1692: Witch.
2025: “She cited the Condominium Act.”
Same hysteria. Different century.
It began, as these things often do, with a woman speaking plainly in public.
In 1692, that got you accused of flying with the Devil.
In 2025, it gets you accused of “disrupting the community.”
Different century, same burn.
⚖️ My Crimes?
Let the record (and the flipchart) show:
- I read the reserve fund study aloud (gasp).
- I warned, with figures and footnotes, that fees would rise (they have).
- I asked to see the “noise complaint” before being subjected to a mystery “study.”
- I won – in front of a tribunal and then again in court.
- I expected directors to follow the law, not improvise it.
Apparently, all of this is witch behaviour in a condo corporation that prefers its women agreeable, uninformed, and mildly apologetic.
🔥 The Trial
Just like Salem, it started with a whisper – from Mildred, naturally.
“She’s a threat,” she breathed. “She questions things.”
Soon, the crowd was stirred.
A man leapt to my moral prosecution, accusing me of having something to hide – because I dared to say no to a secret proceeding based on unknown complaints and undisclosed studies.
His contribution to reasoned discourse?
“I don’t like her attitude.”
In Salem, that got you dunked in a river.
At Blenvale, it gets you voted out via proxy.
📜 The Evidence
In Salem, they had spectral evidence.
At the AGM, they had Mildred’s monologue and a lot of muttering about “tone.”
No minutes.
No specifics.
No case law.
Just righteous indignation, served lukewarm – like the tea.
Meanwhile, I stood beside my easel:
- Budget variances
- Legal invoices
- Judicial rulings
- Human Rights Code sections
A woman calmly presenting data while being accused of “causing division.”
We’ve seen this play before. Spoiler: it ends with apologies – but not before the burnings.
🔥 Salem vs. Blenvale
| 1692: Salem | 2025: Blenvale |
|---|---|
| “She turned my milk sour!” | “She’s dividing the community!” |
| Spectral evidence | Redacted invoices |
| No defence allowed | Microphones cut at AGMs |
| Public hanging | Public shaming via proxy vote |
| Magistrates with no training | Board with a legal retainer and no restraint |
| Pressing by stones | Pressing by lawyers and lien threats |
🧠 The Real Offence?
It wasn’t tone.
It wasn’t conflict.
It was that I refused to perform meekness for people who fear facts.
When you expose dysfunction, they won’t say “thank you.”
They’ll say “she’s difficult.”
And they’ll mean: she noticed.
💸 About Those Fees…
📈 I predicted a 15% fee increase.
They scoffed, clutched their pearls, and muttered, “Heresy!”
Now it’s 16% – but don’t worry, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.
Next year, I’ll try delivering budget forecasts via séance. Might be better received.
I pointed to page 16 of the reserve study.
I drew you a line graph.
I used words like “unsustainable.”
You called me “liar.”
Then came the $178,000 staircase bill, the 300,000 lawyer invoices, and the insurance circus.
But sure – let’s talk about my tone again.
🪦 Final Thought (Spoiler: I’m Still Here)
They tried to Salem me.
They tried to silence me with procedures and paper.
They tried to burn the heretic – metaphorically, of course (fire codes).
But here I am.
Still standing.
Still quoting statutes.
Still terrifying the board with my scandalous literacy and ability to file an application.
I’m not the witch.
I’m the one keeping receipts.
And this time, the village has Wi-Fi.
Disclaimer: This post is satire and opinion. Read full disclaimer.
