Thursday, December 20, 2007

To assume or not to assume

I've recently been insulted by a blogger I will refer to as Ms. X. that I have considered a friend for quite a while. Here's her capper:

"That kind of stuff is worthy of Bill Clinton, no[t] you."

I'm not going to link to the post because it contains private e-mails from another blogger, Ms. Y, I also consider a friend that have been posted without her permission.

That crosses a line for me. If you have to make your point about a private conversation, find a creative way to do it. Posting someone's private e-mail and address is not only wrong, it's fucking lazy.

The issue is a private e-mail list. Ms. X's original post mentioned some private e-mail lists she'd heard of among feminists. Finding out there were private lists pissed Ms. X off. Ms. X infers that private e-mail lists are all about "posses". A posse is a group of supporters a blogger can count on to come to her defense whenever anyone dares to question her behavior. So for Ms. X, it seemed, participation in a private e-mail list was equivalent to fomenting posses. She asked her readers to offer reasons why they would participate in such a list.

There are all kinds of private mailing lists and I have been on several over the years. I offered reasons why I believe private conversations in a mailing list and out of the public eye are useful and healthy.

In Ms. X's next comment, she mentions a specific list and a specific list owner, Ms. Y, without naming the list itself. I happen to be on a mailing list owned by Ms. Y. The list I'm a member of is private.

Is Ms. X talking about the private mailing list I'm on or is she talking about another private mailing list owned by Ms. X? I don't know. I'd have to learn a lot more about the list before I can make that decision. Also, of course, I have pledged privacy to Ms. Y and I intend to uphold that pledge. But I don't feel as if I'm in danger of violating that privacy simply by interacting with Ms. X in a conversation about the usefulness of private mailing lists in general.

Next Ms. X claims that she was banned from a specific private mailing list owned by Ms. Y and that she is receiving traffic directly from that private mailing list. Understandably, this makes Ms. X feel bad. People are linking to her blog posts directly from this private list and Ms. X can see that in her blog statistics. Ms. X asks that members of the list from which she was banned either speak with Ms. X directly or copy and paste her posts to the mailing list, rather than linking.

This is also the post in which Ms. X starts revealing private discussions between herself and Ms. Y. She claims Ms. Y told her her presence on the mailing list would be unwelcome. This leads Ms. X to believe that Ms. Y is using this mailing list to say bad things about her behind her back. Combine that with the direct linking and you've got a recipe for paranoia.

Or not.

Here's a couple of reasons why paranoia might not be the first stop for that particular conclusion train.

First and foremost, there are lot of reasons why people on private mailing lists post links to other people's blogs. List members may be linking to posts they admire. List members may be linking to posts they don't understand, so that they ask for clarification from fellow list members. If you are a blogger that has posted about feminism consistently and for a long time, it is likely you will be linked by other feminists. Pretty cool.

Second, there is a fundamental misunderstanding of privacy that is going to be a trend in this story. Ms. Y happens to have a healthy respect for privacy and private conversation. I hadn't read Ms. Y revealing any private conversations. No mention of banning, no mention of unwelcome bloggers.

A commenter asks a question about why Ms. X was banned, and this prompts Ms. X to post a series of private e-mails between herself and Ms. Y.

Now a new story emerges. Rather than being banned, it is revealed the Ms. X wanted to JOIN the mailing list. Ms. Y replies that the list is in a rough period and the membership is currently frozen. Ms. Y assures Ms. X that there will be future opportunities to participate in private mailing lists together.

Do you see how things are shifting now? At first the argument is that mailing lists are bad. Now it is revealed that Ms. X wanted to join a list and was told she could not.

I responded in shock that Ms. X would post private e-mails. But I want to keep the discussion going. I point out that lots of people aren't comfortable with direct interaction. People say bad things behind our backs. The thing to remember is that I'm not going to change my opinion of Ms. X based on gossip (and remember, nobody has gossiped about Ms. X at this point). I pledged that I'd judge Ms. X by my own standards and that I'd expect she would do the same for me.

Alas, not true. Time for another side trip on the wayward conclusion train.

Ms. X now claims that horrible things are being said about her behind her back by someone who pretends to be a friend to her face. Next, she asserts that the mailing list she wanted to join is, in actuality, a list designed specifically to reject her and another blogger. She now returns to the argument that private mailing lists are always bad.

