And I haven't stepped into the fray until now for the same reason: I haven't seen the email that Sal sent Emily. Is that not possible?
I know first hand from last week how complicated this kind of conflict can become. And then all the piling on complicates matters even more. Plus Emily is on vacation and Sal is still lurking! Maybe these things do take on a life of their own so that the main participants don't even have to be present! ________________________________ From: awoelflebater <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 10:43 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Eastwooding: PS to Ann "I'm not going to shut up; it's my turn!" --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > ME: Jesus, did someone call a meeting? > > >A: Here is the thing, the email, according to Curtis, was supportive and > >ego-stroking to Curtis. > > M: Sorry to intrude in the fantasy, but there was no "ego stroking". She was > defending me for something she believed to be unfair. > > A: When that happens and yet the other side of the email was allegedly an > unwarranted and vicious attack on Emily, Curtis appears to not be able to get > beyond the fact that he liked the email because Sal was complimentary to him. > > M: Sorry spin sister, no go. Even Judy didn't try this routine and she read > it. > > A: If he really has no problem with Emily (and frankly, why should he?) then > he should have understood and admitted that Sal's email to Emily was harsh, > ugly, unjustified. > > > M: Unless that isn't how I viewed it. > > A: Instead of liking the email because it was good for his ego he should > have (if he had any respect or reasonable feeling for Emily's position) > > M: Now you are really running with that ball you created aren't you? > > A: gotten beyond his subjective support of this otherwise mean-spirited and > traumatizing correspondence and called it for what it was. > > M: And that would be because someone else's subjective opinion about the > letter is the "right" one? I don't agree with Judy or Emily about how > horrible the letter was. You tipped your hand a bit far with the word > "traumatizing". I think you and Raunchy are being a bit too eager to please > Judy. I don't see any reason to think Emily was traumatized by the email. > Nor should she have been. I read it. > > > A: That has not happened and therefore I question Curtis' intentions and > values not to mention his motives for treating Emily badly by not supporting > her and understanding where she was coming from in her pain. But maybe that > is asking too much. > > > M: Feeling a little mean today? > > Emily and I are fine, sorry to disappoint. At least I am fine with her and > our last exchange was very friendly and full of understanding and tolerance > for each others differences. > > The very qualities your post lacks. Curtis, you may be correct in all that you say. I am getting impressions from people who read the email that Sal sent that it was not a pleasant email to receive for Emily. Emily has said so and Judy has said so, both of whom read the letter. So I am going to back out now that I have put in my two cents regarding the conclusion I drew from all of the to-ing and fro-ing on this subject. I am going to back out because I did not read the email and thus can not comment further on it. However, I can and did want to say what I said regarding the general play of personalities and human nature as I saw it based on discussions of this issue. At this point, if Sal is all she is cracked up to be by those who love and support her, it would be about that time when she could step out from behind that curtain and say her lines. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So Emily and I are cool now. Have fun with > > > > > > > whatever this thing is that seems to interest you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Have fun believing that you and Emily are cool now. > > > > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure that if you play the song "Imagine" > > > > > backwards, it generates one of your posts. > > > > > > > > > You may be cool with Emily, Curtis, but I doubt she's > > > > cool with you. After calling her motives into question > > > > so brutally, do you really think she trusts you? Just > > > > curious... > > > > > > There's a number of things Curtis can't change. > > > > > > 1. He can't change the ugly email Sal wrote Emily accusing > > > her of being mean to him. > > > 2. He can't change the fact that he then defended Sal on FFL. > > > 3. He can't change the fact that he tried to make Sal's email > > > sound like no big deal. > > > 4. He can't change the fact that he accused Emily of sending > > > me Sal's email to foment a public fight, after Emily had > > > explicitly explained otherwise. > > > > > > Why *would* Emily want to be "cool" with Curtis in light of > > > those facts? > > > > > > Nor can Curtis change the fact that I've also read Sal's email. > > > > > > Curtis *could* have avoided all but #1 (at least as far as we > > > know; was the email really all Sal's idea? did she run it by > > > him, and if so did he encourage her to send it?). If he had > > > not defended Sal, if he had acknowledged the ugliness of Sal's > > > email, if he hadn't attributed ulterior motives to Emily for > > > sending me the email, he wouldn't be out of favor with Emily, > > > and folks on FFL wouldn't be wondering about his integrity. > > > > > > If one of my supporters had written a nasty email to > > > someone viciously castigating them for purportedly putting > > > me down, and I found out about it, I'd call the emailer out > > > on FFL by name. > > > > > > Curtis *definitely* doesn't have the integrity to do that. > > > > > > > When Emily played off Robin's irony email did you think > > > > she was teasing you or did it piss you off? Was your > > > > poor treatment of her pay back for a bruised ego or did > > > > it have nothing to do with this: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/319723 > > > > > > Good question. But if he deigns to respond to it, will we > > > have any reason to trust what he tells us? Will Emily? > > > > Here is the thing, the email, according to Curtis, was supportive and > > ego-stroking to Curtis. When that happens and yet the other side of the > > email was allegedly an unwarranted and vicious attack on Emily, Curtis > > appears to not be able to get beyond the fact that he liked the email > > because Sal was complimentary to him. If he really has no problem with > > Emily (and frankly, why should he?) then he should have understood and > > admitted that Sal's email to Emily was harsh, ugly, unjustified. Instead of > > liking the email because it was good for his ego he should have (if he had > > any respect or reasonable feeling for Emily's position) gotten beyond his > > subjective support of this otherwise mean-spirited and traumatizing > > correspondence and called it for what it was. That has not happened and > > therefore I question Curtis' intentions and values not to mention his > > motives for treating Emily badly by not supporting her and understanding > > where she was coming from in her pain. But maybe that is asking too much. > > > > > >
