I just want to be clear that I brought it up here, and not Natter, out of politeness to Natterinos who had moved on. My personal feelings on this is that if today, someone says, "Allyson, what you said to Zoe last year has been eating at me all this time and I need to tell you about it" they could do it here (or email) in my mind. Please, let's talk about it. If it's affecting your enjoyment on the board, or has completely fucked with how you feel about the community at large in how it was dealt with, bring it here.

The way the community dealtt with this situation is disturbing to me. People went Salad Shooter while the pink elephant in the corner took a big dump on the floor.

To my mind, if bon hadn't spoken? No one would have defended ita. They would have left her to think that the community doesn't feel rage when she's blindsided with hateful bullshit. Well, I would have spoken, after my work meeting. There was a quiet silence. "How will ita deal with this? I'm waiting for ita's response to tell me what to do" I felt immediate rage, and truth be told, had an extraordinarily threatening response formulating that was designed to make Sean wamt to leave the board. If such a thing as social capital exists, I went to the bank and took out a social capital equity loan and was prepared to spend three times what I'm worth in pure poison.

I took some breaths, went to my meeting (I was away cooling/working for almost three hours). Rage still there. Understand that other people got their opinions out and moved along. I hadn't.

But still. No one had to be shamed to speak for Sean.

This is all about my personal perceptions, maybe, but I think some people feel free to lay the smackdown on people like me (and pigpile), and coddle others "so and so is just having a bad day" and lament the pigpile.

I don't understand the problem. You called Sean on his actions - nobody disagreed. You said everyone's responsible for their own posts - again nobody disagreed. You said Sean's not a filmmaker so he shouldn't have gotten upset at ita, and people disagreed about a) whether his statement was misleading or he, in fact, makes his career from film, and b) whether his career should have to justify his feelings being offended. And some folks accused you of baiting him. Which you said was not your intention.

That's what happened. Had anyone else filled the box and hit post with your words, they would have gotten the same responses. Except maybe they would have had some smoke blown up their asses alongside. I don't know. I've always perceived you as a person who wants folks to be straight up when they disagree with you. Without all the monkey pats. I admire you for it. But I don't think the pigpile was any different for you than it would have been for anyone else, and I'm sorry that you feel that it was.

To my mind, if bon hadn't spoken? No one would have defended ita. They would have left her to think that the community doesn't feel rage when she's blindsided with hateful bullshit.

Well bon bon did speak, and people disabused ita of any such notion. And had she not spoken, you would have with the same result. Or someone else would have. Or at some point it would have come out. But it was pretty clear after bon bon posted where board sentiment lay. And everybody learned their lesson.

No one had to be shamed to speak for Sean.

So you wanted a free swipe at Sean because the board was slow on the uptake for ita? WTF?

just want to be clear that I brought it up here, and not Natter, out of politeness to Natterinos who had moved on.

And I am glad you did. My point about bringing it up here was not that you shouldn't have, it is that because you did, the following posts were only about your post, and not other Natter, which may have made it seem to be a more intensive, piling on reaction.

To my mind, if bon hadn't spoken? No one would have defended ita.

Defended how? I admit that I didn't say anything on the board because I saw it a couple of hours later, and ita had dealt with it so well. I also assumed other comments had been made in back channel, which is how I handled it. (please note, I am sorry ita felt as if she was left hanging on the board, for which I apologized to her.)

I felt immediate rage, and truth be told, had an extraordinarily threatening response formulating that was designed to make Sean wamt to leave the board. If such a thing as social capital exists, I went to the bank and took out a social capital equity loan and was prepared to spend three times what I'm worth in pure poison.

Kudos for admitting to the inclination and even more kudos for taking the time needed to re-evaluate and change your mind, but I find it very disturbing that you were consciously composing threats with the stated intention of driving off a long-term member of this board. Again, though, thank you for resisting the urge to post that.

I would just like to say that Allyson continues to goad and taunt me.

I'm really getting pretty sick of it.

