I CAN'T FORGET HER.

We all have regrets, Joseph. Sometimes I weep at my ignorance and cruelty of my past... You are not alone. We can only try to learn from our mistakes and be better than we used to be...

I liked this a lot, Joseph, very conscientious of you. This piece is full of heart! ❤️

Very dear NB,
You are really very kind. Your comment and trophy mean a lot to me specially because they came from you.

It is my pleasure, Joseph! If you get a chance, I would love to see what you think of my newest poem :)

Are you interested in receiving remarks from published poets on how you might become a better writer?  Or do you think that there's no room for improvement in the way you write?

If the former,  I know a critical workshop site on which you'd receive incisive feedback on your submissions.
You should know, though, that  the "price of admission" to that workshop is that you post well thought out and articulate responses to three submissions from other posters for every piece of yours that you post there.  The advantage of this is that setting our exactly why you think a piece works (or doesn't) work well  helps you see what the elements of good poetry are.

I note that you say that you want honest feedback on your work.  You'd certainly get it at the site I have in mind.

Why not try it?  What have you to lose?

I find it curious, so odd,  
that once forgotten images
of an ugly girl
who lived next door to me
when I was young
and whom my friends and I
subjected so repeatedly
to sprees of naked scorn
have sprung to mind
this morn
and with a penetrating focus
that I can’t explain
now threaten to become
the axis of my memories,

Very dear Baldwin,
I don't care if you believe me or not. I like you very, very much. I want to stay in communication with you and to write frankly to each other. However, you sometimes write with extreme provocation. I want to improve my writing of course, if it is possible, but l consider my writings, frankly speaking, much better than yours. I write rhythmic poetry. You can't write three lines of iambic trimeter, or tetrameter without making mistakes. Sorry to say so, but l like to be frank with you.
Baldwin, l am always ready to accept good criticism, and l want  your group of improving my poetry to give me their honest opinions, but l can't be committed to write  pieces of homework at all. If they are ready to send me their opinions and accept receiving mine. They are welcome. Believe me, and l think you do, l have a lot of people and poets who like my poetry and very  much. I am always ready to accept pieces of advice, but l am not ready to write without rhythm, and l am not ready to criticise other people's poetry. I am a poet and not a critic. Please keep in touch with me. I like you very much, Baldwin.

The issue isn't whether your work is better than mine,  but whether yours could be better than it is.

"l am not ready to write without rhythm, and l am not ready to criticise [sic] other people's poetry. I am a poet and not a critic."

No one said that to post there you'd have to write without rhythm.  And I find your statement that you are not a critic quite puzzling.  You have no problem being one when it comes to my submissions.  Telling me where and how I do not write well and that I have not given any evidence that I know anything about poetry or how to write it  is to engage in criticism.  And you don't seem to  have a problem with the time it takes to do so.

If I were a betting man,  I'd say that the real reason you won't post to the site I have in mind is that you'd come off there as showing yourself to not be up to the standards of criticism that they expect critics to engage in.

Of course you could always show me that I'd be wrong to make such a wager.

I write, you say, in such a way
that never shows the metric's path
of iambs quite consistently
within lines cast in measurements
that count to sets of syllables
of six or eight.  But look at how
I'm penning now  upon this page
some words arranged in ways you note
lie quite beyond my writing skills,  
that show your apodictic claim's  
a lie.  Note how my words fly by
your eyes in good tetrameter.
And also count their total up.
It's plenty more that three or four!

Have I not done, and skillfully
the dance that Pope declared that one
who writes be learn-ed in if they're  
to win the poet's prize and be  
admired for showing off how well
they know the makings of a verse
well turned? And do I not recall  
that you appealed to Shakespeare and
the sometimes  faulty way that he
would versified to show that strict
adherence to felicity
in rhythm or in rhyme is not
a necessary feature of
a writing's worth as poetry?

And does the fact a writing's set
in rhythm always guarantee
a writer has composed a work
of pure, inspired,  sublimity?
The answer one would think you quite
aware's a quick and dirty "no".

Dear Baldwin,
This is much better than your other writings, but still you have two mistakes despite your great attention:
1- who writes be learn_ed in if they're. It must be they are.
2_ Is it correct to say? Would versified ...

This is a bit rich coming from someone who has declared that it is permissible to leave out words in order to keep to a set rhythm.  But there is no mistake in  
 
" the dance that Pope declared that one    
who writes be learn-ed in if they're    
to win the poet's prize"  
   
For it's sense is "the dance that Pope declared that one    
who writes **should** be learn-ed in if they're    
to win the poet's prize".    
   
The word "should" is understood.    
   
As to your second point,  the line should have read "would versify".  I'll use the excuse that you once used to explain  a "mistake".  It was a typo.    
   
But even then,  you have shifted the point at issue from my inability to compose a few lines set out in faultless iambic tetrameter to the question I've often noted about your lines -- whether they make sense.  That's what's known as moving the goal posts and going off point.  
   
Did I or did I not compose more than three or four lines in consistent iambic tetrameter?  
 
BTW, is this line of yours metrically consistent?  
 
"I recall her after long time and she lacerates my heart."

And does one "delete" chokes?