so lame to see you leave, and to know that you believe it's over
Just when I think I've finally resolved the [Insect] situation, it crops up again.
To wit, this comment (thankfully left on the right entry!):
But, just to tie everything up in one entry...Ms. [Insect], you responded originally to this entry when you should have responded to this entry; then you got confused when I didn't publish your reply to the proper entry, because you'd gotten confused and replied to the wrong one.
This, by the way, is not my fault. That's all on you for forgetting which entry you were replying to in the first place. I am not accountable for stupidity.
But just to make things absolutely clear for you:
This is the direct link to your first comment (sent, again, to the WRONG ENTRY.)
This, on the other hand, is your bitchy retort comment--on the RIGHT entry!--because I didn't publish your comment on the right entry--because YOU SENT IT TO THE WRONG ONE.
Wau, I hope everything is clear now. Anything else? Do let me know, I'm all ears.
To wit, this comment (thankfully left on the right entry!):
you have not had the courage to publish what I wrote in my previous comment! This is for me a great win! So I have understand very well what you are really and I think I will make too much advertise at this your "quality"! ^ ^I really hate when people can't read. Or track down the right entry in the first place.
Goodbye sweet! ;)
[Dilapidated] Reigns
But, just to tie everything up in one entry...Ms. [Insect], you responded originally to this entry when you should have responded to this entry; then you got confused when I didn't publish your reply to the proper entry, because you'd gotten confused and replied to the wrong one.
This, by the way, is not my fault. That's all on you for forgetting which entry you were replying to in the first place. I am not accountable for stupidity.
But just to make things absolutely clear for you:
This is the direct link to your first comment (sent, again, to the WRONG ENTRY.)
This, on the other hand, is your bitchy retort comment--on the RIGHT entry!--because I didn't publish your comment on the right entry--because YOU SENT IT TO THE WRONG ONE.
Wau, I hope everything is clear now. Anything else? Do let me know, I'm all ears.
Comments
From what I DID read, I think she's yet another person unhappy that you used her name in connection with a "generally negative" (mocking whatever) post in your apparently well-read blog.
Maybe it's time to trot out the olf find-replace function when dealing with quoting people, and give them humorous nicknames rather than including their actual names in your posts?
Just saying.. "naming names" does seem to causing you more drama of late. How much of this would have been avoided if you'd replaced her name with "Cryptic Engigmatica"? (or just good old "Random Person"?)
I try to avoid naming names, because then it just stirs up a lot of he said she said, and privacy nonsense, when my whole reason for posting was to just discuss the BUH emotions I was feeling. Invariably when I name names, someone with an axe to grind will go out of their way to bring that post to the named person's attention.
I have a feeling that may be what;s going on for you recently.
Maybe if I just take that shot out...
Not sure what to say when naming names is particularly key to the issue (like with that hunt drama that I didn't read all of). Anonymizing that sort of thing may not be appropriate.
it's of course your blog, to do with as you please.
Well.
Ms. Bookmite wasn't a backsliding, per se, because I originally blogged about her--briefly--five months ago and she's only just getting around to complaining now.
But yeah. Since it's obviously becoming A Thing for some reason, I'm going to try to be better about keeping names out of it when I can.
I still may go through and re-create Miss Dilapidated, but as of now, I haven't, because it would require retroactively changing entries. Which I can do, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Whatever, drama princess, are we all happy now? Honestly.