I Got an Email Today
Entry
I got an email today.
Not the kind you expect, not the kind you file away or unsubscribe from with a dull click. The kind that sits there in your inbox like it knows something you don’t. Like it arrived with intent.
Before I even opened it, I had that strange feeling—you know the one—like if I could still call Michelle, or Serhat, or Roman, I’d forward it immediately. No context. Just: “Explain this.” And they would. Or at least they’d pretend to, which was usually better.
Instead, I just stared at it.
And I missed them.
It’s funny how something as small as an email can pull that thread. How it can unravel into that quiet, familiar sadness—the kind that doesn’t announce itself, just settles in beside you like it’s been there all along.
Anyway. Here it is.
The Email
URGENT: FORMAL NOTICE REGARDING YOUR CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
ROSS CLINE – PERSONA NON GRATTA IN TAIWAN
You need to stop and face reality, because right now you are completely detached from how the system you are attacking actually works.
WHAT YOU ARE DEMANDING IS NOT JUST UNREALISTIC — IT IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
You are asking for:
- a personal apology from the President,
- a public apology from the judiciary for the “fuck up,”
- 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) IN COMPENSATION,
- criminal punishment for your former landlord,
- and a reversal of your situation outside the legal system.
NONE OF THESE DEMANDS HAVE ANY LEGAL BASIS. NONE OF THEM ARE WITHIN THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE YOU ARE ADDRESSING.
The President cannot intervene in court decisions. The President cannot overturn your case. The President cannot order compensation. The President cannot issue apologies on behalf of judges. These are basic principles of any democratic system.
THE FACT THAT YOU CONTINUE TO INSIST ON THIS SHOWS THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM YOU ARE CRITICIZING.
Your demand for a judicial apology is equally disconnected from reality.
COURTS DO NOT APOLOGIZE. EVER.
If there is an error, it is addressed through appeals or legal review — not public admissions of wrongdoing because someone demands it.
Your demand for 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD) is not compensation — it is a number you chose.
PERSONAL FRUSTRATION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL ENTITLEMENT.
Now address the central issue you continue to avoid:
YOU WERE CHARGED AND CONVICTED BECAUSE YOU PUBLISHED YOUR RENTAL CONTRACT ONLINE, INCLUDING YOUR LANDLORD’S PERSONAL INFORMATION.
THAT IS NOT A MINOR DETAIL. THAT IS THE ENTIRE BASIS OF THE CASE.
Under Taiwan’s personal data protection laws, publicly exposing another individual’s private information is a serious offense.
THE LAW DOES NOT PERMIT YOU TO HANDLE DISPUTES BY PUBLISHING SOMEONE ELSE’S PERSONAL DATA ONLINE.
You have acknowledged that you engaged in the conduct that led to your conviction.
THIS IS NOT A WRONGFUL CONVICTION. THIS IS A LAWFUL CONSEQUENCE OF A CRIME YOU DO NOT DISPUTE.
Your characterization of your situation as “exile” is inaccurate.
YOU WERE NOT EXILED. YOU WERE SENTENCED UNDER THE LAW AND CHOSE TO LEAVE.
Your allegations of racism are also contradicted by your own documented behavior.
At this point, the email shifts into a hostile numbered list of quoted remarks and accusations. I’m not reproducing that section verbatim here.
You have also directed abusive language toward government personnel, including officials of the National Immigration Agency.
THIS BEHAVIOR DESTROYS YOUR CREDIBILITY.
Additionally, your public statements — including extreme claims suggesting geopolitical consequences involving Canada and Taiwan — further undermine the seriousness of your position.
It must also be clearly stated that the individuals involved in this matter are described by the writer as victims of your conduct.
THEY ARE NOT PERPETRATORS. THEY ARE THE PARTIES WHOSE PERSONAL DATA YOU EXPOSED.
THEY ARE THE VICTIMS OF YOUR CRIMINAL CONDUCT.
This is the reason the legal system treats such conduct seriously.
