John Smith

I agree with these. I do think that any expansion, while warranted, might have risked the plot getting slow or dragging. The way they handed the character of Jing Tao was baffling. I was disappointed at his eleventh hour "redemption" attempt. I just never really felt it. The same with Wan Ting's mother.

This is pretty awkward for me because I was referring to the comment from HannahBanana.

Now that it has been over two weeks since this controversy and for all those holding the pitchforks attacking and all those wearing shields defending, nothing much has changed outside of him leaving the drama and staying out of the public eye as far as I see in the media. I am in the US and perhaps this is getting more traction in South Korea. I personally would be extremely disappointed if this was not resolved in a public way.

Thanks for taking the time to read my humble thoughts and respond. I appreciate it.

Thanks for the article, I appreciate it. I am a fan of surveys, charts, graphs, and information about some of the aspects of Asian dramas that make for heated discussions.

I think a happy ending is a constantly changing idea for each drama or movie that is less about joy and more about satisfaction.

I think the mismatch of evaluations could be because of many reasons. Questions could have been leading , misleading, or simply misunderstood. Maybe out of X amount of choices there was not an obvious choice for a particular responder. Maybe responders had an idea of what they thought, but did not realize how they felt might be different. I also think that it can be difficult to separate the drama from the viewer. Is a happy ending simply an ending that is happy, or is it an ending that makes the viewer happy?

I prefer textbook endings most of the time. Sometimes I wish there was not a complete ending because that would not leave room to continue the story. I prefer satisfaction over happiness. I also tend to avoid tragic or sad endings versus simply looking for happy ones.

Well stated. Also, thanks for being willing to share part of your story. I do not know what will happen but my guess is that at the end of it all, there will be a decision that no one might agree with, but everyone will have to accept. I think that people who choose to believe without facts or proof would be the type to remind you if they turned out to be right, but forget if it came time to apologize for being wrong.

I am not worried about you blowing on me. I am worried what facts and reason will do to your firm stand.
I still think that cancel culture is not the same as erasure , with neither applying in this situation. He was fired as a business decision after admitting wrongdoing. It was clear the public was against him remaining. He was not booted off for making a political statement, or for wearing a competitor's clothing brand and not the one he promotes. There is also no erasure. There are still thousands of articles and even more search returns for his name. You can still access his previous works, and still has social media. As far as learning from mistakes, he has admitted to very vague "misconduct", "wrongdoings", and a "dark past." Has he learned anything, or have we learned anything?
On a more opinionated note, two things I might like to address. If you are going to reference the H-person, you need to tread lightly, and be clear on what you want to say and how you want people to interpret it. Second, I think a bit of irony would be if victims and perpetrator have some sort of settlement agreement where victims retract legal claims and the perpetrator admits no specific guilt, basically erasing the incident and no one really being able to learn from it.

You can stand by it, but do not lean against that flimsy logic or you might fall over.

A world where there are no surprises sounds dull. Gossip has been around forever. I am pretty sure when three people gather, two will eventually talk about the other one. Rather than blame journalism or social media, I would say that a lot of people do not take advantage of the ability to be informed or at least remain neutral. Almost everyone (I would include myself in there) would choose to be entertained over being informed. I also know that there are times when I need to be informed. I am not sure about accusations allowing for no salvation but clearly media and people like drama not apologies. Drama will be page one in bold type, and apologies or corrections will be much later, and in much smaller type if possible.

Newsflash. He admitted misconduct, and feels guilty. No one here that I know of is currently sitting in a jury box being instructed on the presumption of innocence. The article(s) did not ask us for a legal brief stating our position, it just asked us what we thought. You should not be surprised that the amount of thought that goes into a particular comment may vary from person to person and from topic to topic.

I wonder if gender plays a role in situations like this. Both the gender of the person who is the subject of the controversy, and the gender of those who offer support or make negative comments.

To be fair, the last part of the article asked for our thoughts on the bullying controversies and he was just sharing his thoughts. Your callous, demeaning remarks only serve to reinforce the idea that bullying is often done in ways that even we ourselves may not be aware of. I may not agree with someone, but that should invite discussion, not attacking the person.
I find it understandable that people may want to support him. That is not a bad thing.

There are already so many posts that question this type of thinking. Seeking justice is not the same as seeking revenge. I suppose it is possible to seek both and find neither too. Punishment also does not mean destruction. I would hope a good judgement would be one where all involved would benefit, but without the facts that is hard to spell out. His reputation has taken a hit, but I suppose now we will get to see his character.
I am not sure what you mean by your end quote because it is often misused. What does it mean to you?

I suspect the victims felt that they were their own proof which is why they spoke out. Some commenters may have favored one side over the other, but most seemed to take a wait and see attitude. I do think when people are casually asked to pick a side, they tend to pick one. Giving a diplomatic answer is not always the first thing that comes to mind. Once he posted the letter admitting to misconduct, that is when it opened the floodgates of comments that were unfavorable to him.

There has been research that suggest the brain is not fully developed until the age of 25-30. Do you suggest we just give everyone a free pass until the age of 30 or 35 just to be safe? I am not sure you could say he got to the top, but should we add making it to the top or simply working hard to the qualifications for free passes? He got dropped from a drama. I am not sure what is this "all" that people keep talking about that he lost. He needs to accept judgment (at least from victims and authorities) and punishment (being a public figure allows for punishment by the public, plus whatever legal punishment), and hope for a chance at forgiveness and redemption. I wonder if he has his own PR and legal team.

