[friends] how does one define these

You know, it's really rather interesting what came out of the comments section on the "hidden readers" post two days ago.

I went into that post believing that some readers who visit me "silently" may be miffed that I hadn't linked back to them. It was in no way an accusation - quite the opposite, as Ubermouth pointed out - I was concerned that I didn't know who was regularly visiting and I couldn't return the visit and she construed it correctly.

This was not explained well though in the post and it's not the first time that I've confused readers.

Into this came Welshcakes' aside that I've been known not to declare myself either and though that is not so in terms of intent, I began to see how this could have been viewed that way. I remember saying to Liz Hinds once [or maybe even twice] that she visits but her avatar doesn't show up. Tom Paine is another.

Now, in Tom's case, it is because he uses his Reader and now that mine is set up properly, I can see that that is a good way to do it. In Liz's case, I see that it was not her doing at all. There is something in the conjunction of personal computer idiosyncrasies and configurations, some which might have been put in place, many where someone simply answered "yes" on a dialogue box and many where the way the computer was set up had caused it.

When I was staying at Welshcakes' in Sicily, her computer did some very strange things and Mybloglog just would not configure itself properly. She went in then and it worked after that but I don't think she actually knew what had changed it. I'm sure Mybloglog know.

Perhaps they don't though and that brings home an important truism - that we are going to have to be damned careful with our accusations, beginning with me. It might well look like someone is doing something but it might, in fact, be a technical idiosyncrasy - enough of them occur on my computer, mainly due to my dabbling and imagining that I know what I'm doing. I'm currently learning PHP, by the way.

This then brings in the question of bona fides. Assuming the good intentions of all the people above, then is there any mischief going on in the sphere?

There sure is. I am fairly certain my emails, if not my computer itself is hacked and my evidence is an email I discovered two days ago, supposedly written by me and supposedly distributed between certain bloggers.

Blogpowerers will recall my opinion on doing that sort of thing - publishing [or distributing] private emails of others and it is one of the main reasons I'm not now there but until yesterday I was cynical about whether someone could actually intercept, hack and alter someone's emails. According to a computer whiz I met, it was easy to do and he proceeded to show me diagrams of how it was done.

The face paled.

Living in Russia, as I did, I'd always assumed I was being monitored and that's why there was never anything left on any computer which could be misconstrued or used - in fact the opposite. I told my friend over there that I welcomed such intrusion - better the knowledge than the suspicion and innuendo.

He mentioned that clearing history does not clear cache and I know that well but even so - that's not the end of the earth.

Finally we come down to bona fides and whether people who purport to be friends are really friends. It was in my Headmaster role years ago that my cynicism really took wing, as time and time again, smiling faces turned out to be treacherous ones. The best way to describe my attitude today is "circumspect". I wish I had a pound for the number of times people have emailed me that I shouldn't assume that such and such is my friend.

I'm puzzled by two things - why people would be two-faced in the first place and secondly, why people would want to combine against another person when their official position does not require it as part of the job specification. Hell, I have too much on the plate to worry the head about that sort of thing. On the other hand, it is true that, as BH honchos, we did email each other to discuss incoming members and I certainly put my point of view there. Still do.

I'd not like the blogosphere to become a hotbed of suspicion and innuendo, as it has so much to offer. I've seen first hand that there are wonderful bloggers who have become real friends and maybe that blinds me to their lesser sides but hell - who's perfect?

Lastly, as was continually being impressed upon me over these past few months - none of us are important enough for anyone to trouble themselves over us so paranoia over what someone is going to do is usually misplaced. The bureaucratic world and even the blogosphere are not necessarily evil - they're just indifferent.

UPDATE: Longrider has a great little piece about drive-by trolls which relates to this post here. Check his out if you haven't already done so.