Violations and Ruminations
Apr. 8th, 2015 03:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lydyMost of Minicon this year was grand fun. As the Chair of the Code of Conduct Committee, I had several things that I had to deal with, and learned several really useful things. I also ended up saying "giant inflatable penis" more times than any person should have to. But that's not what I want to talk about.
The Consuite at Minicon is comprised of some interconnected rooms. This year, they took all the beds out, and the rooms had either comfy furniture to sit in, or tables with food and drink. I'm using consuite a little loosely, since I'm including the bar area. The Dead Dog Party was held, as is traditional, in the consuite. Somewhere fairly early in the evening, Ann talked to me about a problem with Ken Konkol. Ken's been known to be a problem for, oh, forty years, in a variety of ways. His most recent exploit was being arrested for refusing to vacate an hotel room in Florida. That was last November. This is not a man who has learned better. According to Ann, who had spoken to another long-time Mnstfer, Ken had showed up assuming that he would be allowed to stay in this other person's house. This other person has had a bad experience with Ken overstaying his welcome, and refused. On Sunday, once again, Ken insisted that of course he was going to stay at this friend's house, since he had no place to go. Ann offered to explain to Ken in no uncertain terms that this was not going to happen, since the other person felt like he was not getting through. Ann did so, at which point Ken asked to stay in the consuite.
Now, staying overnight in the consuite is a thing which happens from time to time. It is the prerogative of the hosts, the people running the consuite and bar, and it is assumed that they will use good judgment, which they always do. The people running consuite and bar often end up sleeping in those rooms, as well, since their job is never-ending, and it's useful to have as short a commute as possible. Ann told Ken no, and in no uncertain terms. She had concerns about the fact that there was evidently a charge against him for trashing an hotel room, possibly related to his arrest, and generally didn't feel that his lack of planning constituted a reasonable emergency on the part of the con.
I wanted to talk to Ken up front, make him say what his plans for vacating were, and make him stick to them. I thought that a proactive approach was more likely to circumvent his extremely probable tactic of just hanging around until they closed the suite, probably around four or five in the morning, and then pleading that he couldn't go because he had no place to go and no way to get there. A plea that looks especially good because he's using a walker these days and really does look frail. I thought to do this under the guise of being helpful. "Do you need help calling a cab?" sort of deal. I was assured that Joel had it all under control, and decided that I could just stand down. A while later, I noticed that Ken was no longer in evidence, assumed that it had all blown over, and stopped worrying.
Around three in the morning, my sweetie Ctein and I ended up in one of the smaller rooms with a couch, talking, like we do. As these things will, late at night, we ended up having a two hour, wide ranging, very private conversation. There was no one in the room, the crowd was quite thin, we weren't using space other people needed. When someone wandered in to use the rest room or see if someone they wanted to talk to was there, we suspended the really personal stuff. In case you haven't done the convention thing, this is actually a pretty normal interaction. People are always wandering off to slightly secluded spots to talk, neck, or what have you. Somewhere around five in the morning, Joel informed us that he was going to bed and they were closing up the rooms. Ctein and I left, feeling a bit smug about having closed down the convention.
Monday was the traditional "fish fest", a sushi lunch at Sakura, followed by the less venerated but still very traditional ice cream trip to Pump House Creamery. I had much good sushi, a beer, and was feeling utterly charitable with the entire world. And then I got a call. From Ann. She said that Ken Konkol had decided to hide in the closet of the room where Ctein and I were talking so as to avoid getting thrown out. For the entire time we had been talking, sometimes about quite personal information, he was in the closet. When he was found, he had made a little nest of pillows and blankets and was reading. Joel had thought to look in the closet because he hadn't seen Ken leave, and figured he must be there somewhere. I told Ann I had to hang up, I felt sick to my stomach. I did not, in fact, throw up, but I was hugely, massively upset. Trying to remember what we had talked about, what other people we had discussed in frank fashion, what confidences had been violated. I was toweringly angry.
When we got to the ice cream place, I pulled Ctein aside, and told him. He went through roughly the same reactions. It felt incredibly violating. It's not a physical violation, but it is still a huge invasion of one's personal space. And it may be a minor thing, but it also destroyed that slightly smug sense of accomplishment about having closed down the con. After a very brief discussion, we went and told _everybody_. Loudly. And everyone had the same sorts of reactions we did. They were appalled and horrified, and sympathetic. It was so very nice to have all my friends be so very much on my side. It felt validating and helped keep me from spinning out of control. Ctein reports the same thing.
