Concur on wishing Trudy would stop with the snide. It's the only truly disruptive part of this whole discussion.

You know, I am remembering that we discussed this once. Either Betsy volunteered herself, or somebody volunteered her, soon after her bout of pneumonia a couple years back. (I seem to recall Mr. P coming under some sock-puppet scrutiny, seeing as how he is too good to be true.) We all mentioned the fact so many of us have met one another, that we correspond and send each other RL mailing addresses and in general are much too tightly-knit for Fake Internet Drama to work very well.

David S. reminisced about how Typo Boy heard a friend of David's was in the hospital in a new city where she didn't know anybody, and he went and visited her. I love that kind of story -- that is the kind of story that makes Buffistarianism work.

(Not that you have to go visit people you've never met in the hospital, but, that sense that it's all real and we're not joking and if you really did need to flee the country for some reason, you could depend on us severally to Underground Railroad you to Canada.)

In sum, let us all go visit each other in the hospital. Just, Brigham & Women's, front lobby, next Tuesday at 4. No need for anybody to be sick or anything.

I've been away for a long time. As a matter of fact, I only came back when I read the news of Gus' death, so I've been following this from lurktown, but now I feel I have to say something. I have seen at least three cases of pseuidicide rip up communities I've been part of. The approach taken here strikes me as the healthiest way of dealing with the thorny issue of any I've seen.

Trudy, if you do not choose to pursue the questions that's up to you.

Since it apparently does need to be typed out loud, you do not get to make that choice for the rest of the board.

Period.

I mourn for the Gus we lost, but I'm becoming convinced there is reason to believe we're being manipulated.

To the extent you can stop aiding and abetting the manipulation, that would be a very good thing.

What Vortex, Betsy, Nutty, et. al. said. I'm much more concerned about the people I have broken bread with (both in the literal and figurative sense).

Not wanting to speak for any but myself, but I'd say the intersection of these two points is where some of the inital hurt and anger were coming from. Yes, a legitimate question. Did we jump on it too early or too fiercely? It felt a bit that way to me, and and least some others.

This is one point on which (if you feel like it, brenda) I would like some clarification. It seems as though you may sort of mean it would have been better to let people mourn longer, before bringing up the doubts. If so, could you please explain that, a little. Admittedly, I'm getting this idea, in part, from an (open) LJ entry, as well.

Yeah, at this point, Trudy, if your aim is to make us feel as bad as you feel, then you're succeeding, at least for me.

For me as well. I'm almost wanting to cry here.

Trudy, why do you care so much for the feelings of people whom you've never met, who may well not even be real, who -- if they *are* real -- might not even have a death to be mourning? You apparently care enough about these hypothetical strangers enough to say really hurtful, destructive things to people who you've actually met in person, and to disrupt a discussion which has been, for the most part, respectful and calm.

You're a very compassionate person, Trudy, but I feel that in this instance, it's out of proportion.

That's kind of the jist. When this all first came up, it felt - weird, and cruel. Because at that stage I don't think things had solidified to the point that the chances of our being mistaken were quite so remote.

And, obviously, that's not the whole story - the reactions of any family outside or of people here who weren't so convinced or hadn't had time to process are important considerations. But so are the feelings of those with the doubts or those who don't want to see other people suffering over something that maybe isn't worth it. So I'm not entirely sure what the answer would have been.

But at the time, it did feel very off, like we were looking for something to be wrong, maybe, in a way that I'm probably not explaning at all adequately.

[last sentence edited a bit]

I've gone to several massage therapists who asked for a "person to contact"

Umm, an ambulance?

Sure, but would we belive the Fella without an obit and a death certificate? He could be anybody.

You know, Trudy. I don't think anybody here has a problem with your position. What they have a problem with is the way you present your position.

The only person who actually seems to be trying to cause strife here is you.

But at the time, it did feel very off, like we were looking for something to be wrong, maybe, in a way that I'm probably not explaning at all adequately.

I understand what you mean, brenda. It did feel too soon for me as well, but once it became clear that A) people had had suspicions in the past and B) kimi was not a known quantity as I had assumed (and B') no one had met Gus), I better understood why the question came up so quickly, especially given people's past experiences with pseuicide.

With apologies to Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, grieving happens so completely differently for everyone that it makes sense that everyone feels just as they do.

Whether it is grief over a mortal loss, over loss of innocence, over feeling manipulated, over just. not. knowing. it's going to be different for each of us.

The temptation is to take other people's reactions personally, because the experience is, well...personal. And while I'm no fan of snide...mostly for its supreme uselessness as a tool for understanding...I get strong emotion...especially fear and anger...in a case like this (whatever it may be).

When the temptation gets too strong, I try to revert to that 'what we learned in kindergarten' school of thought. Words can't really hurt me, and even if they do, the upset will pass.

eta: slang gone bad: What I meant to say is that I understand strong emotion being a part of this discussion, not that I get angry or fearful. Perhaps an unecessary distinction, but none the less.