If you've read this far, and seen the twists and turns, I suppose you have figured out what a losing cause my further participation is. But I try to take Ms. X at her word. She claims that our friend, Ms. Y, has created a list whose purpose is to exclude her and talk about her behind her back. This obviously isn't the list I'm on, since Ms. X isn't a topic of discussion there.

But, maybe Ms. Y need to vent somewhere and has created the "I hate Ms. X" mailing list. Maybe she has recruited members from all over the internets. Perhaps they have badges, and cute little names and a theme song.

OK, maybe not.

Many comments ensue and eventually, the mailing list is named.

Yup. It's the one I'm on. Of course it's in completely unrecognizable form. I've got to wonder where Ms. X is getting these crazy ideas about the content of a list she isn't allowed to read. And now that she's revealed the name of the list, she feels free to reveal that I am a member of that list.

Remember what I said about privacy? I intended to keep my pledge to Ms. Y. But Ms. X didn't want to let that happen. So not only does Ms. Y's privacy get tossed to wind, but Ms. X chooses to throw mine along for the ride.

I suppose I should be angry.

Yes, the thread is patently absurd.

MailingList/Bad, MailingList/Good, MailingList/Bad.

But, dammit, I respected this woman right up until that thread. I've learned from her. I've laughed with her. I want her to be healthy and ready to rock and roll. I want to read more of her wonderful thoughts and opinions and be able to follow along as her mind zips from one interesting subject to another.

She's not there now. She's in a bad place. I'm not what she needs right now.

I hope one day she'll be back blogging and making me laugh and cry and think and smile.

22 comments:

Donna said...

I had to write Ms X off. She was getting so much misinformation, and wanted to believe the liar over anyone else, that I knew it was a losing situation to try to explain anything. I was also as shocked as you were that she was revealing private emails without permission and with the person's address attached. But now she wants people to talk to her in private email. Uh, riiiiight.

And yeah, she hates private email lists, hates 'em so much she tries to join them....oh wait, she only hates the ones that keep her out. Doesn't matter if lots of others are kept out, just can't leave her out. Entitlement, much?

I hope she pulls herself together again and figures out that the entire interwebz are not out to get her. She burnt too many bridges with this one. I hope she enjoys the liar's company since she mostly did it for/because of her.

belledame222 said...

I simply can't imagine why Ms. Y might have ever thought Ms. X's entrance into the group might further destabilize matters.

turtlebella said...

I've seen this sort of thing happen so many times before. And I've been on both sides. When I'm not on a list I usually feel a little hurt. This- and all the immense amount of drama in this particular case and every.other.case of this kind- lead me to believe that there is a very, very thin layer between us and our sixth-grade selves. And that at the same time that these kinds of situations are entirely human, sixth-grade regardless. We all desperately want to belong to a group, and the more groups- well, some people might construe that as more power. Take away someone's belong-ingness or their (self-)perceived power or popularity and whoo-boy. Watch out!

Now, I said I've felt a little hurt. But it's a hurt that goes away pretty quick when I remind myself that I'm pretty happy with the lists I belong to, the blogs I read, the bloggy friends I have, as well as my life off the internet. Truly, I think people can be in a space where finding out about a list they aren't on - and that they believe they should be on or that they have been denied being on whether in reality or just in their own head - allows them to engage in some sixth grade drama, whining, and general hysterics, paranoia, whatever. This to me explains the whole flip-flopping ML=bad/ML=good...no bad...thing- it isn't about logic at all, it's about using what ever means to lash out.

thene said...

I've never once interacted with Ms X, but I've read a fair bit of her stuff and some of it had a real impact on me. I'm sad that the awesome has been tinged by the psycho to such a degree that I will never get to vent on the same ML as Ms X. But that's drama for you.

Ravenmn said...

Welcome, all. Thanks for your comments.

I'm thinking about the idea of feeling hurt for being excluded. I know that feeling. And I'm capable of expressing it, I think. For instance, Ren didn't add me to the list of people she loved yesterday. My first act: to read the list more carefully. What? She didn't include me? Why not? LOL.

I would have listened if Ms. X could have admitted feeling bad about it right up front. Instead, her initial approach is to condemn the concept and question her readers who participate in such a horrible idea.

She assumes none of her friends talked about inviting her. She assumes none of her friends support her ideas and link to her posts with approval. She assumes her friends equate her with the horrible behavior of some rather infamous bloggers.

