uring the second week of February 2004, the ILW clan engaged in a group chat again. The "Famous Five" would only be four in this instance as "Julian" (Doug) was obviously indisposed with his contracts until Friday of that week. Nonetheless "Dick", the good doctor, "George" the tomboy and "Anne" and I reviewed all potential suspects. Activity on the ILW message board by the Roanoke imposter had subsided, in fact, most havoc happened on a couple of nights in late January. The consensus of the group was that the culprit had either infiltrated our group (my view) or was one of us (theirs). Arriving at no unanimous conclusion, the doctor and I continued the discussion long after the others had said good night. We were at odds in our views.
"Dick" presented a number of reasons why he suspected none other than our own "Julian" (Doug). Astonished that he could contemplate that Doug was responsible I listened intently. Numerous factors were presented to corroborate his conclusion ~ some had significant merit, others appeared to me to be quite a stretch.
The thought that Doug was at the root of the ILW drama concerned me. Could it be at all possible? "Dick" noted the times of the imposter's presence on the ILW board and proposed it could easily have been "Julian", as he'd not been in contact with the group at all that night, but I knew that "Julian" (Doug) had been busy entertaining the Japanese businessmen during that timeframe. I was unwilling to accept "Dick's" hypothesis, so he went on to explain in more detail how he believed it was not only possible, but probable.
I felt a little ill-at-ease towards the end of our chat. It was conceivable, but then what would that say of the intergrity of my close friend? Doug had denied any involvement all along. I shared with "Dick" that if Doug was the imposter, then what should I think of the personal feelings that had been exchanged between us? Doug knew I had been deeply betrayed, he had shown a significant amount of compassion and his entire reason for meeting me arose out of a sense of guilt for being harsh with me, without thinking about how vulnerable I was. If there was a chance that he hadn't been honest about the Mystery of Roanoke, could it be possible that the rest was not true as well? "Dick" shared his take on the matter, which was not at all comforting and not at all respectful of "Julian", especially in his absence. We logged off in the early hours of the morning.
I would be a little restless until I heard from Doug on Friday. I was disappointed that the others didn't support Doug the way I did, but then they didn't know him as I did. He'd confided only in me, up to this point and had good reason to be wary and protect his identity. I was anxious to clear up the misunderstanding amongst the group. It was time to rule out and dispell any and all doubts.
"Dick" presented a number of reasons why he suspected none other than our own "Julian" (Doug). Astonished that he could contemplate that Doug was responsible I listened intently. Numerous factors were presented to corroborate his conclusion ~ some had significant merit, others appeared to me to be quite a stretch.
The thought that Doug was at the root of the ILW drama concerned me. Could it be at all possible? "Dick" noted the times of the imposter's presence on the ILW board and proposed it could easily have been "Julian", as he'd not been in contact with the group at all that night, but I knew that "Julian" (Doug) had been busy entertaining the Japanese businessmen during that timeframe. I was unwilling to accept "Dick's" hypothesis, so he went on to explain in more detail how he believed it was not only possible, but probable.
I felt a little ill-at-ease towards the end of our chat. It was conceivable, but then what would that say of the intergrity of my close friend? Doug had denied any involvement all along. I shared with "Dick" that if Doug was the imposter, then what should I think of the personal feelings that had been exchanged between us? Doug knew I had been deeply betrayed, he had shown a significant amount of compassion and his entire reason for meeting me arose out of a sense of guilt for being harsh with me, without thinking about how vulnerable I was. If there was a chance that he hadn't been honest about the Mystery of Roanoke, could it be possible that the rest was not true as well? "Dick" shared his take on the matter, which was not at all comforting and not at all respectful of "Julian", especially in his absence. We logged off in the early hours of the morning.
I would be a little restless until I heard from Doug on Friday. I was disappointed that the others didn't support Doug the way I did, but then they didn't know him as I did. He'd confided only in me, up to this point and had good reason to be wary and protect his identity. I was anxious to clear up the misunderstanding amongst the group. It was time to rule out and dispell any and all doubts.
No comments:
Post a Comment