Dear E,
This is a very difficult post for me to reply to. For one reason, and that is the memory of Edwarda. I know that you and I share a common bond in regard to the friendship we each had shared with her. You and I have exchange a few brief but friendly correspondences, since that time. I imagine that all that will come to an end, once you read this post from me, and for that I am sorry. It is even more sorrowful based on the reality that neither you or I are immediately at odds between ourselves. Unfortunately, I do feel a need to reply here.
You ask, "Was it a "game" with Poet, too, Neenny?"
In my opinion, I think that is where the "game" started. I think Poet started the "game." Poet is not an innocent bystander. She has played along with many a posters on SI in a flirtatious manner. I seem to recall that same comment could be made about you or I as well. I am not singling Poet out on this particular issue of being flirtatious. On the other hand, many posters on SI are aware of the carnage that has been left behind regarding Poet, long before CH ever met her acquaintance. I have long viewed the ruin of yours and Christopher's friendship at the hands of defending Poet, as a real shame. You and CH, had a history going back a long way. It was sad to watch that come to ruins. From an outsiders view, it looks as if a lot of that ruin was a result of defending Poet. I feel that Poet left others to defend her. I am sorry that you and I will differ on this view, but I no way see Poet as the innocent victim. Let me ask you something here, knowing that your friendship with CH goes back a long way, dare I ask you, Over the years, were you subject to overtly suggestive or threatening private messages from CH?? I would think if this were true to his personality and the many accusations against him, you would have been victim to the same type of PM's over the years.
Was it a "game" when he got SI to allow him to continue posting to an upset and unwilling Poet after they'd told him to stop by waiving a lawsuit under their nose?
Do you really feel that Poet's upset was all because of CH?? I say NO WAY. BTW, did she stop posting to him. NOPE.
Was it a "game" when he referred to PMs from when they were pals? When he insinuated that he might post private exchanges? What's the name of the game, Cad?
Was it game when Poet had previously posted PM's from another poster to her?? She is not beyond this game, as I said before, not an innocent victim. I am not saying that CH is without any guilt, just pointing out that it is a two-way street.
Was it a "game" when he claimed, untruthfully, that Poet had spoken against "our young men in uniform"? What's the name of that game?
Ya know what E, I believe there was such a post. I recall reading a post made by Poet, that I felt she was dissing our servicemen. I remember being shocked by it. I am not even sure it is the same post that was the issue between CH and Poet, but I do recall a post that I interrupted as Poet speaking against our men in uniform. I would love to find the post, as I am sure many others would love for such a post to be found and clear the accusation one way or another. I never publicly mentioned that I believed such a post existed, because I did not want to take a side, if I could not find the "proof." So I choose to stay out of it. I am only addressing it now, because you posted this question to me. I had sent a PM to CH, way back when the entire thing hit the fan, telling him that I felt there was such a post. I was willing to attempt to look for it. CH replied to me, that the issue should be just let to blow over. But obviously it will never blow over.
If you were the victim of such a game, you wouldn't play it for long. Oh yes, I forgot, you wouldn't have any choice if the litigious CH had you in his sights and wanted wanted wanted to keep you there.
Interesting that you should suggest that I pretend to be in a situation with a litigious CH and not having a choice about playing the game for a long time. Guess what, in my real life, my husband and I are involved in a situation with a litigious attorney. And I intend to play the game as long as it takes to prove my side of the situation. So in reality, if I was Poet, and I was put in the situation, she claims to be in, I can assure you, I would fight it to the bitter end, if I had nothing to hide, or I felt that I was correct in my stance. There is no way I would just disappear and play the defeated victim. NO WAY. In my real situation, the attorney is as pissed off at me, as I am at him. He may have met his match. I refuse to play his game and let him win by default.
I see that my prediction that he would say it was all a joke proved entirely accurate. Now let's hear him say his unwelcome attentions to Poet, and his insinuating threats to post private correspondence, and his calumnies of her, were also just jolly jokes, too, what a madcap guy. That's what he hopes to convey, I do believe!
E, I do not have any more proof of what the TRUTH in the situation between CH and Poet really is. Neither person has publicly proven what they claim against the each other. I do feel at this point CH is not any more guilty of blurring the lines than Poet is.
Once again if it was a private situation then it should have been handled as such, and never made public. The public situation should have remained as posters on SI as individual that had differences in opinion on whatever subject was currently being discussed, possibly politics, religion, the stock market, occupations, abortions, war, whatever, lots of people on SI have differences in views on any number of given topics. So if this problem was a result of private message, it should have stayed private. Unfortunately it has become an open forum for public opinion on the matter. One that I think no one knows what is really true or what is lies.
Though, I do believe, that history has a way of repeating itself.......
Jane
BTW, did you ever have a problem with suggestive or threatening PM's from Christopher?? |
