I think the game being played is to frame the debate as being between two extreme positions, and appealing to neutrals, people of good judgement, to take a sensible, intermediary position. That is the role Dick is being invited to take on, in the same way that SE23.life mods have been used, and suggest a moral equivalence between Chris and his numerous antagonists.Homecroft wrote: ↑24 Jul 2019 13:36Surely the fact it has been sent to a "complete stranger" albeit with the actual number redacted, shows it is not seen even by him as confidential?
I don't get the game being played here, it makes no sense. Simply send it to the person it relates to, or an intermediate party who can be trusted not to publish it? Once she has it, this is all pretty much done with.
In the meantime it just looks like another game being played.
Thanks for sharing that though Dick
The problem with this is that Chris' behaviour, now attested by so many, is so far beyond norms, that many other people find it hard to credit, and the people who call it out are easily dismissed. On one of the recent SE23.life threads there was something about contributors here 'frothing at the mouth', or it might have been foaming. Can't find it now, but once someone has aligned themselves with the 'sensible middle', it's difficult to say you'd got it wrong.
It also happens on the wider stage, when people accuse the Labour Party of being anti-semitic. Someone I've known for nearly fifty years recently wrote to me that he was "astonished that there are still real anti-semites around in this country". When a life lessons can be so shaped in the comfort of the BBC and other respectable media, it is easy to see why people who do raise concerns about extremists are considered extremists themselves.