The Minimum Standard - what was wrong

A Plan for Action - what possibly to do

______________

$spyed has finally spoken up.

I want to feel charitable toward him, understanding of his legal restrictions, and supportive toward administration. It's my nature. To try to see and respect "the other side."

But far too much does not add up, and I am not (yet) impressed. Far too much does not add up.

So as far as I'm concerned, we should still be stinking about this. If you're still sceptical too, keep up your efforts as you've been making them. Perhaps more calmly, but do not yet relax back to "business as usual." They surely want that now more than ever.

I examine stuff like this very logically - premises, conclusions, loose ends, and inconsistencies - and will write more probably sometime Monday evening, U.S. EST. (I'll probably update this entry.)

But I can tell you right away, his take on the situation definitely is not passing the logic test. And I'm not impressed by that tone of voice either, that says basically, "get over °jark cause so many other people were important."

Keep your eyes open - it still smells far too fishy. But don't go around irrationally bashing either. Just keep this site about respect for °jark, until he's satisfied with a conclusion to this mess.

Or, you know, do whatever you think is best. I'm just trying to provide guidance for those who want it. I feel responsible, to offer something rather than nothing.

So my own position is: I'm not standing down yet. Not yet at all.

Stabbing °jark in the back still makes no sense to me, and how it was handled makes even less sense than that.

And then there's the matter of °euphoria's very revealing resignation... It helps give us a perspective on the morality of the characters involved...

Which, at the very least, should encourage us to distrust any easy answers.... That aren't really answers at all.

Something remains rotten at the core of deviantART.



_____________

Update: I just left my first words to $spyed since this whole mess began, thought I would reproduce them here:

"Here's the problem:

We're being asked, basically, to choose between two different parties' interpretations of events, neither of which can 'legally' tell us the whole story.

We have to make a leap of faith, in one direction or the other.

You know me, Angelo, I've always tried to see your side.

But the other side is the one who was stabbed in the back