So? This sounds bad, but, really, am I supposed to do something about it? Should I send her to a timeout? Is there any reason why you continue to throw your frustrations out at the rest of us on the board, rather than taking things off the board and dealing strictly with the person you're having issues with?

I also assumed other comments had been made in back channel, which is how I handled it.

To me, the point is not about supporting ita, it is about maintaining the civil atmosphere of this board. My reaction would be the same whether it's Sean talking to ita or tommyrot talking to Gus.

To my mind, if bon hadn't spoken? No one would have defended ita.

I missed Sean's original post, then had to step out. When I got back and saw it, I was honestly in shock and could understand how other people could sit there for a few minutes (even six) and say, "What the fuck just happened here." I'm glad bon bon pointed it out and that may certainly have spurred more people to comment (not pile on).

I agree that the post was truly nasty and hateful. I also agree that the first apology sucked. But the subsequent apology seemed earnest to me and I'm willing to move on as ita and Sean hash this out for themselves.

I did think that people were sort of offering an explanation as to Sean's outburst (bad day, sucky life sitch, etc.) which bothers me because there is no excuse good enough in my book for that kind of unqualified venom--but again, an apology is good enough for me.

At this point, it seems to me that everyone is pointing at a big pile of pink elephant shit on the floor saying, "I'm not going to clean it up. You clean it up." I don't think I've ever seen a situation on this board where each subsequent post seems to be making the matter worse, not better, as more personality conflicts are surfacing, thinly disguised as "discussion".

Again, I'm still not Allyson, and I don't have a dog on any side of this fight (except for the overwhelming monkey-grooming anxiousness to make the bad stuff go far, far away), but I feel the need to make these observations, if for no other reason than to prove that it's totally possible for various posters to have totally different reads on various things:

• I didn't on my initial read, and *still* don't on going back and rereading, see any of Allyson's posts as attempts at a "free swipe at Sean" -- my perception of them was and remains that her posts were a jumble of being pissed at him for lashing out at ita, needing to unload and speak her piece because she hadn't been able to while the discussion was active (and choosing a thread framed for just this kind of discussion, far away from the place where the original flare-up had blazed up and burned out), and trying to communicate that she felt like she had some authority in speaking of and against his hair-trigger temper because it's her hair-trigger temper too, and she knows from ugly experience that it never goes anywhere good.

And if Allyson is okay with a relative lack of monkey grooming, I'll add that her posts usually do come off as blunt, brutally honest, and frequently just short of tactless, sometimes crossing over the line. But she gets a pass for me on a lot of it because she's as hard on herself as she is on everyone else, she's willing to apologize and back down when called on it (and I can think of one time she didn't deal with the kerfuffle in question and talk about her own complicity in it until months afterwards, which struck me as damn difficult and courageous: for lots of people it was a way-past and half-forgotten thing, and she was dragging it all up again for the express purpose of laying a good chunk of blame at her own feet, which took guts).

And this present kerfuffle in particular - I really, really can't read her as taunting, goading, or going for a free swipe.

• Re social capital: both Allyson and Sean got a pass from me on this one. For whatever reason (partly because of her community standing, her work in the fandom, and at least partly because I know some people like her IRL), I read the honesty in her posts and shrug off the abrasiveness. IMO, she kinda guac'd herself with the remark about Sean, but her point about being responsible for your own anger and your own responses to others' posts (along with her admission of having been a dick herself in the past) balanced the guac'ing.

Sean got a pass earlier because I know he's been stressed like crazy about employment and money, because he's always been sweet and kind to Hec and me (and a tireless fellow roughhouser with Emmett) every time he's been up here, and because I couldn't square the blind rage post with everything else I know of him. It felt like an outburst that was waiting to happen, a hot button that ita happened to trip but that literally anyone could have (probably not Jilli or Aimee, but likely anyone else).

And now I'm totally anxious, because it kind of feels at this point like everyone is slightly wronged and slightly wronging (except for ita), and like this discussion isn't going to go in a fruitful direction at all.