality of the recording is too poor to get much use out of
anyway, but I have thanked you for filming it.

I'd quite like to watch your spouse's video (which belongs exclusively
to him, unless he's specified otherwise in a pre-nup agreement).

I find it hard to believe that the quality of the video recording
could be worse than the quality of the drunken antics it records.

[Hieronymous707]

The quality of the video is about what you'd expect from a smartphone, i.e.
it's viewable. I have a Ustream channel, and volunteered to broadcast Will's
performance live. Not only did he not thank me at the time, he acted like he
was doing me the favor. Will tends to act the prima donna. In my experience,
it's really not much of an act. Will will always remind me of a huge burning
vagina, which coincidentally was the theme of the event I attended.

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Hieronymous707
The quality of the video is about what you'd expect from a smartphone, i.e.
it's viewable. I have a Ustream channel, and volunteered to broadcast Will's
performance live. Not only did he not thank me at the time, he acted like he
was doing me the favor. Will tends to act the prima donna. In my experience,
it's really not much of an act. Will will always remind me of a huge burning
vagina, which coincidentally was the theme of the event I attended.

Latent homosexual projection coupled with a flaming variation on Vagina Dentata ... Freud would have a field day with you.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL. Thanks for reading and commenting.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Hieronymous707
The quality of the video is about what you'd expect from a smartphone, i.e.
it's viewable. I have a Ustream channel, and volunteered to broadcast Will's
performance live. Not only did he not thank me at the time, he acted like he
was doing me the favor. Will tends to act the prima donna. In my experience,
it's really not much of an act. Will will always remind me of a huge burning
vagina, which coincidentally was the theme of the event I attended.

Latent homosexual projection coupled with a flaming variation on Vagina Dentata ... Freud would have a field day with you.

Yes, and he seems so deeply /hurt/ by it all... Drama Queen Klinger that he is.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL. Thanks for pretending to read and comment.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
LOL. Thanks for pretending to read and comment.

Corey, PJR wrote that he'd like to watch the Doo-Nanny video, can you post it for him here?

Since he's probably still pretending to Killfile you, he'll have to get the link through my reply to you.

Unless he's in such a tizzy by now he'll be pretending to killfile /me/ again as well... heh.

[Hieronymous707]

Yes, sir. I could most certainly post a link to the video if I were so
inclined, and properly motivated to do so. Thank you for asking.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
Yes, sir. I could most certainly post a link to the video if I were so
inclined, and properly motivated to do so. Thank you for asking.

Right, I sort of knew that already, Oh Flaming Bush.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL, sort of knew.
That's rich. Thanks.

[Will Dockery]

<This message has been deleted.>

Nothing, literally, to argue with, there... heh.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL

[Will Dockery]

LOL

A Happy, Hilarious X-Mas Eve Morning to you, Reverend!

[Hieronymous707]

WRONG! LOL.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
WRONG! LOL.

Sorry, you don't have to authority to declare what I do right or wrong.

Nice try, though, Oh Flaming One.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL. WRONG, AGAIN!
(nothing new to see here.)

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Hieronymous707
The quality of the video is about what you'd expect from a smartphone, i.e.
it's viewable. I have a Ustream channel, and volunteered to broadcast Will's
performance live. Not only did he not thank me at the time, he acted like he
was doing me the favor. Will tends to act the prima donna. In my experience,
it's really not much of an act. Will will always remind me of a huge burning
vagina, which coincidentally was the theme of the event I attended.

Latent homosexual projection coupled with a flaming variation on Vagina Dentata ... Freud would have a field day with you.

Yeah, same thing Geno tried to tell me after he met Corey at Doo-Nanny.

But, gullible me, I thought Corey was just being friendly.

[Hieronymous707]

Okay, so let me get this straight.
You both believe that my reason
for attending Doo-Nanny is that I
had homosexual feelings for you.

Thanks for reading and commenting!

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
Okay, so let me get this straight.
You both believe that my reason
for attending Doo-Nanny is that I
had homosexual feelings for you.
Thanks for reading and commenting!