She has no faith in us. She ignores our desire for privacy because we didn't act the way she wanted us to act. She believes the worst about us with no direct evidence.

And Donna, you're right as well. The misinformation is enormous. Doesn't sound a bit like the list I am on.

Daisy said...

Oh, p-l-e-a-s-e. I am linked to private lists ALL THE TIME. I have been linked on private Livejournal blogs, and I have no idea why or what they are saying about me. Facebook links me almost every week, and since it's the same school, might actually be the same person doing it. And you know, it might be someone who is (((gasp))) making fun of me--OMG! Obviously, I have no idea WHAT they are saying, no way to find out, and I still manage to sleep at night.

I got over 100 hits from some private board in Sweden (that I couldn't read even if I had access), that I know was using something I wrote about to make fun of and/or criticize the USA and/or the South in particular, and it pains me greatly that my words might be used that way. When I wrote about Michael Vick, I said people who eat meat need to STFU about dogfighting, and some doggie-lovers email list linked me, probably roasting me alive. But you know what? What I don't know doesn't hurt me. If I say provocative things, I have to be ready to face the consequences, including people linking me or not, or saying unkind things about me, or not. Or asking me to join an email list, or not. That is the nature of the beast.

Although I've read blogs a long time, I only started one myself in June, precisely because I didn't know if I was tough enough. I thought long and hard about it, talked to people I respect, etc. Finally, I started slowly, and with great trepidation. But I knew the risks: someone might not like me! Ohhhh my God! Ms X made a snotty reference to the email list being like high school, but throwing a hissyfit about being popular and being liked and then throwing a tantrum because you weren't invited somewhere is as high school as it gets.

If you are a serious blogger, act like one. Deal: what you write might get you UNinvited somewhere, or told you are not welcome. Them's the breaks. What did you think blogging and airing your controversial opinions would lead to? Miss Congeniality or Homecoming Queen? Come on, Ms X, you know that Miss Congeniality is boring as shit...you do not want to be her.

Why are you acting as if you do?

belledame222 said...

High school, nothing. The last time I remember something that reminds me remotely of this is that time in the third grade when Mom gave me permission to have a Valentine's Day party but only could invite x number of kids. and one girl who wasn't invited found out and was very hurt about it. months later, when she had a swimming party at her house, she invited everyone in the class except me:

"You can't come."

I was crushed, I tell you. No, seriously. It wasn't FAIR dammit.

Then again: I was EIGHT.

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

fuck it. no need to gild the lily, i suppose: everyone gets the point by now.

berber carpet bomb said...

raven --

I just now had a chance to read this post and, yeah, there are a lot of things you shouldn't assume. I won't have much time until have the middle of next month -- though I'm hoping for the 7th or so for things to calm down. So, I'd like to get back to this when I can. You are right that I should have indicated that I was hurt, up front. I did in my way, of course. But I can see how my not specifically explaining. Real quick: I'm not implying that private lists are possees. I was making a crack about the list to which mainstream, long time bloggers like Amanda, Jill, and others belong.While Amanda was referring to BlackAmazon and Shannon as leading a possee, the curious thing was she could have been accused of the same b/c of the private list -- in so far as it shaped opinions about what blog posts and news events to write about.

It all probably started out for great reasons, the mainstream bloggers' mail list. And I'm ONLY talking about that email list now. But as the blogosphere grew and ideological differences were too great, it appears to have become exclusive and not in a good way, I don't think. By talking amongst themselves, they shared information about bloggers who needed help -- while others were ignored. Twisty was famous for revealing that she rec'd some email about X blogger needing help from some antifeminist attackers. And then it would turn out that every mainstream blog was talking about this incident -- while others were ignored.

This is all relatively benign -- it would seem. But I think we have to remember that it's the seemingly benign stuff that needs examination: it's often there, in tacit norms, that we find oppression operating. In this case, it bolstered a kind of circle jerk among the big bloggers that too often prevented them from looking outside that circle and shaped their reality.You described, yourself, one way you imagined that this might take place -- though I don't think I'd be *that* harsh about it. i don't think it was a private list for mainstream feminist bloggers to lick their wounds about attacks from RWOC feminist bloggers -- or anyone else for that matter.

This is NOT to say this is what is going on with your list.

Later, I'm out of time.

