I haven’t posted a longer verse for a long time.

I suspect it is because I haven’t really been in the frame of mind that sends me a random opening quatrain with my usual morning ‘Blimey, I seem to have woken up again…. well, that’s a good start I suppose’.

So here’s… well, I suppose since it’s subtitled ‘verse‘ under the main title ‘verse‘ and in the post category ‘verse‘, it’s obviously some kind of poem.

verses are
much harder work
than the nonsense
normally here

you have to
make them rhyme
and scan
unless you don't
of course

but it is quite
oddly satisfying
to create 
a quirky poem

or at least
call it one
even though often
there's very little
reason to suppose
that there is anything to it
other than having
a general 'poem-like'
formatting on the page

of course,
I'm not being 
that serious
at this
'writing poetry'

if I was,
I'd actually
try to do better,
not treat it
with ignorant

14 thoughts on “verse: verse

      1. I’ve seen far too much of that kind of ‘verse’ in the blogosphere. I’m (usually) too polite to accuse the creator of spouting phlyarological drivel and calling it ‘art’. Creativity is highly subjective (and there’s always the possibility that I’m missing something).

        Liked by 1 person

  1. I find my poetry, be it good or the more normal standard of absolute crap, always gets a lot more likes.
    More than enough likes to sustain my much ignored prose and satisfy the bit of my ego that chooses to count the likes of the vitamin purveyors as a genuine endorsement of my talent.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. yes, I do have a few of them flocking whenever I tag a post appropriately… today’s count on my post tagged deliberately to gain followers and likes (https://skippedgear.com/2021/07/07/three-easy-tips/) currently stands at 27 likes, which is about 26 more than a normal post. posts tagged with ‘poetry’ or ‘verse’–typically applied to the above-mentioned ‘any old shit’–attracts a regular, non-commenting but apparently liked–and gleefully taken anyway–few avatars.

      please note, I have not typo’d, I am currently eschewing capital letters at the beginning of a sentence to save one shift keypress per sentence because I am that lazy.

      Liked by 2 people

          1. It may help you to work through the thought process if you realise that it isn’t in fact ‘clickbait’ if the automated programs that click your bait aren’t in fact yet capable of thinking about whether they are clicking on something genuine or being falsely lead.
            Therefore, in this scenario, you are simply taking advantage of the fact that there is no intelligence, artificial or otherwise, that has been falsely enticed towards your poem and, in fact for that particular audience, you can post, and I quote, “any old shit”.


          2. Interesting. Who are these ‘automated programs’ to whom you refer? I assume they’re not people. Maybe I’m missing your point? (Quite possible.)

            My objection is to the psychological manipulation of real people, luring them into following links that purport to be one thing, but are actually utterly unrelated. ‘Bait and switch’ sucks.


          3. Exactly ‘automated programs’ = scripts (in language of your choice, but software ones, not human actor ones). Therefore, not fooling ‘anyone’, fooling a program.
            You may also pick up human readers who need some exercise accidentally too, but they might like your poetry


          4. I see. So you’re talking about trying to pervert a search algorithm. Those are constantly evolving (and have been for decades) to prevent ‘keyword stuffing’ and similar abuse… if you’re right that tagging your verse with ‘weight loss’ works now, there’s a good chance that it will fail to work in the future, and, worse, you run the risk of being flagged as a bad source, and your genuine content would suffer. (At least, that’s the kind of penalty I’d impose on content providers to discourage dishonest tagging, were I to design a search engine web spider program.)

            Liked by 1 person

          5. The post on which I have deliberately used ‘false’ tags (also included the keywords in the text…although only in the context of taking the piss… ) https://skippedgear.com/2021/07/07/three-easy-tips/
            Anyway, a ‘bad source’ sounds about right for me, and don’t be under the impression that I care if search engines know how to find my content (or I want anyone searching for anything useful being directed to me by mistake). Not bothered. And WordPress searching in the reader patently doesn’t work that way currently.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to pendantry Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s