That night was the Desiccated Dodo Party at Scott's. This is also a Minicon tradition. I walked in the door, and there was Ken. I took a deep breath and decided that I did not wish to make a scene. While it felt awful to be in the same room with him, I didn't want to export the damage to my friends. I quick texted Ctein to warn him, and then proceeded to ignore Ken. I socialized cheerfully with my friends and told anyone who hadn't heard yet about what had happened the previous night. Everyone was appalled and sympathetic. I got into a couple of games of Zar, and had a quite good time, although I did cuss in front of the teenager. Which he thought was funny, and his mother didn't seem to be too upset with. Something about Zar makes me say terrible things. In between the first and the second game, Cally said that she overheard Ken say that he was disappointed that he hadn't gotten to play a game with several people yet, and my name was on the list. I was...gobsmacked, I guess. It sounds bad, but you should know that I have never, not once in all my life, shared a game with Ken. The expectation that he could game with me? I am flabbergasted. What is it about abusers that makes them want to continue to contact their victims, get closer to them? What is it?
Zar over, I was in the kitchen. Laura, Dean, DDB, Ctein, Doug, Scott, and probably other people were there. I don't really remember. Ken came to the kitchen door, and I lost my temper. I don't think he was speaking to me, but I said, "Go away and never speak to me again." He _advanced_. He walked towards me. He said that he was just here to thank our gracious hostess, and pointed to Laura. Someone replied that Laura was not, in fact the hostess. I told him go get out of my face. He asked me why. I yelled that I didn't need to explain, he needed to leave me the fuck alone. He insisted that I did need to explain. And he kept on _advancing_. By this time, I have completely lost my shit. I'm screaming at the top of my lungs, and I'm pretty sure that the majority of the words were fuck, and the rest involved telling him to go away. Eventually, he was made to leave. I really don't remember that part too well. I did see Ctein visibly restrain himself, and I'm grateful. Actually breaking Ken's fingers, or whatever else seemed appropriate, would have been difficult to explain to the police. Ann Totusek stood in the doorway to prevent him from coming in. I burst into tears and cried on Dean's shoulder. It was the closest one, I think.
Because the context was well known, everyone was instantly on my side. There was no recrimination at all, only sympathy. Everyone understood why I had lost it, and was completely sympathetic. It helps, of course, that pretty much no one likes Ken. But I think a much more important piece of it was that the abuse of the previous night was known and understood, and so my behavior had context.
There followed a discussion in which I, hilariously, provided technical advice about how to make Ken go away. It was decided that asking the host of the party to remove Ken was the correct procedure to follow. This is in exact compliance with our current anti-harassment policy. Scott, as host, asked for time to consult with Irene, his wife and co-host. That took very little time, but I don't think Irene knew the context and absolutely she needed to be consulted. Also in accordance with our policy, the hosts asked a Board member, in this case Ann, to actually do the evicting. Which she did. And for which I was so very grateful. There was some talk about further bans of various natures, a one year ban from Minicon, maybe a longer one. Ctein brought up the issue that in smaller venues, such as Fallcon, he would not be comfortable with Ken there and there would be a good chance of unpleasant drama if they had to interact. I pointed out that Mnstf meetings are pretty damn small, as well. I pointed out that all of this is stuff that has to be handled at the Board level, that we didn't have a quorum of Board members, and even if we did, I wasn't really ready to deal with all this shit, even as a complainant. As the victim, I cannot actually vote on the outcome, but I can advocate for myself when the time comes. But the time was not now, and what with Ken living out of town, there wasn't any reason to do anything before the next scheduled Board meeting.
