[MD] In the drink

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

Mark 20-12-06: I was asked to rejoin this list after having left,  to finnish 
some stuff off with MD members.
I'm surprised to find you trying it on, but then again, it's par  for the 
course.
Let's deal with your points one at a time...

 
In connection with the 'Edge of Chaos' essay (found at:  www.moq.org/forum)  
Mark Maxwell stated September 20th 2003:  
 
>Anyway, this is great, i love it. You have knocked it into  shape. I only  
>hope  
>you have been credited enough and i am thinking it should be  co-written?  
>  
>Many thanks Anthony,  
>Mark :)
 
Mark,  
 
In light of the all the hard work and the time I put into this  essay plus  
recent circumstances (where you've apparently forgotten all the  help and  
support I've given you over the years), I'm now accepting (if  belatedly)  
your offer as co-writer for this piece of work.
 
Mark 20-12-06:
You have already passed off my work as your own. What's all this  about 
belatedly?
Now then, what you must remember is i have the original essay  versions, 
which chart it's development, so it can be demonstrated what work  you put into 
it's editing: Your editing came at the end of the process in one  burst of 
rearranging of existent material.
If you believe your editing amounts to co-authorship you  simply demonstrate 
how generous i was in offering you co-authorship back in  2003.
I'm confident people will simply react, 'Jesus, you offered him  
co-authorship for doing that? He's not written any of it!'
I think this is known as hanging your self by your own petard  Anthony.
If you wish to be known as the doctorate who abused the naive  good nature of 
an undergraduate by stealing wholesale the work of that  undergraduate, then 
you're a nasty piece of work.
I stand by my appreciation of your editing, which was very much  needed. But 
editing is not writing. You didn't write more than some very  superficial 
lines about 'Boys from the Blackstuff' and such. This can be  verified.
 
Best wishes,  
 
Anthony
 
P.S. Congratulations on being taken as an M.Phil in philosophy at  Liverpool.
 
Mark 20-12-06: The department you now feel to be full of clowns i  believe.
 
 
P.P.S. It seems that some of your recent posts (e.g. see below)  have been  
made under the influence of alcohol (and I wasn't the first person  on the  
Discussion group who has noticed this).  If this is the  case, consider  
getting some help.  For your own sake and the sake of the  people who know  
you.
 
Mark 20-12-06:
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely  stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under  the table.

David Hume could out-consume
Schopenhauer and  Hegel,

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as  Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising  of the wrist.
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.

John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy  was particularly ill.

Plato, they say, could stick it away--
Half a  crate of whiskey every day.

Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the  bottle.
Hobbes was fond of his dram,

And Ren Descartes was a drunken  fart.
'I drink, therefore I am.'

Yes, Socrates, himself, is  particularly missed,
A lovely little thinker,
But a bugger when he's  pissed.
 
Mark 20-12-06:
I've written many e-mail's 'under the sauce' thanks very much, but  i'm not 
sure that makes me an alcoholic?
It does make me a drunk e-mail writer on those occasions when i  happen to 
fulfil these conditions.
If i did this once over five years it would be true.
 
I suspect what you have in mind here is the following message for  the forum: 
'Don't bother listening to Mark Maxwell because he's drunk  all the time.'
But let's get back on track: I can prove you stole my work.
A careful analysis of the editing process indicates rearrangement  of 
existing material.
This skill was shown to you by Robert Pirsig.
I sent a very early version of my essay to Platt Holden,  and he made a 
number of editorial suggestions. (Platt is thanked in the essay)  Therefore, Platt 
may verify what i say here. One of Platt's suggestions was  to place the long 
quote at the top. This does not make Platt a co-author, and it  doesn't make 
you a co-author either.
 
Now onto a most interesting thing: Voice.
You confirm in this very e-mail Anthony, do you not, that all  writing has a 
voice.
In fact, you are relying on this very phenomenon to bias the MD  against me 
with your alcoholism stuff?
Yes, you are you vile individual.
Now then, it's a damn funny thing, but it may be shown that in my  
possession, and in that of Mr. Pirsig, there happens to be found a  piece of writing you 
pass off as your own, in which your voice suddenly, and  dramatically changes 
to that of someone else who has a distinctive voice of my,  eerrrrrrrr, i 
mean, its own.
I know the reason for this don't i Anthony?
And you know the reason also don't you Anthony?
 
What you have argued well for Anthony is that the Voice principle,  when 
evenly applied, appears to show that i have to drink heavily in order to be  as 
slow as you are.
 
If Horse is contemplating changing my essay on the forum then i  feel he 
should have a very careful think before he does so.
 
Love,
Mark (hick)!