Which is more important?

[milo]

Now think these rules were written for me; Admittedly, I had thought you yourself had written these rules as a response to one of my posts. But whether it was written by you or by Mr. Hammes (who I didn't know existed until you mentioned him), given that there is clearly a caveat in the tone, one can logically deduce what the post was aiming at. My comment was a response to the implied commentary as made by the poster of these rules (you), not as a show of narcissism. As I said, there was a caveat in your tone, aimed at me; I responded to the caveat and gave my opinion. It is very disconcerting to see an individual comparing an obvious response to an extreme form of narcissism~~

I posted them for your benefit, so you could learn. And you do need to learn. Sadly, it seems you are bulletproof even to the brilliance of Mr. Hammes. These were written most likely before you were born, not for you but for everyone. And while you can't seem to figure them out there are others who will.

I thought I made it abundantly clear that until you mentioned him, I didn't know who he was. I got the gist of what the rules were saying. That isn't the point. While the words themselves belong to Mr. Hammes, the intent behind the post belongs to you, and that is what I was responding to. The rules of Mr. Hammes are easy to figure out. What seems difficult to figure out is why some people are getting offended by a simple comment that I left regarding how I see things. These are my views, how *I* feel about poetry and the critiques received concerning them. Never once did I respond with arrogant, passive-aggressive, or tongue-in-cheek comments. Never once was there a caveat in my tone. It was a mere response, just like this one.
Nothing more. Nothing less.

The only thing that is abundantly clear is that you are immutably self-absorbed. Whatever imagined slight you believe to have received is irrelevant to me or this thread. What is relevant are naive, clueless statements like : Anything other than that and I feel I would either become lost or turn my poetry in to something that reflects the work of another instead of what lies in my heart, and if a poet loses his own voice to the noise of the crowd, what does that say of his craft other than that it no longer exists as something individual?" To which anyone can see the wisdom of mr. Hammes applies.