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

for fuck's sake. this is just...sad.

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

Right then.

You know, Ms. X., I do get the impression that if you'd really wanted to know the truth you'd have

1) just fucking asked me directly

2) at minimum, not -blocked- my home computer access from your server.

For a -start-.

Then again, I've been saying I just want you to go -away- from my life and consciousness, and very probably engaging with you at all is in conflict with this goal.

Nonetheless. I am given to understand that you are confused about your exclusion from the slumber party, and would be -gratified- to know why this would be the case.

Allow me, then, finally, to -gratify- you.

The list, as I'm sure you know or you wouldn't have emailed me about it, is currently hosted and maintained by, yep, me.

It -began-, Ms. X, last summer, as a series of informal exchanges on various subjects with, o, about a dozen people? Ms. A, she who inspired this petty clusterfuck in the first place, was one of those. -You were another-. As you -also- know.

You -left- that proto-list, of your own volition. As I recall, you were not particularly vexed about that list's invisibility to the public eye or who we might or might not be -excluding,- at that point. What it -was- you were vexed about, exactly, I cannot recall, and no, I am -not- going to go foraging through the various emails in my archives to determine exactly -which- hair had gotten up your ass -this- time. I don't -care,- now.

I thought I remembered that it was part of your spiel about not liking to gossip about personalities. Perhaps I misremembered. It doesn't matter. The upshot was: you. left. You were busy. Busy busy busy. So, fine.

Some time later, through a process which is frankly none of your business, it came to pass that I moved the party to a somewhat more formal setting, with an eye toward expansion. Ms. A, as one of the original women in the email back and forths and as a friend, was grandfathered in. If you had stayed on the list, you would have been also. Then more people were invited.

Seeing as how you had declared you were 1) very busy, which did seem to be the case and 2) had just left the smaller group of your own accord, citing business, leaving some minor friction in your wake, I did not immediately rush out to beg you to (re)join, no. That is correct. As such, technically speaking, you were -excluded.-

You were not, however, -banned-, as in, she's not coming in, ever ever ever, quick draw up the bridge, muhahahaha. It was not a consensus decision. There -was- no decision, at that point. It was understood that the invite list was a work in progress. Most people, I do believe, either

1) probably didn't know whether or not you were on the list, as there are a number of lurkers and not everyone checks the member list

2) assumed you were busy and might be joining us at a later date, as indeed could have been the case, had things gone differently.

Some of these people, up until this latest bullshit you've splattered all over the place, would have been very glad to see you there. In fact, that's why your post was linked from the list in the goddam first place. Because people were -worried- that you were being or feeling excluded, see.

3) didn't know or care who the fuck you were in the first place (how I envy them).

NOW, however, you are "banned." NOW you are -rejected-. NOW there is mass consensus that this should be the case, YES. Although quite frankly I have to tell you that even if it -were- a unilateral decision at this point? It would be final.

NOW you are BANNED, from the list, from my life, because you are being an EPIC plonker.

-How- are you being an epic plonker? O, let me count the ways.

Let's just start with -how- you approached me, mkay? You wrote to me at the list address, which is, guess what! unlisted. You wrote to me as though I had already invited you, and in my confusion, at first, I assumed that I must have done.

I mean, it took me a good hour or so for the penny to drop: um, well in fact -no-, it's not a coincidence that you're writing this to me -now-, the day after Ms. A left the group. Also of her own volition, that, by the way: no one kicked her out or asked for that to happen, much as she apparently wanted me to make that decision for her.

So, I give you the benefit of the doubt, and tell you the goddam truth: that it's just been a -fuck- of a week, that there's -just- been a conflict wherein several people left, one of whom I still regret losing very much, by the way, and seeing as how this particular fight or the genesis thereof is one you had already taken a side in, this is...really bad timing.

At THAT point, your cue was to go, either

1) something like, "Yes, I know about the conflict because Ms. A told me about it in the first place, that's why I want to get in, to read the clusterfuck for myself and bring my opinion back to Ms. A," iow the fucking -truth-, dear.

2) if you can't manage that, at -least-: "Oh, okay. I understand. Let me know when things settle down. I'm still interested."

But, no. Let you in let you in now now now; you won't post, you say, you just want to read it. You still don't say why. And, hello: awkward, much?