Tuesday, I got a call from Ann. Evidently, Ken reached out to Ann and wanted to make things right. He's going to see a counselor through the VA and she was talking about wanting to provide the counselor with properly anonymized information so that he can discuss it with Ken, and I lost my temper. Because really, Ken is not my problem and what I really want is for him to die in a fire, right now. It's been less than 24 hours. And I am frothingly angry, still damaged, and trying to involve me in his rehabilitation is just not on. I have no charitable feelings towards him, and should not be asked to. Ann also said something about wanting to be sure that Mnstf wasn't perceived as an organization that just casually bans people who one of the Board members do not like, and I agree that we don't want to do that, but I cannot cannot cannot talk about this right now. And I am still upset that she tried to do so. I know that she had good intentions. But framing Ken's rehab as a good thing for me makes no sense at all. It does absolutely nothing for me. And right now, if Ken wants to apologize to me, I am not having any, will not listen, and if he calls me I will scream at him until he hangs up the phone. Not having any. Which is, you understand, why I don't get to vote on the issue of what Mnstf should do to Ken. Because genuinely not judicial, here.
The Consuite at Minicon is comprised of some interconnected rooms. This year, they took all the beds out, and the rooms had either comfy furniture to sit in, or tables with food and drink. I'm using consuite a little loosely, since I'm including the bar area. The Dead Dog Party was held, as is traditional, in the consuite. Somewhere fairly early in the evening, Ann talked to me about a problem with Ken Konkol. Ken's been known to be a problem for, oh, forty years, in a variety of ways. His most recent exploit was being arrested for refusing to vacate an hotel room in Florida. That was last November. This is not a man who has learned better. According to Ann, who had spoken to another long-time Mnstfer, Ken had showed up assuming that he would be allowed to stay in this other person's house. This other person has had a bad experience with Ken overstaying his welcome, and refused. On Sunday, once again, Ken insisted that of course he was going to stay at this friend's house, since he had no place to go. Ann offered to explain to Ken in no uncertain terms that this was not going to happen, since the other person felt like he was not getting through. Ann did so, at which point Ken asked to stay in the consuite.
Now, staying overnight in the consuite is a thing which happens from time to time. It is the prerogative of the hosts, the people running the consuite and bar, and it is assumed that they will use good judgment, which they always do. The people running consuite and bar often end up sleeping in those rooms, as well, since their job is never-ending, and it's useful to have as short a commute as possible. Ann told Ken no, and in no uncertain terms. She had concerns about the fact that there was evidently a charge against him for trashing an hotel room, possibly related to his arrest, and generally didn't feel that his lack of planning constituted a reasonable emergency on the part of the con.
I wanted to talk to Ken up front, make him say what his plans for vacating were, and make him stick to them. I thought that a proactive approach was more likely to circumvent his extremely probable tactic of just hanging around until they closed the suite, probably around four or five in the morning, and then pleading that he couldn't go because he had no place to go and no way to get there. A plea that looks especially good because he's using a walker these days and really does look frail. I thought to do this under the guise of being helpful. "Do you need help calling a cab?" sort of deal. I was assured that Joel had it all under control, and decided that I could just stand down. A while later, I noticed that Ken was no longer in evidence, assumed that it had all blown over, and stopped worrying.
Around three in the morning, my sweetie Ctein and I ended up in one of the smaller rooms with a couch, talking, like we do. As these things will, late at night, we ended up having a two hour, wide ranging, very private conversation. There was no one in the room, the crowd was quite thin, we weren't using space other people needed. When someone wandered in to use the rest room or see if someone they wanted to talk to was there, we suspended the really personal stuff. In case you haven't done the convention thing, this is actually a pretty normal interaction. People are always wandering off to slightly secluded spots to talk, neck, or what have you. Somewhere around five in the morning, Joel informed us that he was going to bed and they were closing up the rooms. Ctein and I left, feeling a bit smug about having closed down the convention.
Monday was the traditional "fish fest", a sushi lunch at Sakura, followed by the less venerated but still very traditional ice cream trip to Pump House Creamery. I had much good sushi, a beer, and was feeling utterly charitable with the entire world. And then I got a call. From Ann. She said that Ken Konkol had decided to hide in the closet of the room where Ctein and I were talking so as to avoid getting thrown out. For the entire time we had been talking, sometimes about quite personal information, he was in the closet. When he was found, he had made a little nest of pillows and blankets and was reading. Joel had thought to look in the closet because he hadn't seen Ken leave, and figured he must be there somewhere. I told Ann I had to hang up, I felt sick to my stomach. I did not, in fact, throw up, but I was hugely, massively upset. Trying to remember what we had talked about, what other people we had discussed in frank fashion, what confidences had been violated. I was toweringly angry.
