dearinter.netbeta

dear internet,

let us say you (or i) are (or were) in a situation where you have a choice for self-defense. i am talking about a personal affront, more of a psychological part, such as someone accusing you of something, a misconstrual of facts, or some other accusation against your morals and/or actions. something did occur to trigger the event, and you were involved, but it is painted as though you are something which you are not and did things and plotted things which you did not do or plot. no one was hurt, aside from feelings, but it made some people cranky and you fell under the blame train.

it is up to you to decide if you want to defend yourself. they give you an option to take a punishment, which they minimize in exchange for you letting it be handled at the lowest possible level (the plea bargain, basically), at which point the issue will be dropped, the masses will be pleased, and you will be fine after a few months but have to tell them you did the wrongdoing you did not do. or you can buck the system and say "i didn't do that" and throw it up the chain, which makes the accusers and others angry because of the negative attention upon the system and your refusal to just take it. such action would avoid the punishment now since it will be proven that you did not do the crime, but will anger some powerful people which could several years later come back and bite you in the bum at the least expected moment, such as the blocking of a career move. there is no "forgiveness" option, because in cases involving feelings, intentions, and perceptions they will always think you committed the act.

do you stick up for yourself and chance later underhanded wrath, or do you let the system have its way with you now in exchange for peace later?