I understand if you want to support him, but not at the expense of blaming the victims or making excuses for the perpetrator. When he posted that statement that admitted to misconduct and was confirmed by his agency, what did you think was going to happen?
I do not know anything about your own situation other than what you typed. It is still clear that you ran into some roadblocks, a bit of luck, and had some support along the way to dealing with your bullying issue. Not everyone has the luck or support to deal with the roadblocks let alone deal with the actual issue of bullying.
In response to your thoughts about "A", I think a better question would be why did the perpetrator wait 13 years and a day to bring up the issue?
Is your excuse for his behavior that he lived a life that we all live? You have issues, I have issues, we all have issues. You deal with yours, I deal with mine, and now he is having to deal with his.
In response to your thoughts about "B", sarcasm is not the right tone given the seriousness of what is going on. He did not admit to sexual assault (since 3/6/21) and his agency denied in what is translated as "sexual violence with coercion." I am inclined to wait for proof unless either side changes their story. I would like to mention that blaming possible victims because they were there is not cool. And I am saying that in a nice way. If someone were to get punched, would you blame the person getting punched for having their face in the way?
As far as it not being reported, we do not know for sure if it was or not. And what happened afterwards. Sometimes it requires a moment of bravery and coming across the right person at the right time. That does not always happen. Hindsight is always 20/20, and over time we get braver, stronger, and probably misremember some of what happened and a lot of how we felt.
I doubt it is the most important question but perhaps he was the easiest person to identify being somewhat famous. We do not have access to all the facts and I would imagine that if others are involved, then they will face some problems too. I just do not think it will make big news. Gossip is annoying but we all do it to some extent.
You sound like you want to support him which I do not have a problem with. The best support you can probably offer is to encourage him to be as honest as possible to the ones he owes it to. If he is as hardworking as you claim he is, then dealing with this and accepting judgement and punishment will offer the chance for forgiveness and redemption.

Whenever comments start with a statement and then follow it with the word "but", it almost immediately signals you are not genuine with the statement. Your statements start thoughtful and understanding, and then turn to a mess.
Retribution is not the same as consequences. Retribution makes it sound unjustified when he has not really faced any sort of justice yet. Most of the consequences he has faced so far are business related decisions by those who employ him. There are plenty of people in the world who have done wrong and still sustain themselves. He will have to adapt and overcome, and maybe down the line think about redemption. This is all just beginning for him.
Ratting out? That is a derogatory term. They are victims. You cannot question their decision and say you are not, and have it be true. We do not know what happened. Maybe they did and were rebuffed. Maybe they did and were unhappy with what was said. Victims do not have much choice about being victims, so why should they be on the perpetrator's or anyone else's schedule to deal with it.
He damaged his reputation with his character. There have been a few comments with just stating he deserved it, but most have been statements that people have put thought into. And for as much as people may say he deserves it now, what will happen if (hopefully when) facts start coming out. This is just starting, and he is going to have to deal with a lot.
It is not like telling an ex-convict that he would never be able to get a job because they "deserved it for their past actions." It is more like "you cannot be surprised if your past actions have consequences today." Again, the world is full of people who have done wrong and have been able to move on.

Is there another apology letter that he was shown to have drafted and written himself? I certainly did not see all of that in the one that was posted a few days ago. It read more as a "call the PR and legal team to draft a minimal statement that looks like it says a lot but really doesn't and make sure there are no specifics and if possible, mention the current drama and oh, make it look amateur but professional but still kind of amateur" statement.
Since this is less than a few days old, we have no idea of the scope of the situation. We are also not sure how long this has been going on. How do you know those who were hurt because of him had a fresh start? You claim his whole career has been ruined as if he was not entirely responsible. It is a 100% him thing. There might be forgiveness and redemption somewhere down the line.

They said he was a bully and he admitted to a somewhat generic term of misconduct, and this his agency narrowed it down a bit more, to school violence which still is a vague term. So there is no might, he was a bully. Another way to phrase your question might be why did he wait until he got famous to mention what had happened? This is a Kim Ji Soo problem, not a problem of the victims. Even insinuating that victims were waiting to get paid more is insulting to them and most of us in general.
I have noticed that quite a few people claim he is going to lose everything he worked for. If that is what judgement and punishment lead to, then that is what happens. There is also the possibilities of forgiveness and redemption. I think for those that want to support him, it is at the start of a long process, and the sooner he works towards judgment and accepts punishment, the sooner the chance of forgiveness and redemption.
It can be hard to find the root. The roots are usually hidden, and you never know where to look for them until growth appears. And sometimes there is a forest of growth when you are looking for a single root.

I did come across an article that supposedly has a member of the drama that alleges he was not nice. Now that the floodgates are open, I suspect there will be more stories, some positive, some not, some true, and some not.
I think that his time to start to reform can be now. It is hard for me to imagine that someone who has done something wrong can escaped unscathed. I think that one thing he has going for him is youth. Not because of what he did when he was a youth, but he is young enough to have the time to work on recovering and reforming.