When we got to the ice cream place, I pulled Ctein aside, and told him. He went through roughly the same reactions. It felt incredibly violating. It's not a physical violation, but it is still a huge invasion of one's personal space. And it may be a minor thing, but it also destroyed that slightly smug sense of accomplishment about having closed down the con. After a very brief discussion, we went and told _everybody_. Loudly. And everyone had the same sorts of reactions we did. They were appalled and horrified, and sympathetic. It was so very nice to have all my friends be so very much on my side. It felt validating and helped keep me from spinning out of control. Ctein reports the same thing.
That night was the Desiccated Dodo Party at Scott's. This is also a Minicon tradition. I walked in the door, and there was Ken. I took a deep breath and decided that I did not wish to make a scene. While it felt awful to be in the same room with him, I didn't want to export the damage to my friends. I quick texted Ctein to warn him, and then proceeded to ignore Ken. I socialized cheerfully with my friends and told anyone who hadn't heard yet about what had happened the previous night. Everyone was appalled and sympathetic. I got into a couple of games of Zar, and had a quite good time, although I did cuss in front of the teenager. Which he thought was funny, and his mother didn't seem to be too upset with. Something about Zar makes me say terrible things. In between the first and the second game, Cally said that she overheard Ken say that he was disappointed that he hadn't gotten to play a game with several people yet, and my name was on the list. I was...gobsmacked, I guess. It sounds bad, but you should know that I have never, not once in all my life, shared a game with Ken. The expectation that he could game with me? I am flabbergasted. What is it about abusers that makes them want to continue to contact their victims, get closer to them? What is it?
Zar over, I was in the kitchen. Laura, Dean, DDB, Ctein, Doug, Scott, and probably other people were there. I don't really remember. Ken came to the kitchen door, and I lost my temper. I don't think he was speaking to me, but I said, "Go away and never speak to me again." He _advanced_. He walked towards me. He said that he was just here to thank our gracious hostess, and pointed to Laura. Someone replied that Laura was not, in fact the hostess. I told him go get out of my face. He asked me why. I yelled that I didn't need to explain, he needed to leave me the fuck alone. He insisted that I did need to explain. And he kept on _advancing_. By this time, I have completely lost my shit. I'm screaming at the top of my lungs, and I'm pretty sure that the majority of the words were fuck, and the rest involved telling him to go away. Eventually, he was made to leave. I really don't remember that part too well. I did see Ctein visibly restrain himself, and I'm grateful. Actually breaking Ken's fingers, or whatever else seemed appropriate, would have been difficult to explain to the police. Ann Totusek stood in the doorway to prevent him from coming in. I burst into tears and cried on Dean's shoulder. It was the closest one, I think.
Because the context was well known, everyone was instantly on my side. There was no recrimination at all, only sympathy. Everyone understood why I had lost it, and was completely sympathetic. It helps, of course, that pretty much no one likes Ken. But I think a much more important piece of it was that the abuse of the previous night was known and understood, and so my behavior had context.
There followed a discussion in which I, hilariously, provided technical advice about how to make Ken go away. It was decided that asking the host of the party to remove Ken was the correct procedure to follow. This is in exact compliance with our current anti-harassment policy. Scott, as host, asked for time to consult with Irene, his wife and co-host. That took very little time, but I don't think Irene knew the context and absolutely she needed to be consulted. Also in accordance with our policy, the hosts asked a Board member, in this case Ann, to actually do the evicting. Which she did. And for which I was so very grateful. There was some talk about further bans of various natures, a one year ban from Minicon, maybe a longer one. Ctein brought up the issue that in smaller venues, such as Fallcon, he would not be comfortable with Ken there and there would be a good chance of unpleasant drama if they had to interact. I pointed out that Mnstf meetings are pretty damn small, as well. I pointed out that all of this is stuff that has to be handled at the Board level, that we didn't have a quorum of Board members, and even if we did, I wasn't really ready to deal with all this shit, even as a complainant. As the victim, I cannot actually vote on the outcome, but I can advocate for myself when the time comes. But the time was not now, and what with Ken living out of town, there wasn't any reason to do anything before the next scheduled Board meeting.
