It has been pointed out to me that my post of 1/31/2003 ("Ange Mlinko vs. Arielle Greenberg") was a rather dumb argument based on erroneous information. The first problem was that I used old work that was not quite representative of the poets. The second problem: Arielle Greenberg DID NOT attend Brown; she intended Syracuse for her MFA. I now agree that it was stupid of me and poorly researched. The inaccuracy evaporates the tidiness of my evaluation, particularly the criticism of the Brown/Burning Deck style and the concomitant irony of the argument. I admit: I'm a dummy. My apologies to Arielle and Ange, especially for the confusion.