caught between 2 acquaintances

[jawnbc]

Perhaps I shouldn’t care. Or bother. But I do.

Someone casually informs me that they’ll be crashing with another nodding acquaintance in the not-too-distant future. Person #1 has always struck me as a good person. Person #2, I have found, has serious issues, including stalking and other obsessive-like behaviours.

I don’t know if #1 knows this about #2. I started to write an email about it, but no matter how I worded it.......waaaah!

“Hey,

I hear you’re gonna stay with #2 in a few weeks. How well do you know each other? Because . . .”

1. If #1 is in the dark, I could save him much heart-ache and drama
2. if #1 knows this but is gonna give #2 the benefit of the doubt, could be OK
3. If they’re already good mates, I look like a meddling asshole.

Help? Please?

Comments

[greenshadows.livejournal.com]

Meddle not, that ye be not meddled with. It's good that you care but this could backfire, and as long as person #2 isn't a stalker in a potentially homicidal way, well, person #1 will survive at least. :)

[barak.livejournal.com]

I know whereof you speak.... my suggestion is to stay out of it.

[davomatic.livejournal.com]

If they're both acquaintances, it's best to hold your tongue. No need inserting yourself into other's drama unless absolutely necessary.

[roybear.livejournal.com]

My vote is to stay out of it. I know somebody exactly like #2 (in fact they may even be the same person) and I've only ever got burned before when trying to warn anyone about it. Learn from ol' Roy's mistakes young man ;-)

Re:

[jawnbc]

Ole Roy? Yer name's Shaaaane, and you're younger than me. I'll be 40 in 11 d-d-d-d-days


*thud*

Re:

[roybear.livejournal.com]

"Shane"? Only my mother and telemarketers call me that.

[beverly-sutphin.livejournal.com]

I'll be the dissenter. I'd speak to person #1 about it. I've been in similar situations and I always let people know. I'm not a gossip about it and I strive to objectively report the information that I have observed with examples and then let the person decide for themselves. If person #2 approached me (you) about sharing said information, I'd tell #2 that I was only speaking truth and that if #2 felt the information was in error, #2 could feel free to show me where I was wrong.

Besides, #2 can go fuck himself if he has a problem. I say this because I'd also move in the direction of eliminating #2 from my circle entirely. I try and stay away from people who have serious issues (expect myself *heheh*).

If I were #1, I'd really hope that my friends would warn me about the #2's of this world if they had access to information that I didn't. Just imagine if I'd had the opportunity to gain some info about my ex from his exes *sigh*.

Anyway....

I'm surprised that you are found it difficult to assess this situation. I would have sworn that I'd learned how to deal with situations like this from you in years past.

Re:

[jawnbc]

were the relations all face-2-face, it'd be a no brainer. It's all virtual, hence the lack of clarity.

But you've--of course--neatly summarized my train of thought exactly.

[beverly-sutphin.livejournal.com]

P.S. If you do approach #1, if possible, try to do it in person or over the phone. It isn't the kind of thing that always comes across okay via email.

Re:

[jawnbc]

only contact is email or chat

Re:

[beverly-sutphin.livejournal.com]

I'd still tell #1. I'd use chat. I'd explain that I felt it was a bit awkward and I'd explain my motivations in sharing the information.
Then, I'd tell #1 exactly what I knew of #2 (good bad and ugly) and let them decide from there.

But that's just me.

Speaking of chat. I tried to add you to msn, but dunno if it was effective. I have problems with their service all the time. If/when you're around, msg me on msn (brrdy@hotmail.com -- I never check the mail there, it's for msn only).

[bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com]

Well we all know gossip is just bad bad bad (I'd certainly NEVER do it!) but I've been saved from several potential disasters by friends telling me that so-and-so, who's planning to stay with you, has a history of stealing and/or leeching.

Of course that doesn't let me off the karmic hook for failing to warn the people they DID stay with, who DID suffer those consequences.

[danbearnyc.livejournal.com]

As someone who has been stalked through the streets of Northern Queens by an obsessive drag-bear I feel the need to weigh in on this issue.

A legitimate warning is not gossip.

McLesson over.

[bunnycoco.livejournal.com]

Stay out of it, please. Unless #1 is under 18. Or under 12 and Dutch.

[that-dang-otter.livejournal.com]

I can't help but reflect on how "warnings" about presumed "disaster dates" are too often wildly offensive to both the warnee and the warnant. (If those are real words?)

