Tal Bachman wrote:Analytics -
Yeah, I think you might be right about keeping quiet. That was really well put, thanks.
What do you think I should do if he persists in saying I invented the stuff? Just say, "I've already recounted the meeting as accurately as I can"? Like, what if he comes out and says, "Tal persists in misrepresenting me"?...
Not that I'm Analytics, but here goes anyway.
First, I would reframe how I'm looking at it in that:
1. The SP is not "persist"[ing] in anything, it would appear, at this point anyway. He has written and sent his letter and his wife has done likewise. They have consented to have their letters posted at FAIR. I think I read that that is all he was going to say about it, but I could be mistaken in that recollection.
2. The SP did not directly state that you "invented the stuff". I think he was careful to say you misunderstood and other general terms to that effect. That may or may not be true but he is not the one calling you a liar (unless you want to read that into his remarks?) (I acknowledge that I am quite literal and don't automatically see bad intentions everywhere and generally first take things at face value, until proven that there's something lurking below the surface).
Remembering those two facts can ratchet down the intense emotional response that this exchange could easily and understandably elicit but which may warp one's perception, leading in turn to more misunderstanding.
Second, I would remember the adage that discretion is the better part of valour. This is often very applicable to a wide range of situations. There is nothing to say you can't change your reaction if something momentous alters from where things stand now.
Third, I would not make a preemptive strike; i.e., react now to something he may (or equally, may not) say or do at some future time. (This goes along with #2). Don't answer what isn't asked or said, In other words.
Fourth, I would try and decide if my regard for the other person and a possible ongoing relationship are worth losing in order to publicly discuss a matter that is sensitive for one or another of the involved parties.
Fifth, if something else transpires to change any of the above or if I truly felt my character had been totally impugned and it was crucial to put the record straight, I would then re-evaluate the pros and cons of speaking out and even so, I would likely keep it on the side of me and my thoughts and opinions and not the other guy's. Nobody can read minds.
And lastly, I would remember my default position on this and pretty much everything: People can misunderstand, fail to remember, mischaracterize, be poor communicators, etc., none of which makes them a LIAR. On either side.
I think it is very unfortunate that a person's pain from loss of faith that meant so much to them is disregarded in favour of scoring points. How does a person's life crisis elicit glee from any quarter? That's a different world from the one I inhabit.