“Proper channeling of information”. This has been used as a reminder several times in the past few months, one would be tempted to ask around what the improperly channeled information or what the improper channels were, in the first place. As far as I know, here are some examples:

1.   1.   In an informal gathering a few years ago, a supervisor asked the subordinates for comments about a particular subordinate. It turned out that they had a lot to say about that person, who refuses to listen openly to any feedback, that they were each keeping to themselves. With complete trust that the supervisor would be able to talk to that person in her capacity and responsibility as a supervisor, they each gave their comments, only to find out days after that instead of relaying those comments in a constructive way to help that person change for the better, the supervisor made it sound like everybody was ganging up on that person, which understandably made that person very mad. But it was a very sly move, and something that will be done several times with different agenda and in different circumstances, to different unsuspecting people. And here, as in all other instances, the question is, who is/are the real victim/s?

2.   2.   Some complaints about that person reached me, but knowing what happens when one talks to that person or to the supervisor about any negative comments, I opted to just process the whole thing with the complainants and then just keep my mouth shut. But anything rotten is bound to stink, and someone would inevitably smell it. The same supervisor was advised about the issue in a meeting that’s supposedly confidential, but lo and behold, the information reached that person, again relayed in a negative way. It was vehemently denied, of course. And the most interesting twist in the story is that, it was the supervisor who brought up the topic in that meeting and the others just shared their comments about it. But that “minute” detail, again, was scrapped from the story that reached that person. If that is not gossiping in its highest form, I don’t know anymore what is. Maybe the good thing that came out of it is that I don’t hear the same complaints now. But honestly speaking, it grates my nerves just to hear that person complain about tattle-tales or “improper channeling”. I’m just praying that I won’t run out of EQ or be provoked to produce the complainants just to prove that there are no rumors in that issue, just people who refuse to be mature enough to own up to their mistakes. As is always the case with them. But then again, the proof is not my burden, and anyone can just ask anyone from that batch.

3.   3.   There are so many more instances (like that person and that supervisor accusing me of creating a faction among, take note, intelligent and independently-minded people just because I questioned, discreetly, the propriety of showing a candidate for a supervisory position who among the future subordinates signed the endorsement letter for the said candidate; or someone telling MY supervisor that the ratings given me were too high, to no avail) when I have lost my trust and respect for those two, and one of my weaknesses is that when that happens, I lose all objectivity and kindness in me. To tell the truth, whenever that happens, I wish them HELL. And no, they’re not in my list of friends because I can’t bear being a hypocrite. I can work with them, sure, but I can’t be a friend to them.

.

I won’t deny it, tattle-tales do exist. But if the talks have no factual basis (like a pair of shoes, perhaps), and if you’re really “clean” or AT LEAST are willing to say sorry and reform, there’s really no need to worry and they will all fade out eventually. Sometimes, too, those talks only help confirm your instincts about whom to trust or not to trust. But as always, the choice to wade in the mud, to help wipe away the mud, or to be a mere spectator is completely yours, based on your principles and convictions. I myself am not inclined to listen to anything but those that give me a taste of that sweet revenge.

.

Of course it would be sad if everything/everyone would turn out to be that dirty, and especially so if it would involve or victimize nice and harmless people that I respect. In cases like this, I pray that things would be resolved as soon as possible with the least amount of hurting and betraying. But to hear one of the two persons described above demand for “proper channeling of information” is, to say the least, ironic to me.

.

But (I’ll try not to defy the 3^rd commandment here) “fate” has its ways, and so one day, when the self-proclaimed “victim” of rumors and champion of “proper channeling of information” was ONCE AGAIN discussing an “inaccurate information of questionable veracity” (a gossip, yes), never mind if it was in interrogative form, someone felt slighted and reacted negatively. Normally I would be one of those who would try to clean up the mess. But for this person, I just can’t find enough goodness in me for that.

.

All I can say now is, “Look who’s talking. Gotcha.”

.

**********

.

And my friends, sometimes, sad to say, the system sucks, and I can understand why people would feel bad about it. Even I sometimes do. What I could never understand is how someone who had done several wrong things but got away with them in this system could be so SELF-RIGHTEOUS in making public proclamations, and even easily disown those proclamations when confronted. That person even has the gall to say sarcastically nowadays that “You’re so negative, you should always be positive”, to anyone who complains about the system. In my honest opinion anyone who has not yet tendered his/her resignation is part of the system, no matter how much one denies it. The question now is, are you really helping build a better system, or are you merely wallowing in the mud and pointing an accusing finger?

.

“You’re so negative, you should always be positive". If that statement and the way it is delivered are completely devoid of any intention to sow yet another intrigue, please tell me how. Until you do, I could only say… “Look who’s talking.”