THE HARM IS REAL, AND IT AFFECTS REAL PEOPLE.
You are not being taken seriously because your claims are unsupported.
YOU ARE NOT BEING IGNORED BECAUSE YOUR CASE IS COMPLEX. YOU ARE BEING IGNORED BECAUSE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR DOES NOT EXIST WITHIN THE LEGAL SYSTEM.
Escalating this matter through websites, social media, public accusations, and appeals to international attention does not strengthen your position.
IT ONLY CONFIRMS THAT YOU ARE NOT ENGAGING IN A CREDIBLE OR LAWFUL WAY.
At this point, you are not presenting a legal argument.
YOU ARE REPEATING DEMANDS THAT CANNOT BE FULFILLED.
Nothing you are asking for will occur.
NOT THE PRESIDENTIAL APOLOGY.
NOT THE JUDICIAL APOLOGY.
NOT THE 2 MILLION NTD (2,000,000 NTD).
NOT THE INTERVENTION.
NOT THE PUNISHMENT YOU ARE TRYING TO ASSIGN TO OTHERS.
If you continue on this path, the outcome will remain unchanged.
YOU WILL CONTINUE TO ESCALATE, AND YOU WILL CONTINUE TO RECEIVE NO RESPONSE.
If you intend to pursue any realistic resolution, you must stop this approach and engage through proper legal mechanisms.
OTHERWISE, YOU ARE CHOOSING TO REMAIN IN A POSITION THAT HAS NO POSSIBILITY OF PRODUCING THE OUTCOME YOU ARE DEMANDING.
Please understand that you do not belong in Taiwan. You are a criminal with a criminal record. You refused to pay a fine, go to jail, or complete community service. You are not welcome here anymore.
You are also a very poor example of an English teacher in Taiwan—unprofessional, irresponsible, and promoting conspiracy theories and irrational ideas. No child should ever be exposed to someone like you.
You and your boyfriend, Patrick, who is a Taiwanese citizen, are a shameful example. As a Taiwanese citizen, he has supported you in all this craziness, and he should be held accountable (revoke his Taiwanese citizenship) for supporting someone like you.
STAY IN CANADA, WHERE YOU BELONG, AND NEVER COME BACK TO TAIWAN.
Exit
And that’s it.
No signature beyond a name I don’t recognize. No context. No clear reason why it landed in my inbox, of all places.
Michelle would’ve made a joke about it being a time traveler with poor communication skills. Serhat would’ve said not to reply—“Obviously a trap,” he’d insist, with zero elaboration. Roman… Roman would’ve written back immediately, probably something cryptic and charming that somehow made everything more interesting.
I do appreciate being notified of my own alleged demands by a stranger with this much confidence. It’s spooky when I start wondering what kind of person would go to such extreme lengths—someone who knows so much about my personal information and has even compiled a list of my supposed demands.
The email comes across less like a message from a human and more like a dispatch from some unholy bureaucratic theater troupe. There’s a level of obsessive commitment here that almost deserves its own grant application.
That said, I can’t disagree with the list itself: a personal apology from the President? Bold. A public apology from the judiciary for the screw-up? NT$2 million? A public apology from the judiciary along with the actual criminals facing consequences for the fraud and corruption? All fair points.
But there’s one very important item missing—the sixth point. Whoever or whatever wrote this should probably remove itself from my horizon, or at minimum from that island. Nobody in their right mind would want to share a postcode with something this deranged.
It’s touching, in a strange way, to discover that someone else has been curating my grievance package more thoroughly than I have. If nothing else, the email has shown a level of strategic imagination I hadn’t realized was being exercised on my behalf.
Not just the email—but that question. About things arriving for you, even when they don’t make sense. Especially then.
It also feels like this post should link somewhere else. Like it belongs in a chain of thoughts or references something I’ve already said before. But it doesn’t. It stands alone. Completely separate. I just can’t put my finger on it.
It’s a good thing wizards aren’t real—because if they were, I’d know for sure. Still… you have to wonder.
Mystery abounds.