No, you misread whjat I wrote.

I wrote that at least one "friend" warned me what he had decided you were up
to (who you also claimed to trade emails with at the time, although he
angrily denied that).

Then you went off for the night with Parnello and Gabe, and knowing them and
their swinging lifestyles, I did kind of wonder.

Anyway, no, I just thought you wer being friendly, and you even fooled me
into thinking we were friend.

New year is coming, live and learn, I reckon.

--
"Autograph of Zorro / Black Eagle Lady" written by W. Dockery, H. Conley &
M.H. Benders. Note: This is the authorized posting of this video.
Duplication, unless by the above named collaborators, is a violation of
copyright.

http://youtu.be/X2XfA8Zg3Lw

[Will Dockery]

"Hieronymous707" wrote in message

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
Thanks for reading and comme

No, you misread whjat I wrote.

Yeah, I know, I know... a typos.

Don't blow a fuse over it.

--
"Autograph of Zorro / Black Eagle Lady" written by W. Dockery, H. Conley & M.H. Benders. Note: This is the authorized posting of this video. Duplication, unless by the above named collaborators, is a violation of copyright.

http://youtu.be/X2XfA8Zg3Lw

[Hieronymous707]

I don't believe I ever claimed to have traded emails with your friend, Geno, but
it doesn't really matter. I imagine I'd have been received quite differently by you
and your friends had I shown up at Doo-Nanny in my reverend clothes and
clerical collar. At least we met and nobody got hurt. That's the important thing.

LOL

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
I don't believe I ever claimed to have traded emails with your friend, Geno, but
it doesn't really matter. I imagine I'd have been received quite differently by you
and your friends had I shown up at Doo-Nanny in my reverend clothes and
clerical collar. At least we met and nobody got hurt. That's the important thing.

Well, it seems it was "Skype" rather than email, and maybe it wasn't much
communication, but there was some, as your posts at the time state:

From:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.arts.poetry.comments/J_6qXYZPvFY/fqQODTryq8MJ

-------------------------------------------------------

Post by Hieronymous707

Dear Will,
I love your titles. As you can see, I've rewritten and retitled
several of my poems. I've posted them here, to my blog, Facebook, and
Twitter. Feel free to say whatever you want to about them, or pay
them no attention at all. I just wanted you to know, like as if this
was some sort of public 'contract' or something, that if I get rich
from them, I'll make you rich too. Fair enough? They'll probably
just sit out there in the ethernet for ever and ever and never amount
to anything, but you never know. Stranger things have happened, and I
need you to agree because as it stands now I'm not supposed to send
you any more money, and I won't if you still don't want me to.

Hey, Will. Were you with Gene when he tried to call me on Skype last
night? I can't imagine why else he would call. I don't even know
him. I tried to wish him a happy birthday, but he didn't answer me.
Is he as big a pussy as you are?

---------------------------------------------

From:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.arts.poetry.comments/J_6qXYZPvFY/fqQODTryq8MJ

Okay, it looks like it was "Skype" that I got the Geno and you emailing
thing from, and true, it looks like (at least at the point archived here)
that there wasn't much communication between y'all.

Interesting that of all the hundreds of posts you've deleted, you left those
in this bizarre thread up.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
I don't believe I ever claimed to have traded emails with your friend,
Geno

From:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.arts.poetry.comments/J_6qXYZPvFY/kdfGDcCAIsgJ

Post by Hieronymous707

Post by Hieronymous707
Hey, Will. Were you with Gene when he tried to call me on
Skype last night?

No... I probably won't see Geno until Thursday.

Oh, okay. Tell him I said happy birthday.

Would he know who you are?

If you think that matters, fuckin' forget it.

Of course it matters. If I told Geno "Corey says 'happy birthday', his
first response would no doubt be "Corey who?", unless he knows you.
Get it?

