MiGawd There Really Are Coloring Police

I'm heart sick over a violation of trust and online bullying. 

An Instagram Post attacked a woman's livelihood and was twisted to insist she is as an enemy of the suffering. Nothing I say, or write, or share is going to comfort Christine.  Not one person is going to be persuaded to stop and think an opinion about facts is not hate, is not mocking, is not biting the hand, is not pissing on people or community, and that in context of how to expand a channel is quite true.

Within a Group of Friends, most chats are basically the same content among the chatters.  Those outside the circle of friends are welcomed IF they conform to the standard of acceptable behavior for The Group.  To bring in more people requires a change in the standard flow of chat.  Part of that is the number of people chatting, part of that is new people bring new things to a chat.  Content, not the chat, expand channels.  Acknowledging this isn't a sin, or even especially profound. 

It certainly is not cruel stones tossed at those suffering physically, emotionally or mentally and using coloring [and chatting] to cope.  It isn't an attack on sparkle or pink or unicorns.  It is a fact chat gets in to a rut now and then, gee that's just like in Real Life!




ALL THAT SAID....
Someone was privately chatting with Christine.  They were later upset by something Christine said.  Instead of contacting Christine and asking her to clarify what she meant and telling Christine how Christine's words felt to her ... she chose to share her feelings and Christine's words with others.

Enough others that someone took it upon herself to post 5 sentences of the private chat publicly and tried to shame Christine for explaining there has to be more to a channel than chat -- Content Matters, Learning Matters is Christine's opinion and she backed it up with examples.  The someone used those 5 sentences to Inform the Community, making sure to point out Christine's livelihood depends on The Group's Good Will.  You read that right, this someone believes that an opinion about the Content of a Channel and Chat is worth attacking Christine's livelihood.  Someone would rather Christine starve than take the time to talk with her like an adult that is upset but able to maintain a civil manner. 

!!MiGawd, there really are coloring police!!

Regardless of Christine's opinion of what constitutes a good channel her trust that a private chat would remain private was violated.  I admit, it freaks me out to see bullies and drama created where there could have been a really worthwhile conversation that did not hurt ANYONE. 

But it's always more invigorating to get self-righteous and heap trauma on someone in a Group of Friends than it is to Confront an Individual.  Isn't that what we learned in middle school?  We're too [delicate, dainty, shy, demure, reticent] to confront anyone, us poor dears - frail and puny we are, just like the misogynist claim :gag:.  However, we can and must share our hurt with everyone but The Individual and then as a Group of Friends we can make sure That Individual is tormented as she deserves to be!

YeBloodyGawdz ... are we twelve year olds or adult colorists?  As Christine asked ... are these the type of people I want to hang out with?  No. It's not. This background drama and trauma that Christine tried to stay out of has escalated to an attack by an online bully in a public forum, enabled by a violation of trust.  I have NO idea what is going on in the background or why I should spend one hour of my limited life to figure it out. 

What I do know is that a community that tolerates bullying and violations of privacy is not something I want to be part of.  I won't tolerate it in real life, I'm not going to sit around and endure it in an online community that is supposed to be about a hobby we all enjoy.  The shame is all on the original violator of trust that didn't have enough courage to ask for clarity and the someone that posted an attack based on a twisted interpretation of a limited portion of a conversation.