Michael, I fear your spirit guides are tricking you again. I have called attention here to Alex, not Allen.

Ignore this.

In order to make the nonsense lines not destroy the mood for the reader of your masterpiece, I suggest you make the font color white for those lines.

Roger - see my post #33.

Michael,

If the journal you're submitting to has a clearly stated policy that poems that can be found on the internet will be rejected, I consider it reasonable to take steps to make sure my poems can't be found on the internet. In fact, I'd consider it kind of stupid not to.

I had previously assumed my poems were invisible. Now I know they're not. My current concern is that I have poems still up in mon-Met that I've sent out that can be found in a simple Google search, and if the editor adheres to his clearly stated policy (he may not of course), then in the event that he would have selected them, he'll reject them. I've PMed John Riley for permission to gut them, as per site policy, and I imagine that will fully resolve the problem well before the editor even looks at them. In future I'll just be a lot more careful about gutting before I submit a poem that hasn't already been culled; I'll use a false title and I'll also make sure rssing don't scrape my poem. Why? As above, because I think I would be stupid not to: why take a risk, however small, when it's so easy not to.

I don't think this is a big deal in the sense that it's simple to take steps to get avoid. I've been saying this from my very first post.

My intention here was to point out that what was commonly believed about poems being invisible on this site is not quite the case. People can and should decide for themselves how they want to respond to this information. I have no preferences about what others do. I did think that at least some people would want to know about this. I have been a little surprised at the resistance there appears to have been to my attempts to calmly communicate some simple facts.

best,

-Matt

I'm pretty sure it's scraping a certain number of characters not whole lines. It took just over three lines of my poem, which was in IP, so short lines. When it scrapes non-poem posts, it takes maybe the equivalent of line on the computer screen. See here for some examples. So, as per Roger's suggestion, a couple full lines of white text would do it. This has the added bonus that you can include a message for rssing should you so desire :)

-Matt

I just pruned non-met. You're welcome. Usually, a quick quiet word to a mod suffices if a poem needs to get poofed.

I hope you'll forgive me for being perfectly honest, but this whole teapot tempest reminds me of workshop days in the pre-electronic world. Back then, before photocopying their poems to be workshopped, some people very carefully wrote a small c with a little circle around it, followed by the date and their name. They actually believed that was an important step, that it only took a little time, and they thought everyone should do it. One of them even told *me* to do it! ;)

They may as well have been throwing salt over their shoulders. Others took a further step: they literally mailed (by U.S. post) a copy of their poem, to themselves, and then filed the unopened envelope. They wanted the time stamp on the post mark, because if some nefarious Boris Badenov stole their poem, they could whip out the sealed envelope in court, proving his dastardly guilt (and presumably waltzing out of the courtroom with Natasha on the vindicated poet's arm).

I delight to think of all those file cabinets, all across the country, crammed full of sealed envelopes, their half-brewed liquor never tasted by the tongues of unsatiated editors, their locked drawers providing weighty testimony to the mute inglorious miltons of America's heartland.

Best,

Bill

Thanks Bill, that's much appreciated. I did PM John Riley as per the instructions at the top of the non-met forum. I only mentioned my concern here to illustrate my point, not as a complaint or as a public request. But again, I appreciate that you've done it.

I figure the risks here are greater than the (c) symbol, and the situation rather different, but I did enjoy your story.

I hear that you and Michael think it's a waste of time, and I'm sure you know far more about these things than I do. It does seem reasonable to me not test an explicit and newly-minted editorial policy when I don't have to. The editor says he says he searches for every poem he decides to accept and will exclude those he can find online. Why is it foolish of me to believe him and make sure he can't find the poem? That's the bit I'm confused about. And if I'm being foolish why did you just cull non-Met so that he now can't find the poem? Or were you just humouring me?

best,

Matt

If you're one of those going for the nonsense prefixing of poem post, are you stumped for what gibberish to use? Then, here's some help--

- need a paragraph of junk prose? how about this?
- need some line of rubbish poetry? how about this?

Cheers,
...Alex

There are limitations to what Alex and the mods can do...there is frustration that some journal editors are less tolerant than others...there is annoyance that the topic (in general, not this particular permutation of it, which was definitely news) has come up before and will no doubt come up again...but I don't think any of these things are Matt's fault. Let's not kill the messenger, people.

[Edited to add: Oh, no, Alex...I can see the crits now: "Sorry, your poem isn't working for me, Julie, but your rubbish rises roughly like a warm reef."]