Tuesday, I got a call from Ann. Evidently, Ken reached out to Ann and wanted to make things right. He's going to see a counselor through the VA and she was talking about wanting to provide the counselor with properly anonymized information so that he can discuss it with Ken, and I lost my temper. Because really, Ken is not my problem and what I really want is for him to die in a fire, right now. It's been less than 24 hours. And I am frothingly angry, still damaged, and trying to involve me in his rehabilitation is just not on. I have no charitable feelings towards him, and should not be asked to. Ann also said something about wanting to be sure that Mnstf wasn't perceived as an organization that just casually bans people who one of the Board members do not like, and I agree that we don't want to do that, but I cannot cannot cannot talk about this right now. And I am still upset that she tried to do so. I know that she had good intentions. But framing Ken's rehab as a good thing for me makes no sense at all. It does absolutely nothing for me. And right now, if Ken wants to apologize to me, I am not having any, will not listen, and if he calls me I will scream at him until he hangs up the phone. Not having any. Which is, you understand, why I don't get to vote on the issue of what Mnstf should do to Ken. Because genuinely not judicial, here.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 12:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 01:02 pm (UTC)I said that Ken MIGHT be seeing a counselor through the VA. I know he is a vet and has access to the VA, but I am not sure to what extent he utilizes it. You are absolutely correct that any behavioral remediation that he might undertake is in no way your responsibility, but I wanted to ascertain whether or not you would object to properly anonymized documentation being given to any counselor he might choose to see in order to help him identify his problem behaviors.
The context in which Ken's rehab is a good thing for you is in that if he manages to learn from this experiences (dubious, but willing to see), in theory, chances of him bothering you or anyone else again are reduced, but not negated. This is good for both you and MnStf, but the primary reason I asked you about it was because both the Board and Code of Conduct Committee have made clear that reports don't have to be made public, and that we should ask the victims how they want them handled. So I was asking. Please remember that I'm responding to this both as a friend and as a Board member. I want you taken care of and made to feel safe, and I also care about MnStf's reputation. I agree that given the totality of the situation here, that it's unlikely for the situation to be seen as "casual" banning, but I am also not sure what the Board is likely to do or to make public, seeing as I've only been on it for about 2 weeks.
I told you on the phone yesterday that I completely support you asking for whatever consequences that you feel you need to feel safe. I can't guarantee that the Board will give you everything you ask for, though having been involved in the situation from the beginning, I certainly know what my inclinations are. My position would be is that if the Board is hesitant to consider a permanent ban, that it be a conditional ban to be lifted only when a therapist says that he has made significant progress in understanding how other people's boundaries work, and how to respond to them. As
I think you are right- someone finally took a hammer and nail to the broken step, and the step is surprised, especially since he thought the one wielding the hammer was a friend, and would never do such a thing. Also interesting to note, the fact that he told Cally that he wanted to play a game with you. This indicates to me that he was lying to me (color me unsurprised) in that in the text conversation I had with him, he denied knowing who you were when you were yelling at him in the kitchen.. This is additional support for finding what he says not credible- he was twisting what he said to make things look more favorable for him. I will be providing the Board a copy of that conversation, along with whatever information I can find about his arrest record and any follow up court information from Florida as supporting documentation. Do you have contact information for Cally so that she could email the Board a statement to the Board about what he said to her? Evidence of lying is certainly relevant in terms of showing a pervasive pattern of behavior here.
no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 01:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 02:26 pm (UTC)If he was unwilling to sign a Release of Information, that alone would be pretty instructive. Also, if he were not under care, it would be good to know. I gave my sons therapist a brief description of the situation, and her summation was that essentially a therapist would be (quite reasonably) unwilling to guarantee good behavior, but if the situation were made clear to them and he signed a Release of Information, might be willing to indicate non-specifically whether or not the person was participating in treatment and making progress or gaining any insight.
As part of his chosen community, it's possible that we can be considered people involved in his "care," and that the removal of access to his community of choice would be detrimental to his progress, since it would be the removal of what he likely considers his support system. Not our problem, really, but it's something that might help us get information in an ethical and legal way.
no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 01:35 am (UTC)I hope this is the last long post I need to write, 'cause, like "migawd, will he EVER shut up? longissimus, non legi"
(and, oh irony, LJ just told me my comment is too long to post, so splitting it in two...)