You must've said something to him because he asked me on Skype who I'd
been talking to about him. Of course, he doesn't know me because
we've never been introduced, yet he keeps inviting me to Conley Bros.
events on FB. He must have some sense that I am interested in such
things, and he must have gotten that idea from somewhere. He sure
didn't get it from me.

Here is where you write that he "asked me on Skype", so, although there
wasn't any email communication between you two, maybe, there was Skype
communication, or so you claimed at the time.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL

[Will Dockery]

LOL

Yeah, that's an amusing thread...

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
I imagine I'd have been received quite differently by you
and your friends had I shown up at Doo-Nanny in my reverend clothes and
clerical collar.

Well, depends on who read your bizarre Usenet posts right before your
surprise appearance at Doo-Nanny.

From:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.arts.poetry.comments/J_6qXYZPvFY/pBqiQXQhpt4J

Post by Hieronymous707

Post by Hieronymous707
You must've said something to him because he asked me on Skype who I'd
been talking to about him.

I did ask Geno if he knew a "Corey" from Skype, and he said that he
doesn't use Skype, so I didn't bother to continue from there.
He has posted here from time-to-time, and may very well be reading
this...
--
Music, poetry & video of Will Dockery &
Friends:http://www.youtube.com/user/WDockery

Oh yeah?
HEY GENO, IF YOU'RE OUT THERE!! FUCK YOU, PAL! AM I FUCKING CRAZY?
WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU'RE TALKING TO, ASSHOLE!! YOU DON'T
FUCKING KNOW ME, DICKHEAD!! FUCK OFF, AND UNFRIEND ME, AND DON'T EVER
FUCKING TRY TO SKYPE ME AGAIN YOU SCARED ASS FAGGOT LOVER IF YOU THINK
LIKE THIS EVER LOVING DICKHEAD DOCKERY DOES!! HE'S THE WORST FRIEND
YOU COULD EVER HAVE IN THE WORLD BECAUSE HE WOULD FUCK YOU IN THE ASS
EVERY CHANCE HE GOT IF HE COULD. OH YEAH, AND GOD LOVES YOU SO FUCK
YOURSELF FOR HIS SAKE PLEASE, AND THEN GO HAVE A NICE DAY!!
Okay, I've got to get to work now. Would you please shut the fuck up
so I can get out of here?

Yeah... it would have been odd if you'd showed up at Doo-Nanny in your
priest robe, and talking like you write on Usenet... Reverend Corey.

Just sayin'.

[Hieronymous707]

LOL. I don't own a priest robe, and I do talk
exactly like I write on Usenet. Ask anybody.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
LOL. I don't own a priest robe, and I do talk
exactly like I write on Usenet. Ask anybody.

Well, I'm glad you didn't come to Doo-Nanny talking exactly like you were

Post by Hieronymous707
Newsgroups: alt.arts.poetry.comments
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 06:05:52 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sun, Feb 27 2011 10:05 am
Subject: Ping: Will
Here, let me make this very easy for you. You have no idea how bad I
want to fuck you up. I want to meet you face to face, and knock you
dead flat on your ass. It's all I can do to keep from getting in my
car, driving nonstop straight to your little hovel there, and beating
the living fuck out of you, but whether I leave right this second or
not, I still plan to, and can't wait to see the look on your face
right before I kick the shit out of you with a couple of stupid little
words like caterpillar, and Bugly. Now, say something, bitch.

As a matter of fact, you didn't talk anything like you write, at least you
didn't at Doo-Nanny.

[Hieronymous707]

As a matter of verifiable fact, (verifiable because there is recorded and viewable evidence)
I talked like this to you specifically, personally and directly at Doo-Nanny while simultaneously
writing on Usenet and broadcasting your comments and performance live on the web. I spoke
to you in the same way as I wrote on Usenet before the event, during the event, and in the same
way as I'm writing now. This is how I talk. Saying I didn't talk like this doesn't make sense to me.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
As a matter of verifiable fact, (verifiable because there is recorded and viewable evidence)
I talked like this to you specifically, personally and directly at Doo-Nanny while simultaneously
writing on Usenet and broadcasting your comments and performance live on the web. I spoke
to you in the same way as I wrote on Usenet before the event, during the event, and in the same
way as I'm writing now. This is how I talk. Saying I didn't talk like this doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, you talked like this, not so much like the other examples that I posted.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 08:48:11 -0500, Will

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version
depicted in the video.

