***************************************
Hi, Jeffster ~
I personally wouldn't frame this question in terms of responsibility, at all. Apparently you've heard, or read something, and it has caused you concern: and you chose to share it with your friends on the board, because you ARE concerned. That's all fair, and good.
I suppose I would frame the question more as one of practicality, and courtesy. Paul and Damien are both very popular and well-loved models on
Broke Straight Boys, so, it was a certainty that, when you mentioned this rumour, it was bound to cause further concern amongst their fans, and your friends, here.
Rumours are unpleasant, and unaccountable things, and are often grounded more in people's hopes, or fears, than they are in
fact. (This is why, in the eyes of substantial segments of the public, on any given Tuesday, Elvis Aaron Presley is thought to be alive and well and shopping at a Wal-Mart in East Memphis, Tennessee, while Justin Drew Bieber is thought to have died of a drug overdose months ago - and to be laid out on ice next to Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, in a matching sarcophagus in Red Square, in Moscow.)
Were I to post on Facebook, or Twitter, or some such place (for example) these four words: "Jeffster is gravely ill!" - no doubt either someone I know who frequents this page, or someone who
knows someone who frequents this page, would get this information back to this board within 48 hours. . . and you'd have a whole committee planning your obsequies. (I do hope your health is good, by the way - it's just an example!) But that's the way social media works, today.
While I do think it was kind of you to share your concern, which I know is legitimate (!!!) - I do agree with Stowe to the limited extent that ~ given the relative openness of these boards ~ it might have been a
courteous act to disclose: "I read the rumour of this impending departure in publication 'X'." Or, if it is a matter of having heard a rumour from someone who might be presumed to have "inside" knowledge of this matter, whose identity could not (in good conscience) be disclosed - it might be a
courteous thing to confess that your source was of this nature, and that you are not able to reveal the source of your apprehension.
At any rate, as Paul often has posted here, and Damien regularly and faithfully does - - - the one thing which strikes me as being
not quite courteous, is to speak about them as if they weren't here. It seems to me that the polite and honest thing to do would be simply to put the question to Damien, and raise the concern honestly and directly, with him. If he were honestly able to allay it, I am sure he would. And, if he were not - he might feel a need not to comment, but that would be his prerogative as a human being, and matters would take their natural course, in any event.
So, let's simply be honest, and ask Damien the question, and I am sure if he is able to answer, he will do so, honestly. If he isn't - and it would be far from the first time people have had to maintain confidentiality because they are seeking alternative employment (happens at my office every day): I suppose he won't.
My two discounted, Canadian, cents.
"A" XOXOXOXOXOXOXO
Hope it is not
