Whose?

Matthew’s? Chuck’s?

After twenty-one “Matthew” posts and eight “Chuck” posts, I have received no communication from either of them.

Since my Open Letter to Matthew on November 16th, I have seen him twice: on December 5th and the 18th. Matthew refused to make any eye contact with me either time.

Since my Open Letter to Chuck on November 28th, I have also seen him twice: on those same two dates and in the same two places where I saw Matthew. Chuck, unlike his peer board member, seemed unable to avoid eye contact, staring directly at me, expressionless, which, to me, felt strangely aggressive despite his veneer of stony stoicism.

While I can see why the David Giannettas and Jason Sidmans of the world might not bother to read my observations/criticisms of the governance of Littleton, I find it impossible to believe that the Matthews and Chucks of Littleton are not reading. (I also can’t help but believe that the Garys, Karens, Marks, Ryans, Jims, Ericas, Maureens, et al. are also reading.)

I will say that I am saddened that a FB group, calling itself “Constructive Conversations for Littleton Women” banned me on November 18th. (After my 2nd daily post; today is day 39.) This side-lining/silencing means that women in Littleton who have shown an active interest in local issues and small-town politics (evidenced by their joining CCfLW) have had others (in this case CCfLW’s administrators) decide what their members (aka self-actualized women) get to see and which behaviors (thinking here of Matthew’s wife’s) will be tolerated with obvious bias.

The “Residents for a Better Littleton” FB group—originally formed when suspicions arose about members of the Select Board engaging in backroom deals regarding a casino coming to Littleton—has refused to share with its readers any of my posts about the cannabis industry in town despite my suggesting so—both by FB DM and by sending a post to RfaBL’s “tip” line email.

As for their reaction, where “they” refers to anyone mentioned thus far (in these posts published weekly from July 19-November 6, and now daily since November 16th), I’ve not been served with any lawsuits.

No allegations have been made claiming libel, invasion of privacy, false light, or defamation by anyone included in my observations over the last several weeks and months.

I’ve not been on the receiving end of any cease-and-desist letter.

I’ve not been enjoined from publishing my observations and critiques by any court of law.

On my end, I’m not seeing any reaction from “them.”

I can’t but help wonder, are you?

Jenna