For those enjoying the Bad Poetry thread at this web site...I thoroughly enjoyed the Petras's collection of Very Bad Poetry, back in the 1990s.
I've used that label for further discussions of Bad Poetry (as a genre from which the work of living poets is excluded, categorically, on the grounds that even if it's bad by the standards of existing poetry it may turn out to be historically important in the development of new poetry), and also for mine...I don't actually try to write bad poems, as such. I hope some readers may classify my verses as "light" or "whimsical" or even "minor," rather than "bad." But I do try to write unpretentious poems, usually with some sort of form, often with some sort of imperfection in the form...
In its early years this web site regularly linked to other people's poems. Current policy, as set by the shifting winds of search engine optimization and "what gets sites misclassified as spam sites even though no member of this site has ever in our life used an automated mailing list for any purpose," is to link much less liberally. Some of the blogs I follow, as displayed in the right side bar, use a link widget that does not work for this site--something to do with the local server's security settings, which are tight, as they should be, and which inspired last week's O Bheal poem about the county that voted to block all electronic communication (while other parts of the same fictional post-plague world have preserved and improved local electronic technology). They link to lots of poem posts, or pet posts, or posts on other themes. We don't.
Those interested in following the links may find my comments on some, not all, linked posts, which brings up a thought that may be off-topic but hardly rates a separate post. Recently, because Disqus has been misbehaving, I reclaimed the file Disqus automatically creates of all of a user's comments. I read through that file--actually with the purpose of filing unusual screen names in my Names Database, because, as noted, I'm a word-nerd--and I noticed something very interesting.
I'd assumed that this web site had been reported as spam because of our epic Link Logs, which were not e-mailed to any lists by anyone here or, so far as I know, by any linked site, but I'd seen muttering about the hazards of liberal linking. Hello--the original meaning of "blog" was a "web log" of all the sites early Internet users had visited and found worth endorsing, right? And, when this web site was in a sort of prenatal stage at Weebly, did not Google actually prod us to add more links? But these things change, and also the Link Logs were generating the most traffic and seemed like the thread most likely to generate revenue by being made pay-per-view.
(Yes, this is a pay-per-view web site...although you're viewing it free of charge, each post you see has been sponsored with a cash or Paypal contribution. The price per post is U$5.00. To keep the site active, Paypal users may click on https://www.paypal.me/PriscillaKingUS/5 and specify the type of posts you'd like to see more of in the "message" field. Others may send U.S. postal money orders to the address found in the Payment Information Page, with specifications in a printed/written note, or a physical copy of a book you'd like to see reviewed here. Once paid, posts can be viewed by everybody. Limits on the type of content we post are basically set by our contract with Google--no porn, hate, violence, or links to sites that didn't behave well for me; as a general policy we interpret the porn policy to mean that we don't mention any body parts, although this rule has occasionally been overridden in health news posts with warnings.)
We used to link to, or post, content shared by correspondents. There was some disagreement about the extent to which the members of this web site endorse the opinions of correspondents, or need to. We now very rarely post content shared by correspondents other than currently sitting elected officials. We have a U.S. Senator who sends out quite a lot of e-mail containing interactive software Google doesn't like. We are quite sure Senator Kaine's intentions are legitimate--our Congressmen's staff need to know whether any correspondence they get is coming from inside or outside Virginia, and/or from political organizations--but Google has misgivings. We have another U.S. Senator whose correspondence tends to snag even in Yahoo's spam filter, although it's not spam, because even Yahoo doesn't like his interactive signature graphic. We had wondered whether we'd been "reported as spam" on account of any elected officials, and, if so, which ones.
But no. Turns out, according to Disqus, the spam reports came from a regular reader's site. This person used to post good content at a messy site. I posted some links to and comments on her content. So far so good, but the site got messier and messier. I posted some warnings that I wasn't able to read her content due to especially obnoxious ad gadgets. Rather than have the good sense to appreciate the warnings, or even have the common courtesy to reply that she was making money from the ad gadgets so she'd rather keep them than me, she reported those comments as spam! Some people live and don't learn!
So, for fellow participants in or followers of those "Link-Ups" and "Blog Parties"...Sometimes I comment even if a site doesn't behave well. Sometimes I withhold comments until I'm able to print a page out and read it (I try to avoid careful reading of screens when possible). Sometimes I don't get back to a page, or even get to it the first time, before the comments are closed. Sometimes I don't comment because I don't like the actual content, but not for any reason that needs discussion; it's just not my kind of thing, and it's not one of those sites like Blogjob or Chatabout where we got paid for posting things like "Nice graphic" or "Hello, how are you today?"--which some bloggers don't even like. I don't, in any case, use link widgets.
I might bring back the Link Logs with comments, which were obviously readers' favorite part of this web site, if readers asked and paid for them. Unfortunately, the most popular Link Logs featured cute animal pictures supplied by Petfinder, a U.S. animal rescue site; everybody seemed to like the cats and dogs, and people shared those posts, and people in the appropriate cities even adopted the animals! How cool was that?!--but then Petfinder DOWNgraded to a system that no longer meets our standards for web site behavior (sticky cookies), so Petfinder links won't be coming back until they can fix that. Sorry. I enjoyed the Petfinder links.
Even my cat enjoyed the Petfinder links, when I was posting them. I don't know to what extent my lap-snuggling cat actually looked at them, but she definitely enjoyed snuggling while I reviewed them on the computer, and she did look at pictures on screens and endorse the pictures I snapped of her family. Lap-snuggling behavior tends to be a function of age in cats. My current cats are too young to do much of it. I wouldn't expect they'd purr over any posts containing Petfinder links for a few more years.