Are you now claiming that two or more people were holding the camera?

My camera was on a tripod,

Your fantasy about owning possessions is growing more detailed. When
will you reach the notorious "two yachts" stage?

Post by Will Dockery
and I simply had a friend click the start button
when the song began.

You have no friends, Dreckster.

Post by Will Dockery
Not that any of this is your business, of course, so your subtle stalking is
noted.

You should be pleased that I'm taking an interest in "your" video.
After all, you posted the link to it about thirty quadrillion times
until it was mysteriously deleted.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version
depicted in the video.

Are you now claiming that two or more people were holding the camera?
My camera was on a tripod,
and I simply had a friend click the start button
when the song began.
Not that any of this is your business, of course, so your subtle stalking
is noted.

You should be pleased that I'm taking an interest in "your" video

Of course, as always, thank you for reading and posting.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
LOL. WRONG, AGAIN!
(nothing new to see here.)

Yeah, that's about par for the course with you and your posts, Reverend.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
Okay, so let me get this straight.
You both believe that my reason
for attending Doo-Nanny is that I
had homosexual feelings for you.
Thanks for reading and commenting!

No, I never agreed with Geno's opinions on the matter, I just thought you
were being friendly.

[Hieronymous707]

If that's the case, then I don't understand
what your reference to being gullible meant
if not to suggest that Geno was correct, and
that I had duped you into thinking I had other
than homosexual intentions in your regard.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Will Dockery
Sonnet #119
What potions have I drunk of Siren tears,
Distill'd from limbecks foul as hell within,
Applying fears to hopes and hopes to fears,
Still losing when I saw myself to win!
What wretched errors hath my heart committed,
Whilst it hath thought itself so blessed never!
How have mine eyes out of their spheres been fitted
In the distraction of this madding fever!
O benefit of ill! now I find true
That better is by evil still made better;
And ruin'd love, when it is built anew,
Grows fairer than at first, more strong, far greater.
So I return rebuked to my content
And gain by ill thrice more than I have spent.
-William Shakespeare
Well, this is a rather creepy one... more like something I'd expect from
Baudelaire or Rimbaud in a grim funk.
An enjoyable change of pace from the old Bard.

Shakespeare can be very dark (Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear), but I think this sonnet ends on an upbeat, redemptive note. The poet has erred, but through his errors come to realize the true worth of a good person's love (be it a lover/wife, self love/respect, God, or a combination of all three).

I first watched this one when I was about 16 or so. I last watched it about a year ago on youtube. I've probably seen it a half dozen times or so altogether.
I was fortunate enough to catch his Othello in its theatrical rerelease 20-ish years ago. Welles on the big screen is a glorious experience. Caught the reconstruction of "It's All True" on the big screen as well.
"Chimes at Midnight" is the ultimate Welles-Shakespeare film, though. I wasn't able to find a screening or vhs copy of it for many years, but one night on youtube, there it was. If it's still up, it's an absolute must see. Welles used scenes from 5 different Shakespeare plays to create the story of Falstaff (played, of course, by himself). He often cited it as his favorite of his films.

Haven't managed those yet, but in late 1980s & early 1990s collected almost all the basic classics, including, finally, the odd Mr. Arkadin.

