Dear Tineoidea,

My conscience is clear there as I know for a fact that if anything, I’ve been way too soft with him.

I believe you, since from what you’ve described, he was piggybacking on you: you invited him to a project, and then he behaved irresponsibly and endangered the whole project, and with it, your livelihood too:

There was a project to which I invited him, that would then support my living. There he mostly alienated people with his reckless behavior and tried to defend himself when I told him to stop. He also kept making promises of helping me with this and that but never actually did anything I asked him of, even simple tasks, then complained about me “leaving him out of the decision making” when he himself barely engaged, had no idea about what was going on, encouraged me to drop the project and even went MIA for months.

I didn’t get the impression that you wanted him to help you with your “living situation” (which was the greatest cause of disagreement with your ex girlfriend), but rather, that it was him who depended on you, not vice versa.

One thing I noticed, specially now, after your latest reply to anita, is that you seem to be somewhat detached from your emotions. You weren’t the least upset with her interpretation of your problem, but you said:

That’s quite the twist but I can assure you it’s nothing like that.

All the theories are appreciated nevertheless.

Why would an alternative explanation, which has little or no truth in it, be equally appreciated as the truth? Why doesn’t it bother you more that someone claims something about you that isn’t true? I wonder if you had to suppress your anger and hurt, sometimes long ago, and that’s why you end up tolerating people like your “friend”, not saying anything for the sake of loyalty?

Just to add, I don’t think anita was wrong for suggesting this “alternative truth”. I am just pointing out that your reaction is surprisingly calm and agreeable, and perhaps it’s something worth exploring…