So the deal is, the person in question in DCS3 isn't fully comfortable with me telling the story, so he wants to think about it for a bit. I'm not sure how I feel about it, as it bridges the line between my experiences and his. Of course I don't want to be cold and heartless, but I also see this as one of the tests of blogging: If you have a real-life experience, should you feel compelled not to blog it?

Of course the factor is the impact that it has on the other person. If this were something that made them look really bad, then that would be one thing, but that's not the case here. If it were a story they told me in confidence I would feel it wrong to blithely pass it on to the world.

The difference here is that this is a story that happened to me. It affected my life a great deal for at least a week, and though as it turned out that it affected someone else more, I still feel that it's more my story that I'm relating, and this is the epiphany, the cathartic ending.

The recursive nature of this whole medium necessitates that as I talk about my own life, I talk about the hows and whys and moral quandaries I face about posting or not posting, I'm again posting 'about it' ('around it' would be more accurate).

So, I'm curious to see where my readership's moral compass lies. Those of you who read DCS3 this morning, what do you think?

Keep in mind (as I am) that if this situation that happened three years ago were happening today, there's no way I wouldn't blog about it (except for employer-employee issues, which no longer apply here). These are my stories, these are people messing with my professional project and consequently my professional life, and as such they forfeit their right to ignominy. As for Other-Kevin, he has simply related his view of the story, of the people who fucked him directly as I was fucked peripherally. He clued me in on the missing data of who my own assailant was, and in so doing, freed me to tell a story which until now didn't have an ending...