Magnificent Ambersons, Touch of Evil (with a young and swarthy Charlton Heston, this one caused a bit of a stir in the Library when I found it. I got on the elevator with Kathy and said "I found Touch of Evil!" on VHS. A little old lady riding in the elevator kind of freaked out, thinking I was saying I /have/ the touch of evil, or something. I mean really, she ran to the security man and told him something... I was ready to show him the tape, and title, but nothing was said to me so I let it ride.) Citizen Kane, of course, at that time about the only video of Welles easily found on the shelves, The Stranger, Third Man, Lady From Shanghai, most of these taped off late night television from Ted Turner or AMC, a couple from local Libraries. Macbeth was from the Phenix City Library. Since I so often live on both sides of the river, I had cards for both Georgia and Alabama libraries back then. Never got the see The Trial, Chimes At Midnight or Othello, but will one of these days when they manifest at the right time. I found the DVD for "It's All True!" for like two bucks at Big Lots a while back, which was okay, but fragmented, unfinished, as we know.

All-time favorite Welles film must be Lady From Shanghai, with The Stranger, touch of Evil, Third Man falling in along there, Citizen Kane of course but I've watched it too often to know for sure, it got kind of overexposed. Magnificent Amebersons has too many rich, demanding PJR-Corey types to be really enjoyable... too much doom and gloom with no action.

Post by Michael Pendragon

Post by Will Dockery
http://youtu.be/Z1_I36qHDts
Michael, had a funny moment this morning watching "I Love Lucy" when the guest star on the episode shown turned out to be Orson Welles.
This was early 1950s Welles, got a bit chubby but still fit and still very much the "superstar" on the level of Lucy and Desi, and he was there to do a charity show with Desi... with a special request to have Lucy as his assistant for his magic act, a great episode that mixes the "real life" people with the actors playing characters on a sitcom.
Funny to see Lucy swoon while talking with Welles... that chick sure had some weird taste in men!

Hey, Orson Welles got his share of babes. Even when he was old and morbidly obese. Dolores Del Rio, Rita Hayworth,

Oh, Good Lord yes... the Lady From Shanghai!

He also had Agnes Moorehead, who may or may not have lived up to her name.

Later famous as Endora the Witch.

Post by Michael Pendragon
Eartha Kitt, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Judy Garland, Paola Mori, Oja Kodar, half the NYC Ballet ...

Post by Will Dockery
But yeah, that ending where Shakespeare dusts himself off and prepares to carry on is good, all in all sonnet #119 is one of his more successful ones, imo.

Definitely a cut above.

[Peter J Ross]

[spamming crosspost defeated]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:31:53 -0500, little

Post by Will Dockery
drunk
foul
losing
wretched
mad
ruin'd
creepy

Quick quiz question: Which one of the above descriptors of little
willie douchebag was *not* written by W Shakespeare?

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Peter J Ross
[spamming crosspost defeated]
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:31:53 -0500, little

Post by Will Dockery
drunk
foul
losing
wretched
mad
ruin'd
creepy

Quick quiz question: Which one of the above descriptors of little
willie douchebag was *not* written by W Shakespeare?

I'm going with "creepy". But he sure looks prescient about lwd.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"Trust me, the astrological ramblings are not realistic, pragmatic, or
applicable in real counseling or consulting scenarios either." - Ed,
being realistic, pragmatic and kooky.
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 00:21:26 +0000 (UTC),

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet

Post by Peter J Ross
[spamming crosspost defeated]
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:31:53 -0500, little

Post by Will Dockery
drunk
foul
losing
wretched
mad
ruin'd
creepy

Quick quiz question: Which one of the above descriptors of little
willie douchebag was *not* written by W Shakespeare?

I'm going with "creepy".

We hace a winner! SOED informs me that "creepy" (in the sense
applicable to lwd) was first recorded in 1883.

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
But he sure looks prescient about lwd.

I can't think of a character in Shakespeare's plays who could be cited
as an analogue to lwd. There are a few stupid, ignorant characters
who imagine that they're intelligent and educated (the double act of
Dogberry and Verges, for example), but they're depicted as *clean*,
*sober*, *employable* and *capable of refraining from stealing*, so
they're not really much like lwd at all.

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 00:21:26 +0000 (UTC),

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet

Post by Peter J Ross
[spamming crosspost defeated]
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:31:53 -0500,

Post by Will Dockery
drunk
foul
losing
wretched
mad
ruin'd
creepy

Quick quiz question: Which one of the above descriptors of little
willie douchebag was *not* written by W Shakespeare?

