Person A, whom I met at NAB and enjoyed spending time with, tells a very ugly story about the actions of Person B, who I have not met. Having talked at length with Person A, I believed his story. Apple and several other people I trust also believed Person A’s story.

Based on others’ conclusions I made a quick decision to de-link Person B from the FXScript Reference site when I had brief internet access. At the time I wondered if that was the right thing to do, what the repercussions would be and whether or not that was even the right decision having only heard one side of the story. Shortly after I removed the link, Person B wrote me and asked what I’d been told then denied everything in advance.

This sucks.

I only know one person’s story and the other person’s denial of that story. And I want nothing to do with this.

The following four scenarios are all possible:

1. Person A is telling the truth, Person B is a liar.
2. Person A is a liar, Person B is telling the truth.
3. Person A and Person B are both lying.
4. Neither Person A or Person B are lying.

Conclusions 1 and 2 seem most plausible. Since it seems certain that something bad happened between Persons A and B, I decided the best immediate course was unfortunately to de-link everyone from the FXScript Reference, at least for now.

The question of what to do seems to come down to potentially rewarding someone who doesn’t deserve it. By only de-linking the two people involved, the person in the right is unduly tarred with their accuser. Linking everyone ignores what is obviously a bad situation and rewards whoever is guilty. De-linking everyone seems more fair than either of the two above options though drastic and personally disheartening. This negatively affects all the others who have nothing to do with this, but I just don’t see any other ethical resolution. I am open to suggestions.

Since our session, the remaining panelist was also contacted by Person B. My first impulse is to go completely transparent, post everything and absolve myself of any position. But the charges are very serious and there is an ongoing legal case, so it would be inappropriate for me to represent any information. Since I have already acted once, I will post my reply to person B in it’s entirety:

I am sorry about the de-linking. It was a rash decision made between sessions at NAB with 10 minutes of internet connection. Until I know the full story of this disagreement, I’m taking down all links to everyone but myself. I’m not happy about that, but it seems like the correct thing to do based on limited knowledge.

Since you seem fully aware of what you’re being accused of and who is involved, I would appreciate hearing your side of the story. I do not feel comfortable disclosing anything I was told. I’ve already mistakenly appeared to take sides and I do not want be involved with these accusations in any way.

I have spent a great deal of time trying to create a small community around FXScript and it greatly saddens me to see this happening.

I look forward to your reply,

Joe Maller

As stated in that reply, I have put a lot of energy into building a small community around FXScript. NAB’s third-party plugin session was my idea and something I worked towards for months and helped organize. Since I first published my notes about FXScript at least a half-dozen new products have been created using the language and countless others have added hacks and modifications to their FCP workflows. Many of those people have written to thank me for helping out. That means more to me than I can say and keeps me going in spite of stuff like this.