Now. The mistake I made -then-, Ms. X, in my next reply, the one that's currently displayed on your blog, and the only thing that I am sorry about, with you, now, is that I let you make me feel awkward in the first place. That I fumfuh'd and offered still more explanations, as though the original ones weren't enough for -most- people to understand, respectfully, here's where I -back off.- As though I didn't know at some level by then that you were totally going to twist whatever I tried to placate you with anyway; of course you're not going to care about any sort of "we're still friends" signals, you're in full tinfoil mode now. I know you too well.

But, what I SHOULD have said, and am saying to you, right now, loud AND clear:

It. Doesn't. Matter. Why.

I. Said. NO.

Full fucking stop.

Okay! So, you write me a typically cryptic kiss-off note and I figure, fine, well fuck it then, because by then I -personally- am kind of ready to see the back of, not just the end of this whole sorry week's mess but yep! -You-. Not running after you. Not this time. More on this later, -if- I feel like it.

But so I figure, all right, fine, at least that's the end of it. -Finally.-

But! No no no! And here's where we came in, with raven's OP here, and anyone who doesn't have their server blocked and knows or gives a good goddam who you are what any of this is about can, apparently, still go over to your site and see the whole stupid, sorry, down the rabbit hole whinge and manipulation fest.

Including my email to you. Which, for the record? I did not and do not give you permission to post publicly. I realize that other peoples' desire to maintain their own boundaries means exactly squat to you, and I don't expect anything to come of my stating this now. Nonetheless. For the goddam record. Not okay.

Sure, you -can- do anything you want. No Internets lawyers here, no. No -threats.- Why on earth you thought this move might win you friends and influence people is, of course, another question. All I can tell you is, oh honey: it SO hasn't.

And that is the crux of it. Hello. Boundaries. -Respect.- It is, and I want to make this -very-, very clear, it's important, this bit, listen up:

NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS

what was or wasn't said by people in the group who aren't giving you explicit permission to read their words. Period. Full stop.

Get it? It is -inappropriate- for you to even -ask-, much less keep pushing and wheedling and sulking and goddam PUSHING. I get that you -want- to see it; oh boy, do we all get that message by now; but, sorry! NO. And, no, no one is going to -fetch- you the archives or anything of the sort. It's not going to happen, and that is that.

Get. Over it.

Really. I mean, I really can't stress this enough.

NOT. HAPPENING.

That goes for Ms. A as well, who, let me reiterate? made the decision -herself- to leave, yes, even when people were telling her to stay and stick it out, pissed off as they were. Deal with the people she -should- have been dealing with -directly-, which is the -respectful- thing to do (see a theme here?) But, she opted to leave, and you know, O.K.

Thing is, once she did that, yes! that's right! No more access to the archives! How about that.

Not, I hasten to add, that she did or does have permission to post anyone's words but her own even if she -did- still have access.

For that matter, she also did not have permission to give you the email list address.

Now. As to the purported reason you want to get in there and read the archives: the subject of the contretemps, the gist of which had to do with racism in interpersonal dynamics. Specifically, as it turned out, that of Ms. A. Ms A wanted you to adjudge where she did or did not go wrong, I take it. Some goddam thing. And you see this as some sort of rationale for your current behavior.

Right, so. Racism, then. Let's just start and stop right here:

White woman. Has received complaints about her behavior as "racist" from a number of WoC. Disengages with WoC, goes instead to white friend who's already proven sympathetic to her on this particular spat if not perhaps the larger issues. Asks for her advice. White friend's response: okay! ooh, only problem is, can't read it, it's in private. Sure wish I could, though! Let's see if I can!

What's wrong with this picture? Ms. X, my fellow whitey-whiterton, would-be arbiter of what is and isn't racist? Hm? Three guesses, and the first two don't count.

I mean, I -could- go on. To ask, rhetorically, what -exactly- either of you think is supposed to happen even in the not at ALL happening event that you got what you keep prodding for.

If Ms. A merely wishes for someone to tell her There There Dear, You're Not A Racist, guess what! You can do that ANYWAY. You've got plenty of public material to judge by already.