("Do you really live in a Cat Sanctuary?" Yes. "Do you actually rescue cats outside your resident cat family?" Yes...but although I do physically foster adoptable cats when that seems to be indicated, I've placed more cats directly from places where they were put up for adoption to places where they've been adopted. Animal sanctuaries are not animal shelters.)
But, if any Link Logs do come back, rules will be enforced:
* Linked sites must load easily in Vista and Chrome 49, if not in Opera, which is preferred. (If you fell for the idea of Windows 10 being an "upgrade," please don't assume that other people were so naive.)
* Cookies must crumble when the window closes, without further steps being taken.
* Chances of being linked increase substantially if a page opens at once, with text or a small simple picture on top and all graphics and ads below. One jiggle, as seems unfortunately to be built into most Blogger, Blogspot, and Amazon pages (one gimmick loads above the main content), may be tolerated. Repeated jiggling, or any widgets that automatically play videos, will not be tolerated.
* This web site was created by and for word-nerds. We enjoy small, simple, pretty pictures. We hate big splashy graphics that crowd the main content off the page, anything interactive, anything that makes a noise (remember we encourage readers to go online from public places), anything that moves or flickers on the screen (we have a sponsor who suffers from vertigo, and don't know how many readers have actual seizures), or anything that tries to stalk or spy readers and "personalize ads."
* We use Amazon graphics liberally, because Amazon pays commissions; we use only the kind that display specific books or products that are relevant to the main content, never the kind that try to be "all about you" the reader, which readers we know personally find obnoxious. What Google does is unavoidable; it may be annoying if you visit other sites that use Google ads, which this site does not, but at least it's guaranteed not to damage your computer.
* Whatever different sites may accept as spam reports...no legitimate member of this web site will ever follow you beyond a published site or social media account you choose to post here, nor will this web site ever send out automated e-mails, nor will we ever knowingly share your contact information with any site that does.
We hate spam too. We have taken basic security precautions like using only business names and contact information, and no bank information, online, and recommend you do the same (unless and until your business generates enough revenue that you need to set up a business or nonprofit organization account). We do receive some spam addressed to our individual screen names and business address...which is better than letting the Super Snoopers generate spam like "Hello John and Jane, we're sending Santa's helpers directly to 123 Main Street with a load of everything Jack and Jill want for Christmas," by a long way.
And if you don't like a comment that I, or some other member of this web site, may post on your page: that's your right, but you make a much better impression if you either remove that individual comment, or remove it with a message explaining why, rather than falsely report it as spam. This web site exists to generate income, and does regularly ask readers to send money to buy products or support the site, but only in content displayed at the site, never in automatic e-mails.
Now (finally) the poem:
Crow: my cousin’s made it through an entire year sober!
* Linked sites must load easily in Vista and Chrome 49, if not in Opera, which is preferred. (If you fell for the idea of Windows 10 being an "upgrade," please don't assume that other people were so naive.)
* Cookies must crumble when the window closes, without further steps being taken.
* Chances of being linked increase substantially if a page opens at once, with text or a small simple picture on top and all graphics and ads below. One jiggle, as seems unfortunately to be built into most Blogger, Blogspot, and Amazon pages (one gimmick loads above the main content), may be tolerated. Repeated jiggling, or any widgets that automatically play videos, will not be tolerated.
* This web site was created by and for word-nerds. We enjoy small, simple, pretty pictures. We hate big splashy graphics that crowd the main content off the page, anything interactive, anything that makes a noise (remember we encourage readers to go online from public places), anything that moves or flickers on the screen (we have a sponsor who suffers from vertigo, and don't know how many readers have actual seizures), or anything that tries to stalk or spy readers and "personalize ads."
* We use Amazon graphics liberally, because Amazon pays commissions; we use only the kind that display specific books or products that are relevant to the main content, never the kind that try to be "all about you" the reader, which readers we know personally find obnoxious. What Google does is unavoidable; it may be annoying if you visit other sites that use Google ads, which this site does not, but at least it's guaranteed not to damage your computer.
* Whatever different sites may accept as spam reports...no legitimate member of this web site will ever follow you beyond a published site or social media account you choose to post here, nor will this web site ever send out automated e-mails, nor will we ever knowingly share your contact information with any site that does.
We hate spam too. We have taken basic security precautions like using only business names and contact information, and no bank information, online, and recommend you do the same (unless and until your business generates enough revenue that you need to set up a business or nonprofit organization account). We do receive some spam addressed to our individual screen names and business address...which is better than letting the Super Snoopers generate spam like "Hello John and Jane, we're sending Santa's helpers directly to 123 Main Street with a load of everything Jack and Jill want for Christmas," by a long way.
And if you don't like a comment that I, or some other member of this web site, may post on your page: that's your right, but you make a much better impression if you either remove that individual comment, or remove it with a message explaining why, rather than falsely report it as spam. This web site exists to generate income, and does regularly ask readers to send money to buy products or support the site, but only in content displayed at the site, never in automatic e-mails.
Now (finally) the poem:
Crow: my cousin’s made it through an entire year sober!
Celebrate his victory; hope he’ll do it over!
Cheer that comes in cup or bottle soon becomes heart-sorrow;
Blest are those whose laughter goes on and on tomorrow.
Here’s to a culture where we all drink soda-water
And a man can be as merry as his toddler daughter!
With a mug of hot black coffee and a cup of tea,
And a glass of icy water, merry let us be!
No comments:
Post a Comment