[John Riley]

This suggestion and the discussion it prompted does cause me to remember the Sphere is structured around an assumed elitism. This may be inevitable with a metrical poetry board. I understand that. It is the world as it exists and I joined up and have learned so much in so many directions. But like all elitism, it depends on an established notion of quality and leaves only cracks for something different but good to creep through. Again, it says metrical poetry board on the door. An accepted hierarchy of worthy journals with a little shifting around is what one should expect here. It's implicit in the elitist culture of a metrical poetry board and while there is so much to learn here about writing poetry and so much more to learn about the poetry everyone should read, regardless of writing style, we have to remember it's ultimately a niche. There are other worlds out there and hiding from them doesn't alter that.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

Originally Posted by Mark McDonnell

That seems a little extreme, Andrew. Nobody has been hurt or insulted. In the course of the discussion I've gone from having no opinion, to tentatively agreeing with the original post, to changing my mind again. It's been interesting; you know like discussions between adults sometimes are. I'm not sure why you would want to wish the varying opinions of 24 people out of existence.

Also, surely the whole style of the 'sphere is predicated on hierarchy and elitism, with its little yellow star system, its 'Distinguished Guest' and 'Musings on Mastery' etc. When I first joined it made me laugh, but we all accept it don't we? If the rules governing 'Accomplished Members' had been more obviously set in stone from the 'sphere's birth (print journals only/only websites run by published writers...whatever) then we would have accepted that too. We would leave announcement of anything that didn't meet these criteria to our Facebook pages and look at AM and think 'One day...'. It may even have fuelled ambition and led people to really nurture their talent. I'm not suggesting this should be the case, but it seems to me it would have been completely in keeping with the sphere's general style and nobody would have been offended by it.

Edit: to clarify.

I agree with you that the relative prestige of a publication may not necessarily reflect the quality of the work in it.

I think AM should be left as it is.

But allow people to discuss, without making them feel bad about their opinions.

I don't know if people get hurt by the idea that their listing or planned on listing of accomplishments are questioned as real or not. I don't. At least i don't think so. If there is hurt for some it is in the suggestion itself, thus the wish to erase.

Don't make me feel bad for my opinion. I can't actually erase this. I think AM should be left as he is/ I am.

[Mark McDonnell]

Well I really hope nobody has felt hurt. The bulk of opinion is clearly that all accomplishments are equally valid. It wasn't your opinion I objected to, but your suggestion that nobody else should be allowed to express theirs.

But I wouldn't want AM or AM any other way...

[Mark McDonnell]

Double posted!

[Max Goodman]

Originally Posted by Mark McDonnell

That seems a little extreme, Andrew. Nobody has been hurt or insulted. ... I'm not sure why you would want to wish the varying opinions of 24 people out of existence.

... allow people to discuss, without making them feel bad about their opinions.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Andrew Mandelbaum

Don't make me feel bad for my opinion.

I don't see why measured disagreement should make you feel bad about your opinion. People need to be able to disagree without being accused of bad faith.

(With apologies for stating the obvious, Mark didn't criticize you for disagreeing with Rick's post, as most in this thread have done, but for suggesting that we

Originally Posted by Andrew Mandelbaum

Kill this thread and pretend it never happened.

)

[David Anthony]

Take a look at the "Recruiting" thread on AM, which I've tracked down and popped up. It goes back to 2002 and covers the same topic, while lamenting the sad decline in standards on Erato.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

Originally Posted by Max Goodman

I agree.



I don't see why measured disagreement should make you feel bad about your opinion. People need to be able to disagree without being accused of bad faith.

(With apologies for stating the obvious, Mark didn't criticize you for disagreeing with Rick's post, as most in this thread have done, but for suggesting that we

)

I was joking a bit with Mark's post to me, Max.
The post was my measured disagreement. Some like yards, I like miles.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

I have decided to allow this thread to continue.

[Jim Moonan]

Don't f**k with a poet. (There goes that bar again...)

All along the watchtower
Princes kept the view
While all the women came and went
Barefoot servants, too
Outside in the cold distance
A wildcat did growl
Two riders were approaching
And the wind began to howl
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx—Zimmerman

x

[Ned Balbo]

I think literary achievements of all types should be welcomed on the "Accomplished Members" thread. The individual poet is in the best position to decide whether or when to share a given achievement. Anyone who disagrees about where a given post falls on the spectrum of prestige can just skip to something else.

There are publications I was very proud of in my youth that really weren't all that stellar, but they were stepping stones that meant a lot at the time & the editorial encouragement was essential--as was the support of friends & fellow writers on the same journey.