If Ms. A truly wishes to know what she did wrong and how she can make it better, well, she's talking to the wrong people and she's going about it in the wrong way, and we've many of us said so in about a dozen different ways by now. Hint: it would start by her recognition of the fact that she is -not-, no matter how -sensitive- she is, the only goddam person in the world, yes! with feelings and everything!, or even, more to the point, the only such in that group, HELLO. It's not fucking rocket science, really it's not. As for -feeling speak-, therapy: yeppers, I sure do get it. And you know what, aside to Ms. A? At a certain point, one goes beyond the "I'm Okay" to the "You're Okay," TOO. Counselor says: consider this Another Fucking Opportunity For Growth.

And then, Ms. X, there's you. Why you apparently think you're -owed- access to this conversation--someone in some Bizarro World appointed you referee? you're so integral to the "community" that of course everyone needs to drop whatever they're doing and catch you up? just curious?--is beyond me. And, I don't care. All that matters is: you're not. Not Happening. And furthermore:

You are out of line. You fucked up. Bigtime. And: we're done.

And a bit of lagniappe. Ms. X, at this point, never even mind me: you've burned so many other bridges that were not even slightly smoky right up until the day you started posting this passive aggressive -bullshit- on your blog, I can say with some confidence that -now- (not before, mind you), no one who's even peripherally aware of this is interested in processing this any more with you. Not in a box, not with a fox, not under whatever control freakery terms you're trying to engineer this time, not at ALL. Done done done. Raven here has been about as patient and compassionate with you as you're going to get, and you know, I think maybe even she doesn't have -endless- patience; have you noticed it wearing thin? Anything? Bueller? No? Well, that would be the basic problem, wouldn't it.

No matter. End of the line.

Oh yeah. For me, personally, now, no one else. The real reason that I, at least, was not tripping over myself going o please please please Ms. X you're my bestest friend and a shining star and an integral part of the community, what would we ever do without you, o please come back, and I'm so sorry for however the fuck I offended you -this- time:

Because I'd done that too many times before. Because you wore me out. Because you are a goddam drama queen. Yes, YOU ARE.

And despite knowing that, having known it for -years-, I was and remained, up until this latest bullshit, your friend. I'd been cooling off by degrees, yes. But: YES I remembered very well the overall context of our friendship. That doesn't mean I owe you anything you goddam ask for right away, but it -did- mean loyalty, it did mean affection. Sorry you didn't see it. Now, no more.

For whatever reason, you decided, as raven notes, to assume the worst of people who cared about you. It's not the first time, Ms. X. Not in my experience. Just the most spectacularly public one, maybe. At any rate: the most recent. It is sad and ironic that it's exactly that tendency of yours that brings about, ultimately, your worst fears. But, at this point:

Not my fault. And not my problem.

Goodbye, Ms. X.

Renegade Evolution said...

aww, I do love you!

I think I'm glad I don't check where my traffic comes from too often. ;)

But yeah, posting somesone email addy crosses a big line for me.

Ravenmn said...

Belle, thanks for posting. There's a lot of history there that I did not know and I didn't want to make assumptions in my discussions over there.

I find it ironic that Ms. X was, for a time, a member of a private e-mail list that her loyal friends were excluded from. She was able to respect privacy then. She wasn't complaining about the boundaries of that particular community.

It's only when she's excluded by her OWN request, that she has a problem with the politics and ethics of a private community.

Ms. X, your arguments would make sense if you consistently avoided private mailing lists for political reasons. Now I learn that when I'm excluded and you're included, everything is just fine. No need for rantage. No need for throwing basic internet ethics to the wind.

Not exactly a two-way street between us, eh?

So I'd like to turn around a quote from you, Ms. X:

I can see that you value yourself and your desire to be included, and that this ethical value is higher than others you might also subscribe to.

Ravenmn

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ravenmn said...

Hey, Belle, looks like you've done what you could and it's come to an end. That can be sad or healthy. Or both.

I'm sad to lose a friend.

I'm sad that a fascinating point of view is being sidetracked by a personal crisis of some sort. I know I am in no position to make things better or to assuage the pain.

I will say this: if and when this crisis passes, there will be no hard feelings. I've done and said things I've regretted.

Come to me with respect, I'll respect you back. Until that time.....

belledame222 said...

I deleted the rantier stuff again, it's redundant, I know, I know. I'm still plenty pissed, but it'll pass.

per crisis though--shrug, I don't know of any such. To hear her tell it she's perfectly fine, as far as I can see...if she's got a problem, well, we all know what step one is. Until or unless she admits any such, I'm just going with "drama queen, it's been a pattern, I's had all I can stands and I can't stands no more, sorry."