I am thinking particularly of an FTM I dated whose other dates had too often been "warned" about his biological gender in the most offensive possible way, yet with the best of intentions from people that were basically OK but kind of stupid in that department.

The moral of the story is that what you consider appropriate to mention may be so irrelevant or misguided in the eyes of others that such advice is best not given at all. You never really know where everyone involved is coming from. The potential for appearing stupid is always greater than the potential for providing useful information.

Re:

[bunnycoco.livejournal.com]

Bravo.

Re:

[beverly-sutphin.livejournal.com]

I'd rather appear stupid so that I could be called on it and perhaps learn something, for example, that I'm a complete idiot for outing someone's biological gender (like that's any of my damned buisiness in the first place) and hopefully change my ways as a result.

That is, I'd rather appear stupid and learn from it than refrain from speaking just in case I look stupid.

In addition, if my information is irrelevant or misguided in the eyes of others, then hopefully they can point that out to me so that I can re-evaluate given the new perspective.

I don't know... I'm surprised everyone (except a couple of us) is so against sharing experiences about acquaintances that may prove to be useful. I've never been one to turn a blind eye by keeping my lessons learned private and letting others discover potential hardships that I could have possibly helped them avert. Maybe I'm missing something.

Re:

[jawnbc]

OK here's the deal. Problem person stalks and harasses people. Breaking and entering, appearing on doorsteps and phone calling at all hours.

It's in their journal, though almost always rationalized through self-diagnosis--or the willingness for some to view these things as "passion" or "interesting."

I wouldn't have posted this about someone ostensibly annoying or unattractive or meagrely-hung (or super well-hung) or anything of that sort.

Re:

[bunnycoco.livejournal.com]

Suppose that problem person has not done this before? Suppose that problem person had a key to the house, and entered the house because the supposed object of his obsession was supposed to have called him and didn't, and so he was worried? Suppose he called this number where he thought the person was once looking for the person out of concern? Suppose the person who passed this info on to you had an interaction with someone really unstable in his past and is projecting a lot of inappropriate conclusions on to this person, and you are now prepared to pass this info on, too?

If you are indeed talking about my dear friend, it is upsetting to me to hear it discussed in this public forum, especially when you are already using terms like "stalks and harasses people," which isn't accurate, and "breaking and entering," which isn't true.

Then again, if you're talking about someone else... oopsie!

[clauditorium.livejournal.com]

Send an e-mail that casually asks #1 how well he knows #2. Wait for the answer.

If they're friends and he wonders why you're asking, you can say you were just curious how these two acquaintances of yours knew each other.

If they don't know each other well, you can share your thoughts about #2.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

If I thought it were a matter of physical safety, I'd speak. If I thought it were a matter of theft and harrassment, I'd probably speak. If I thought it was just emotional yuckage, I'd probably hold silent.

I'd be prepared to make abject apologies to either or both of them if I got my facts wrong, which sounds very possible given what you've said about how well you know them. I'd be prepared to lose a couple of acquaintanceships/friendships. Physical safety issues make that a no-brainer; the other stuff is harder to parse.

I like Claude's idea of starting with a very simple query.

Sorry, things like this ARE hard.

[cachondo.livejournal.com]

A bit of a tricky sich... I wouldn't meddle, especially if they are both just acquaintances and it's just for a visit. However, when I think about it further, I would want to know if the person I just invited to my home should be watched carefully (for whatever reason). Consult your oracle!

[sinnabor.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'd give the warning.

Try to be fair about it, and only give the evidence fairly, not conclusions or rumors.

A "be careful, here's what I know for certain" warning isn't a character assassination or meddling. It's just concern.

In all fairness, creepy stalker guy may be getting better, or may be no threat to #1. But #1 should know to watch out, since that's a bit out of the ordinary.

I think politeness requires that you not vent personal affronts in this sort of situation. But that's not what you're talking about.

Hmmm. Another tack also occurs to me. You could say to person #1 "Uh, #2 has a bit of a checkered history, some of it... unpleasant to his romantic interests. I don't wish to meddle, so I'll leave it to you to decide if you care."

[mathan.livejournal.com]

You let person #1 talk to #2's ex who he knows quite well, who would say something. And then you let #1 learn for themselves that #2 is actually a down to earth decent guy who, yes, has had issues in the past and has actually come a long way in dealing with them.

*GRIN* ;)