And, vis Warm and Fuzzy post? Doubling down on you.
OK, I really appreciate your clarification, because I was kind of spinning out around what Lydy had thought you'd been suggesting. (Well, successfully suppressing spinning out, but I had to be working at it.)
Now, I'm going to describe a series of pitfalls I think y'all (individually or collectively) may be flirting with. Please don't take it wrong. I am not saying you are fucking up, olnly that these are areas where you could fuck up if you're not alert. It's a very sucky vortex and here there be dragons.
I've had to address too many abuse/harassment situations in my life, and I am alert to a number of known fails. These are simply ways it goes off the rails, even when everyone's intentions are good. One has to stay alert for them. Not in any particular order:
1) A classic fail when dealing with harassers is to cut them slack because "they're trying hard to be better" or "they promised they'd never do it again." This is what let Frenkel thrive for over a decade of misbehavior. And that's with people who are, in theory, capable of doing it differently. I truly believe Ken is not, there's too much sociopathy involved (and I mean that clinically, not morally. Remember-- harmful, not evil). He could say it with utter sincerity but it's just not within his skill set.
2) Don't dangle before him the prospect of a return in exchange for therapeutic improvement. It's actually *bad* for him, not just us. It will get in the way of him making progress. Fixing your life cannot be about getting the approval of others.
Anyway, a note from his therapist isn't worth much. Ken's starting at 1 on the socioempathy scale. He could make massive improvements and get all the way up to 2; that doesn’t mean we'd want him back in our community, given his track record.
That said, remember what Rachel said-- you're not a legal body, don't act like one. You can decide to ban Ken for life, but it's never a life sentence without possibility of parole, because you're free to change the rules. If a miracle happens and 10 years from now Ken has become an exemplary human being and done so many good works in and out of the SF community that he practically qualifies for sainthood, the Board can totally decide that in light of his amazing redemption they are taking the extraordinary step of rescinding the life ban.
But that's not an option you contemplate nor hold out to him, even as a remote possibility. It's bad for him, distracting for you.
(continued on next rock)
no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 02:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 02:08 am (UTC)Thank you very much, and I am very sorry to hear that my advice would have any play in your life.
pax / Ctein
no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 01:35 am (UTC)3) Similarly, you don't give any kind of rewards or promises for baby steps, when the central problem hasn't yet been fixed. That's just enabling.
4) Caring about what other people might think of your (the Board's) reputation is a major fail. I can't explain why, because I'm not sure why it works out that way. But it always does, every single time. If you're concerned about your reputation or what others make of your decision or whether they will judge your actions well, you will screw up. It just happens. Run away, run away.
5) related: The abuser's problems are not your problem. The abuser is your problem.
6) Forgiveness is not obligatory nor early (relates to (1)). I can explain this best with analogy. Suppose Ken were an alcoholic who is finally bottoming out and realizing that his life, as he is living it, is an impossible wreck (which Ken may well be doing). They find a way to sober up (clinic, cold turkey, AA, whatever). Then they start to rebuild their life without the thing that destroyed it. That often includes making amends to those they've damaged, sometimes social amends, something material ones. It often includes apologizing to those they remember they've wronged.
It does not include asking for forgiveness, nor can the amends/apologies be offered with any expectation of that. Once the message has been received, the wronged party can decide, at their leisure and if they even choose to consider it, whether to accept it and whether they wish to forgive. They are under no obligation to do so, or even contemplate the possibility. It is entirely up to them, beyond the recoverer's control or wishes. Because, see point (2), their recovery won't work if it's about others' approval and also because they don't deserve it.
They can't earn it. It's not a reward, it's a gift offered if one feels inclined to offer it. And it is never, ever offered before the work is done. That's back to enabling.
pax / Ctein
==========================================
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com
==========================================
no subject
Date: 2015-04-11 07:34 pm (UTC)I would also suggest that attending a specific con is not a civil right, but a privilege based on one's ability to, say, not do wildly inappropriate things like hide in the con suite closet. Also, that a con is not part of a mental treatment team.
no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 07:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-08 11:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 02:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-04-09 03:48 pm (UTC)