Us here in England need to sleep when you people (mainly) in the US are awake, so it looks like I haven't been replying deliberately, perhaps, but I was sleeping
Now that I'm back, I'll address the points that have cropped up overnight:
As several people keep on saying, the issue is NOT that Ami referred to me simply as 'a friend' instead of by name on her thread on the forum. The issue is that she MIS-REPRESENTED what had caused the friendship to end, giving the impression she had been wronged.
Gabben/Lise, please give it a rest. It's getting very boring.
Leah, I'm sorry this is happening to you on this thread.
As for Ami's posting of "I didn't do anything wrong.It is that simple. If people have issues with me or themselves,my conscience is clear.If s/one does not like me, that is their problem. I conduct myself in an honorable way.If s/one does not agree---so be it.I am here and I will stay here . That is my story and I am sticking to it. Ami"....followed by Confucius' post giving quotes of what I actually said to Ami by PM just before she said she 'didn't care to be friends' - yes, Laura, that is exactly what I wrote to Ami by PM. Are you suggesting I made them up (surely you're not!)? The only 'editing' I have done is to leave out references to the person she doesn't want me to talk about. The response by Ami has also been posted here already, Laura - she said that my request to only post publicly to each other ' was not acceptable' and she 'didn't care to be friends'.
The problem is, Laura, that Ami *said* she respected my choice, but then she didn't *actually* respect it at all. She even told me that she *intended to* discuss the ending of our friendship on the forum, so that she could 'learn lessons from it'. Naively, perhaps, I assumed she would discuss it in an honest way. She didn't ask *if I minded* her discussing it - so, if she says now that I didn't object, then that is rather disingenuous of her, IMO.
Paps,Thanks for clearly setting out (for those who have lost sight of that) what this thread is supposed to be addressing.
Izzy,
Bella, I know that it can be seen as 'extremely delicate', and of course I'm aware of that. But that kind of approach (to keep quiet about unpleasant things) can add to the idea that these things have to be kept secret so that the people who *chose to start behaving in this way* (and I emphasise the word CHOSE) can continue with that behaviour. Everyone has a choice, and it is not up to the ones who are the most oppressive to dictate the terms. If someone decides to confide in someone else, there is the risk that their 'secret' will come out, from the minute they divulge it. I tried to get Ami to stop telling me her secrets, in PMs first, but she carried on.
Ami knew what she was doing when she told me in PMs about the affair, she knew she would receive PMs back onto her computer, she knew that when she posted 'veiled' comments on this forum that there was a possibility that her husband might somehow get to see them - we are all aware that that is a risk here, whatever we post. The choice was hers. Me 'spilling the beans' was only in response to her behaviour.
I'm sorry that there is a conflict, too, because when these things flare up here, as they do from time to time with different people - then some people stop posting, some people leave, newbies feel unsafe...it keeps happening again and again, and it devalues what this forum can achieve.
And please, people, don't bring God into it. Everyone's God is different, and can be 'mis-used' to back up anyone's 'reasons' for their behaviour.
Janet
