To: The Philosopher who wrote (67824 ) 11/25/2002 11:55:41 AM From: Neocon Read Replies (1) | Respond to I think I should clarify on this one. I was never on Christopher's side. I refused to ostracize him, was drawn into defending my position, and eventually got fed up with the level of attacks on him that had started up. I tried to adjudicate the matter as fairly as possible: yes, the evidence at hand seems to say that CH was a jerk and cad, but not a stalker and pervert, that sort of thing. I tried to help Chris find the words of apology that might mollify enough people to change the thread dynamic, and ratchet things down. He did not do a very good job of it, since he was obviously acting under duress, to get people off his back, and has since practically repudiated his apology. In this last round of contention, I took heart when Poet said she would be satisfied with an apology, and tried to get him to behave like a man and take the first step, on the premise that he had started the whole sequence of events. He balked, insisting that if he apologized, he should receive apologies, even though that was an obvious non- starter. Eventually, sick of it all, including CH's pride, I left for awhile, only to be dragged back because I cannot stand to see my friend Jewel dumped on. Whereas I understand how CH and X could feel that they have been abused by others, I think their behavior towards Jewel has been pretty bad. I do not regret having tried to mediate matters, and I think there are reasonable grounds for complaint about some matters for CH and X, but I want to make sure that I am not associated with their current obduracy, especially since I abhor the theory they have advanced to make it all seem "sound and fury"........
