Distant Nipping

Nearly a year after my resignation from my previous company, their employees' attitudes still continue to pester me.

After a former student sought my advice regarding his dealings with some of the people there, I was surprised to find out his complaint made a big splash. Part of my advice made his case, so naturally I was dragged into the issue. At the moment, I know not what information has been spread about my advice, but I suppose it has travelled as fast as email. As far as I know, it's been kept to a select number of people, but news about it seems to have reached the ears of curious others as well.

While I am neither pleased or unhappy about the turn of events, I cannot help but wonder how it will all turn out. There have been people who have voiced their support of my views, there have been others who question the neutrality of my actions. However, it would be foolish to the point of optimism if I do not anticipate that there will be those who will see my message as antagonistic and malicious. A cruel reminder that meanings are in people, not in words.

Still, it would only be right to lay out my meaning of it. After all, the most infallible of meanings can only come from the author. Interpretation by others is bound to fall into false context and bias. Even a committee of a hundred people would be hard-pressed to arrive at my exact thoughts and sentiments. So without further ado, let the ignorance and misinterpretation cease.

1. The email was a solicited reaction - No different from a supermodel with a huge zit on her nose asking if she's pretty. A question was asked, I found no obstruction to reply. It is not against the law, my response was in context, and nothing I wrote was false. I saw nothing damaging by responding to it and my third point will actually expound a bit more.
2. Reading the email objectively would not create an issue - Of course, why would it? The only course of action in the email was to avoid confrontation. I maintained a civil tone and a fair evaluation of how the situation could've proceeded without the heated exchange. Unless the reader had bias previous to reading the email, they would see it in the only way the email was intended to be read: a fair evaluation.
3. Culture definitely has some part - For some time, Filipino culture on perception of straight-to-the-point conversation has always puzzled me. I've never enjoyed beating around the bush and it is definitely the same here. Moreover, the observation of being onion-skinned when it comes to frankness seems to be the case here. But to save one's face as opposed to admitting one is wrong is not good enough for me. Yes, that's easier said than done, but to do it is the mark of integrity.

To truly discover the motives of all parties though, maybe for the meantime, it would be wise to let things unfold. For those holding grudges and having bias prior to reading my email however, I rest in the befitting words of Albus Dumbledore.

"It is far easier to forgive someone for being wrong, than for being right"