re: "I'm glad you caught the metaphor." You idiot. The title of the poem is "Mice". Presumably at least half of the metaphor is mice. A metaphor is supposed to work for both the thing it's superficially describing and the thing it's alluding to. richa said 'this poem isn't very good at describing mice'. Ergo, you've at least half-failed. This poem isn't a very good description of people either. And ratrace/human metaphors are overdone. Now you've totally failed. I hope you're suitably ashamed of yourself.

That's because it isn't about mice. I'm glad you caught the metaphor. You're ridiculous.

You win! You have more interest in idle chitchat than any other human being on this planet (if you are human and not just computer generated). I think I'll go to work and talk to some real people now.

I agree. Somebody should be shot for this travesty.

What he said, but more impressively so.

The following, in no particular order are the unsupportable assumptions contained in the famous "hiding behind a computer screen" insult: 1) I don't talk like this to people all the time; 2) I'm not telling you the truth about the crappiness of your poems/personality/ideas about everything; 3) The people you do deal with face-to-face DO tell you the truth about the greatness/originality of your poems, opinions, etc; 4) The internet's worse for getting honest opinions for that reason; 5) I give a fuck; 6) If my username was my real name, I would somehow be more accountable for my comments; 7) If I were any kind of man, I'd meet you and we'd fight it out; 8) You're bigger than fighting with people; 9) You could kick my ass; 10) I'm secretly furtive and ashamed about the fact that I spend my time trashing people on the internet, so that kind of dis actually works.

Of course your dictionary is a history written after the fact, since nothing that hasn't been done or at least imagined (in a few cases, like "teleport" or "anti-gravity machine") is going to make it into the dictionary (ie, "gloobzify", whatever the fuck that is.) It's just that all this relationship stuff has happened SO MANY TIMES that it's everybody on the fucking planet's history since the invention of language at least. That's why it's in the language. Anyway, you can fix it by just saying, "I saw my dictionary as a history written ahead of fact," or something such. In fact, that will probably help with your last utterly ballsed line, too. A compendium of devolution???! For one thing, all the words you've picked out of the dictionary (reciprocal, result, contrary, opposite, reverses) don't of themselves make a devolution (cf, my example above, which only devolves into goopy smarm). They don't make a good poem about dictionaries, either, but that's not the point. Secondly, if those words do make your life seem like a devolution, it might be because you've missed all these really ace words that are also in the dictionary (like "teleport" and "anti-gravity machine") and have nothing to do with devolution. Thirdly, compendium and devolution are balls words to use in a poem. And this whole poem is based on your half-formed notion that anything transformed or described with big words is necessarily worse for it. Which is balls. You're going to say I've proved that with my overanalysis here. Balls. Your poem was bad before.

As far as I know, it is, but only slightly. Then, 1) Do you mean "realized" in the second line to mean anything specific? Or just like, you saw that he loved you too? 2) Opposite and contrary are the same thing. 3) "I don't love you" is the opposite/contrary of "I love you", not, as you have it, "I hate you". 4) This whole poem kind of presumes that a thing necessarily leads into its reciprocal, contrary or whatever. Now, before you go shooting off, of course it doesn't say that outright. But things wouldn't seem like such a "compendium of devolution" if you'd just said, as I often do, When I said, "I love her," I thought about the converse: "If somebody is she, I love that person," which is true. And the inverse: "If I don't love somebody, then that person is not she," which is not necessarily true. And the contrapositive: "If somebody isn't she, then I don't love that person," which is also not necessarily true. And I saw the reciprocal of the original proposition: "she loves me," And the result was something like "We love each other." And then I restated the original proposition, squared: "No, I love you, squared." And she said, "No, I love you times infinity" Et cetera et cetera. 5) Most of your problem is using the word "realized" in line 2. Yes, surely you mean "realized" in the sense that an ambitious guy "realizes" his potential or dreams or something. OR DID YOU???! But it isn't the word for the situation and it butches everything up. It makes it seem like all the transformations just follow the proposition, which is of course not the case. Besides, it's not even grammatical to say "realized ... with its contrary" (as you have). 6) You misspelled blurred. 7) Everything after that is worse. A nice idea, your dictionary being your history or whatever, but the way you have it is kind of preposterous and self-absorbed.

Stop plagiarizing that poem.

"u"..cos its faster to write..and im russian..so for me it doesnt make any difference..thanks anyway for it, ill corect myself next time..

Could you not see from my last entry, in which I omitted myself from any of the catagories, that my comment was a mockery of the idea of categories? You are the simpleton. You only look at the surface.

I believe if you study the meaning of converse, you will see that it applies here, however I think richa's reciprocal is a better word.