I'm going with "creepy".

We hace a winner! SOED informs me that "creepy" (in the sense
applicable to lwd) was first recorded in 1883.

I was unable to look up the proper etymology of "douchebag" as a word.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
But he sure looks prescient about lwd.

I can't think of a character in Shakespeare's plays who could be cited
as an analogue to lwd. There are a few stupid, ignorant characters
who imagine that they're intelligent and educated (the double act of
Dogberry and Verges, for example), but they're depicted as *clean*,
*sober*, *employable* and *capable of refraining from stealing*, so
they're not really much like lwd at all.

Was there any mention about the characters not paying child support or
enabling pedophiles like Lieslotz? Are they depicted as wearing
clownshoes or silly hats while at bars or taverns? How about their
composition of unspeakable shit?

I suspect there are limits to what an English audience would believe
back then but the questions are fair.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I'm going with "creepy".

Let me guess... you're going to get a room together?

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I'm going with "creepy".

Let me guess... you're going to get a room together?

Little Willie Douchebag needs to stop projecting his own fantasies onto
others.

Damn, you are one twisted soul.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
needs to stop projecting his own fantasies onto
others.
Damn, you are one twisted soul.

Your hypocrisy is noted... but that's part of that "special bond"} you and PJR share... am I right?

Why deny it?

All of us can see it... even you, probably.

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
needs to stop projecting his own fantasies onto
others.
Damn, you are one twisted soul.

Your hypocrisy is noted... but that's part of that "special bond"} you
and PJR share... am I right?

You're almost never right, little willie douchebag.

Laughing at st000pid kooks is hardly a bond but you're forgiven if you
think so given that you're deservedly the often the target of the
laughter.

So let's hear what your mind defines as a "special bond":. That ought to
be fun to troll you about for a day or two. Please don't let it turn out
to be another fag lame from you.

Post by Will Dockery
Why deny it?

Deny what? You have this depressing habit of being unable to offer
coherent thoughts. I suppose it's too late to fix you.

Post by Will Dockery
All of us can see it... even you, probably.

Can see what, little willie douchebag? There's that terminal incoherence
of yours again. I suppose that's why everyone laughs at your attempts at
higher levels of communications like poetry. Man up, drink bleach and
join the Kluckweasel in a potters field.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
You're almost never right

Nailed this one, though, and you know it.

Obviously I'm right more times than you'd want to adit.

[Will Dockery]

Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:
? I suppose that's why everyone laughs at your attempts at

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
higher levels of communications like poetry.

You and another troll hardly count bas "everybody", Cujo.

And you rambling on about poetry is pretty funny seeing as how you seem to lack the courage to even attempt writing any.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 21:16:31 +0000 (UTC),

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
You're almost never right, little willie douchebag.

Almost?

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sat, 20 Dec 2014 21:16:31 +0000 (UTC),

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
You're almost never right, little willie douchebag.

Almost?

I saw a post once where he claimed he was stupid. I'll admit it's a bit
understated but I'll say he was right.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>

Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's copyrighted video without their permission?

Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?

We know.

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>
Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's
copyrighted video without their permission?
Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not
only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?

It was there to troll you into a hissy fit. Mission accomplished.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"You are among the worst goddamned liars that exists, and I'd love to
kill
you in a ring and put an end to the useless crap which is you - but
you'll
clearly never give me that chance." - Foamboi Bartlo in a calm moment.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>
Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's
copyrighted video without their permission?
Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not
only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?

It was there to troll you into a hissy fit. Mission accomplished.

You flatter yourself, which is no surprise.'

There was no hissy-fit... there was an education for you that, troll or not, you had committed copyright infringement.

We can look it up again if your memory is that hazy on what happened.

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>
Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's
copyrighted video without their permission?
Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not
only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?

It was there to troll you into a hissy fit. Mission accomplished.

