Apropos of I don't remember what, I read this blog post on 3by9.com and have excerpted the following:
Many people use their blogs, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, etc. to rant, snark, and other wise (sic) express themselves. In many of those writings the writer is sharing an experience, talking about something he/she does or doesn’t like, telling someone off, disagreeing with someone, agreeing with someone only to have others disagree with their opinion…it comes in many flavors. Do you think about how the person or company you’re writing or talking about will take what you’ve said? If you say something behind someone’s back did you think about how he/she will take it if they found out what you said?
...It is easy to sit back with the “shield” of the internet and throw stones criticizing people, many times with no real basis (you know, like facts) to back up what was written. It is very easy to take a “persona” and try to detach yourself from the persona saying the things that could land one in hot water. The common thought process is that the person writing will never see the person being written about, so why not?
...Did you expect the person you talked about behind their back to find out about it?
...Be careful what you say and how you say it yet be true to yourself. (Emphasis Mine.)
Just this week I interviewed the incoming House President Jenniffer González, or as I called her recently, Jenniffer "Gluttony" González. (I missed a chance to be very clever by not calling her "Gluttonny".) I have also interviewed current House President José "Puppet" Aponte, incoming governor Luis "Larva" Fortuño and current Mayor of Caguas Willie "Multiple Nicknamies" Miranda over the past two years.
First of all, I'm aghast that I have actually done this many interviews with parasites. (There I go again...) Second, I fully expect for these people to do one thing concerning My opinion of each of them: Ignore it.
For one, I'm not on their A-list of reading material, assuming they know how to read. (Uh-huh, doing it again...) Second, even if they did find out what I wrote about them, I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. Unlike the 3by9 post's argument of lacking facts, I always place My facts or rationale alongside My criticisms, attacks and/or pejorative nicknames. You may argue about the validity of the facts, but I have taken the time to include them aong with My thought processes and thus you and the person targeted have My viewpoint as complete as can be.
So when I highlighted the last two sentences of the excerpt, I did so with the intention of replying to their thrusts. Yes, I blog as if the people I write about will find out what I said about them. I may not think it likely that they will, but I am prepared if and when they do. For example, if "Gluttonny" (Oh boy, talk about a drumbeat...) had asked Me why I gave her that nickname, I would point to the post and say "You're in politics mainly for yourself." She could argue that I'm wrong, but the weight of the evidence--as I see it--shows her grabbing everything she can for her own benefit. Thus, "Gluttony," now "Gluttonny."
Offensive? Yes. Gluttony is a deadly sin. Inaccurate? No. And there I stand. For the last sentence I quoted above is where I have always stood, saying what I think in a manner consistent with My thoughts. You may argue about the style and many do, but no one--as I have said before--no one has ever accused Me of saying anything except what I believe.
Now as to whether this "opinion cloud" is right or should be managed in some other way is an entirely different discussion. For now, Jellyfish or Larva, Tantrum or Gluttony, Il Castrao or Puppet, let them read what I think and then decide if it merits attention or not. Either way, there I stand.
The Jenius Has Spoken.