Naturally, such posts should be kept to a minimum, as they’re too cryptic for the reader and this one will have comments and trackbacks withheld. The reason this post must be run at all is that one person involved [B] is still close to my heart and I got two messages from that person this morning. I’ve saved them to Textedit.
Some months ago, someone attempted to reveal privileged personal information on me to a known enemy [F] who has stated on many occasions that he wishes to destroy me. I’m fine with F, richard cranium that he is but it was a dog’s act by whoever tried to betray me to F and that’s being unfair to dogs. It makes the person who revealed it [A, B or C], just as much a psychopath/sociopath as F because that person had, by definition, got close to me.
Is it any wonder I now trust no one? No one at all. That has ruined any chance of me ever genuinely opening up again to any human being.
There is a person I’ll refer to as D who is currently close to me and I know D is hurt that I won’t open up. D is entirely innocent, nothing to do with these events and having no personal connection with these others. D is “good people”.
Therefore, D, the reason is because of A, B and C. We all carry baggage and that’s mine.
The good part is that the actual information was wrong and so F bought nothing. So not a bad result. However, the question does arise as to who the traitor was who, having been privy to privileged information as a so-called friend, still decided to do this. There must be something innate in me that turns so-called friends treacherous. Perhaps I choose the wrong friends, I don’t know.
I’ve tasked each of A, B and C, in turn, about this betrayal, they each acknowledge it’s a betrayal and each one blames the other. Two of them, A and C, are logical candidates but B, who has written to me today, also wrote an email a year ago in which this very same personal info was trumpeted as if to say: “I know all, you see.” The tone of that email was not only triumphant but revealed a really nasty side, now turned on me.
When I received that email, which I did not reply to at the time, I shut B out of all communication with me from that day plus C and am very careful about A. Either all three of them were playing a game, two of them were or it was one of them. Life’s too short to kill myself over it and with the data actually wrong, F doesn’t bother me and I’ve not made any issue of it online or by email.
However, the one I can’t forget is B who sent that email. I’m sure B has forgotten all about it but I haven’t forgotten in the least and that ended the trust that there had been. Nothing A and C had said/done/written really bothered me because they were known-knowns and C was in with F from the start [according to A], at A’s instigation [according to B] – I’d expect that from them.
B though did hurt. A and C actually know nothing of the email from B as I haven’t mentioned it till now but I see it as just as treasonous as anything A and C supposedly did.
And so to today.
B tells me that another person, E, is commenting at my site and why am I allowing that, given that E has been bad-mouthing me for years on hearsay? In fact, others have asked me why I bother with either A, B or C any more at all?
The reason is that this blog is bigger than just me. If it were not so, then there’d be little point the co-authors co-authoring.
One can’t control co-authors and shouldn’t. I’m loathe to exercise any editorial control beyond typos/grammar/spelling/syntax and I invite co-authors to say right now, publicly, when I ever tried to censor their posts.
Ditto at at OoL where I’m very much peripheral and like it so. Anything I’ve ever set up or helped set up I’ve tried to make myself peripheral, not just because I’m no control freak but because the satisfaction is in seeing something run by itself.
Therefore I adhere to the blog rules which never alter. Therefore even enemies, as long as they observe the blog rules, can comment, provided they behave themselves. It’s as open as it can be.
Incidentally, in case you’re now thoroughly confused, the co-authors have nothing whatever to do with any of this – I just mentioned them as a reason why I adhere to the blog rules, that was all.
The sole reason the two known enemies [F and G] are still banned from this site is that I’ve invited them to behave themselves before and said they’re welcome but they’ve shown themselves to be utter fruitcakes about it.
So, laze and gem, that’s why what is – is and why what isn’t – isn’t. It’s sad that I trust no one any more but that’s life, is it not? The only reason for this post is that B is still in my heart and by the way, was correct about F in the first place, all those years ago.
UPDATE: I’ve just emailed the identities of A, B, C, E and F to D. Not one of the players is Longrider, Julia, Cherie, Wolfie, Sackers or any other of the regulars or semi-regulars. They’re not in this story.
Filed under: Blogging and cyber things