You flatter yourself, which is no surprise.'
There was no hissy-fit... there was an education for you that, troll
or not, you had committed copyright infringement.

You're still convinced of that? Geez, I'm amazed you didn't join in when
everyone sane and sentient was laughing at Dunce's claims. Oh, wait...you
tried to support the dumbfuck. Sorry.

Post by Will Dockery
We can look it up again if your memory is that hazy on what happened.

Yeah, I laughed at you and you went on a frothfest. Thanks for noticing.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"I'll bet anything many these abusers are ex-military, because they
exhibit that mindless "force, control and towing the line is everything"
idiotic mentality that has destroyed our world for eons now."
- Eddy the Paranoid Kook.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Yeah, I laughed at you and you went on a frothfest.

When you posted my "Autograph of Zorro" video on YouTube without my permission?

There was no "froth" when I simply pointed out that you had violated YouTube's terms of service with your copyright abuse of my work.

BYW, thanks for taking the video down on your own.

Remember, I never asked you to take it down, only reminded you that since the posting was copyright abuse, according to YouTube's terms of service I could make you take it down whenever I wanted to.

Glad we cleared that confusion up, Cujo.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 03:30:23 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
Yeah, I laughed at you and you went on a frothfest.

When you posted my "Autograph of Zorro" video

It's not your video, Dreckster. Learn something about copyright.

<whinesnip>

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 03:30:23 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery
When you posted my "Autograph of Zorro" video

It's not your video

<lies snipped>

You just can't help but blurt out your compulsive lies, can you, PJR?

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 03:42:00 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 03:30:23 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery
When you posted my "Autograph of Zorro" video

It's not your video

<lies snipped>
You just can't help but blurt out your compulsive lies, can you, PJR?

The statement that the creator of a work is the copyright owner of the
work is hardly a lie, Dreckster.

Unless you're Superdouchebag, with amazing powers to be helplessly
drunk in two places at once, you were not the creator of the video,
and are therefore not its copyright owner. You may have had the
copyright owner's permission to share the video on the Internet, but
the fact that you babble and whine dishonestly when you're asked
simple questions about it suggests to me that you probably hadn't.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
The statement that the creator of a work is the copyright owner of the
work

Exactly.

And "Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators - Benders, Conley and myself.

As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version depicted in the video.

[Hieronymous707]

The creator of a video is its videographer.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
The creator of a video is its videographer.

It was done "Work made for hire" style, the cameraman was compensated for turning the camera on.

[Hieronymous707]

Okay. I don't really care since I wasn't the videographer of that video.
I was just the videographer of the video I did of you at Doo-Nanny for
which I was not compensated, so I figure the rights to it are all mine.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Hieronymous707
Okay. I don't really care since I wasn't the videographer of that video.
I was just the videographer of the video I did of you at Doo-Nanny for
which I was not compensated, so I figure the rights to it are all mine.

I reckon I'd call it "A Film by Reverend Corey", but of course that wouldn't
give you any ownership of my songs and poetry that were the subject of the
film.

But I'm sure you already know that.

[Hieronymous707]

You don't have the right to title my video,
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 10:33:30 -0500, Will

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
Okay. I don't really care since I wasn't the videographer of that video.
I was just the videographer of the video I did of you at Doo-Nanny for
which I was not compensated, so I figure the rights to it are all mine.

I reckon I'd call it "A Film by Reverend Corey", but of course that wouldn't
give you any ownership of my songs and poetry that were the subject of the
film.
But I'm sure you already know that.

Are you now proposing to steal a video from your own beloved spouse?

Surely that marks a new low in your career of thievery.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:38:11 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Hieronymous707
The creator of a video is its videographer.

It was done "Work made for hire" style, the cameraman was
compensated for turning the camera on.

LOL! Dreckster hires employees!

If the cameraman was an employee of the stinking dive in which the
video was made, the owner of the stinking dive may be the copyright
owner of the video instead of the cameraman. But that's still not you.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
stinking dive
stinking dive

That's probably your upper lip you smell, Peter.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:25:16 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross
The statement that the creator of a work is the copyright owner of
the work

Exactly.
And "Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version depicted in the video.

