anonymous text, un: ANON

[doreimi]

i have a question. there's no right or wrong answer, i'm just wondering what people think.

suppose somebody came here, and outwardly they seemed like an average person. kept to themselves, didn't make trouble, maybe were a little bit weird but not, like, offensively so. you've never seen them do anything wrong. they seem pretty harmless. they're just a normal, fine, generally boring person.

then imagine somebody else said that they knew that person, and that all the niceness was just an act, and really that person was dangerous. really dangerous. and that the person hurt people in really bad ways. but imagine there was no proof of it, really, just that upset person's word against the boring person's.

how would you decide who to believe? would you only go by what you saw yourself, or only by what happened here and not where they came from, or what? would you believe anyone at all?

like i said, there's no right or wrong answer, i guess. i just wonder how you would make a decision either way, in a situation like that.

Comments

permanon

[doreimi]

so it's sort of a question of who got there first? what if it turned out it was the other way around, and the supposedly dangerous person was your friend? would that change anything?

[tigerpoet]

If the accused was my friend, I would want to talk to them about it. I wouldn't say any names, because I don't want the other person to get in trouble, but I would ask them about the things that were said and if they have any basis.

[doreimi]

so you would get both sides of the story.

what if you asked and the supposedly dangerous person lied? you wouldn't know that they were lying, obviously. but they'd say it's all false, there's no truth to any of it.

[tigerpoet]

If they were my friend, I would believe them. I know that they could still be lying, but I don't have it in me to suspect my friends of lying to my face.

If they weren't my friend... I don't know. I'm not sure I would completely accept that the accusations were true, but I also don't think I'd spend much time around that person if I could help it.

[doreimi]

i understand. i think it's a hard decision to make in a situation like that. when it's only one person's word against another's, it's hard to know what's true and what isn't.

[tigerpoet]

I want to believe the best of people. Sometimes that's a good trait to have. Sometimes it isn't.

[At least he's self-aware enough to know it can be a character flaw.]

I want to believe the accused isn't a terrible person, but I also want to belive the accuser isn't lying about something like that.

[doreimi]

would it make a difference to you what the crime was? the thing the person was accused of, i mean. would that influence it any?

[tigerpoet]

It might. I might believe that someone would be falsely accused of, say, shoplifting for petty reasons.

But to say that someone is something like a murderer... That isn't said lightly. Not unless you're certain.

[doreimi]

so even if they were your friend, if someone made an accusation like that, you'd at least have a doubt...

right?

[tigerpoet]

Even if they were my friend.

...but people change. I would still at least want to talk to them about it. If it's something they regret, if they've already served their time for what they did... I still want to hear their side of the story.

[doreimi]

so when you say "served their time"...

you know people can come here even though they've died, right?

[tigerpoet]

Yes, I know. I'm a ghost myself.

[doreimi]

so what if the accused person had already been executed for what they did, but then they came here afterward.

wouldn't they have "paid their debt" by being executed?

[tigerpoet]

They would have, yes.

I can't forgive them, because it's not a crime that was acted against me. I certainly don't think anyone they harmed should be asked to forgive them. But I also believe that, if no one believes that they can try to repent and become a better person, that there is no reason for them to try to be better.

It might be naive to think that anyone can change if they try.

[doreimi]

so do you think that lets them off the hook, though? dying, i mean. that was already their punishment, so now they've been punished, and they get off scot-free?

[tigerpoet]

I don't think dying counts as getting away scot-free.

[doreimi]

[It does when some people deserve to rot in hell forever and never find peace, she thinks, but she's not about to put that on the network.]

so if they died, but then were alive again here, then they've paid for their past crimes and they get a fresh start here. is that what you mean?

[tigerpoet]

I do.

Don't get me wrong, though, it's only the opportunity to be a better person. If they start doing that sort of thing again, they've rejected that fresh start, and I won't regret introducing them to the point of my sword.

[doreimi]

oh, i see. so it's more like being on probation. the chance to prove that they've changed.

[tigerpoet]

Right. If they reject that chance to repent, then they have no one to blame but themself.

[doreimi]

so you'd call this their "one last chance", then. because that's something everybody deserves, right?

i'm not trying to sound like i'm questioning you, i'm just making sure i understand.

[tigerpoet]

That's what I mean. Everyone should get the chance to try to be better than they were, if they're willing to try.

[doreimi]

and it doesn't matter how many chances they might've had before this, because this is the one more, and the last one. right?

because this is the only one that you're around to see, so that makes it easy to define, i guess. is that it?

[tigerpoet]

It's difficult. If there's anyone who can fairly decide exactly how many chances every criminal deserves, it certainly isn't me.