CIVILIZATION

You are showing once more here that you are more interested in writing lines that rhyme than in making sense.   

You say that you are going to take my advice about how your insistence upon thinking that good poetry must contain rhyme and must follow an antiquated form cause you to write what is in the end not worth reading.

But nothing changes.  You keep producing preachy, pompous, poorly written, question begging  crap.

I'm done with you.

Dear Baldwin,
Thank you very much, my dear fried Baldwin. Sorry to tell you that l read the opinions of other people, but l always write the poetry that l like. I never change the way of my writing, but l read the opinions of other people on it. JZ

So ...  you write to please yourself.  And here I thought that public masturbation was frowned upon and in bad taste, not to mention possibly illegal.

I am really surprised how a person like you supposed to be educated can write such a horrible sort of language with a person always trying to be kind with him. You can't be a poet as the first characteristic of a poet is to have commonsense.

My sort of language? Is it not true that people who write only to please themselves and who refuse to take account of how the way they write puts off readers from thinking that their "poems" are well written is more interested in self pleasuring than in communicating effectively?

In any case, if it's true that one must have common sense to be a poet,  then, given how often your claims about the world and the way that things within it operate show that you do not have it, there's no way you can lay a legitimate claim to the title of poet.

Very dear Baldwin,
Your words can't decide anything except the great surprise in the minds of the readers. How can a person who has no grudge write in such a way against another person he doesn't know? I have the  greatest encouragement from my readers, which is enough for me. JZ

What makes you think that those (notably few) readers who give you "great encouragement" actually know anything about what good poetry looks like?

And I ask again:  Do you think you are incapable of writing poorly?  Are all  of the "poems" you have submitted here without grammar and syntax mistakes, not to mention questionable assertions of fact?

Dear Baldwin,
Thank you very much for your very elongated  pieces of advice. I know who love my poetry and ask me to write much more. Please send me a poem you consider the best of your poetry. Who knows, perhaps l'll like it and in this way l have a live example to improve my poetry. JZ

I didn't ask you if you knew of anyone who loves your written work.  I asked what it was that makes you think that those (demonstrably few) readers who give you "great encouragement" actually know anything about what good poetry looks like and what the elements of good poetry are.

My sending you anything of mine, let alone what is available on this site, would not answer that question.

But thank you for once again answering something I asked of you with a red herring.

On top of that,  I see that both here and elsewhere that you've been given plenty of  examples of things you should be taking account of if you really wished to improve your "poetry".

But given that you evidently think that you are incapable of writing bad poetry,  they've fallen on deaf ears.