Although you're lying, you lie is irrelevant.

The copyright ownership of "the version depicted in the video" has
nothing to do with the copyright ownership of the video, which is
what's being discussed.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:25:16 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version depicted in the video.

Although you're

<lies snipped>

You don't agree that collaborators on a work share the copyright?

If not, you should educate yourself, PJR.

The fact is that "Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators - Benders, Conley and myself.

As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version depicted in the video.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:54:55 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:25:16 -0800

Post by Will Dockery
"Autograph of Zorro" is the collaboration of three creators -
Benders, Conley and myself.
As collaborators, we three have a copyright on the version
depicted in the video.

Although you're

<lies snipped>
You don't agree that collaborators on a work share the copyright?

Are you now claiming that two or more people were holding the camera?
It would explain its shakiness, but none of those people would be you.

<whinesnip>

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
You have no friends

You may be stalking the wrong "Will Dockery" again, PJR?

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
If the cameraman was an employee of the stinking dive

My camera was on a tripod and I asked a friend to press the "start" button
when the song began.

Since I was buying the beers, he was compensated for pressing the start
button.

The camera was mine, the performance and song were mine (shared with Benders
& Conley, as a collaborative work), so the video is my property, physical
and intellectual.

Glad to clear up your confusion, although none of this is any of your
business, as we know.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 08:12:19 -0500, Will

Post by Will Dockery
My camera

LOL!

You can't afford soap. How would you pay for a camera?

Post by Will Dockery
a friend

LOL!

You have no friends.

Post by Will Dockery
I was buying the beers

LOL!

Did you succeed in drinking the dive dry?

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:03:28 -0500, Will

Post by Hieronymous707
You don't have the right to title my video,

Post by Hieronymous707
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

As you know, the quality of the recording is too poor to get much use
out of
anyway, but I have thanked you for filming it.

I'd quite like to watch

We can get Reverend Corey to post a link for you, then.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:27:22 -0500, Will

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:03:28 -0500, Will

Post by Hieronymous707
You don't have the right to title my video,

Post by Hieronymous707
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

As you know, the quality of the recording is too poor to get much use
out of
anyway, but I have thanked you for filming it.

I'd quite like to watch

We can get Reverend Corey to post a link for you, then.

You overestimate "our" (i.e. your) power within your marriage, Mrs
Snorey.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Hieronymous707
You don't have the right to title my video,

Post by Hieronymous707
but you can call it whatever, and watch it
whenever you want. I only did it as a favor
for you anyway, and this is what I get for it.

As you know, the quality of the recording is too poor to get much use
out of
anyway, but I have thanked you for filming it.

I'd quite like to watch

We can get Reverend Corey to post a link for you, then.

You overestimate "our" (i.e. your) power

Not at all, PJR, I'm simply aware that you're probably still pretending to Killfile Corey, so any communication between the two of you will have to appear to be through the posts of others.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:10:08 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>
Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's
copyrighted video without their permission?
Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not
only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?
We know.

Be careful. Santa Claus isn't generous to little douchebags who never
tell the truth about anything. You don't wan't to wake up on Xmas Day
and find no Sterno™ in your stocking, do you?

[Michael Pendragon]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 14:10:08 -0800 (PST),

Post by Will Dockery

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
I saw a post once where he

<snip>
Gave you a little education on the folly of using a creator's
copyrighted video without their permission?
Yes, I suppose you figured out that doing so was a violation of not
only copyright law, but YouTube's Terms of Service?
We know.

Be careful. Santa Claus isn't generous to little douchebags who never
tell the truth about anything.

The voice of experience.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet
You're almost never right

Almost?

I've been right more times than a lying hypocrit such as you could ever admit, PJR.

[Will Dockery]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.arts.poetry.comments on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 01:31:53 -0500, little
willie

Heh... so you forgot you were pretending to killfile me already.

No surprise there, and Merry Christmas, troll!