the-abyss-watcher

[the-abyss-watcher]

That moment when you have someone who is so peeved by you that they're willing to confront/harass you out of nowhere with random questions designed to get you in trouble but fail, before making fun of the exchange elsewhere to try to rally people against you only to fail at that.

[the-abyss-watcher]

I have to admit, it wasn't until you decided to expose Sempiternity for being a creep/stalker and advising everyone to block them that I learned that your two accounts (Loveless and TY L, the latter being the ones you took the screenshots from as seen by the bottom left) are alts.

Why didn't you or anyone tell me? I enjoy both profiles and feel like the stupid black sheep for not knowing. You like me, right?

We've been through this. You know how this goes. And yeah, not everything is universally known yet, especially things related to conflict.

[the-abyss-watcher]

why u such a pedo

I'm not. It's one of those weaponized claims, often used to go so far as to judge other people based on association.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Fellow uni-goer here. Have any of your classmates had the issue at https://archive.ph/Jzc6C so far?

Mine haven't, but you know who has two thumbs and has had that happen? The gal right here.

[the-abyss-watcher]

So let me get this straight. Supposing I came over to your house, the list of rules you use as your household rules, especially when Christina and Constantina are there, can be added to and/or negotiated with? Like it's a democratic house one might say is ran by the principles of distributed governance but without the government?

(might as well ask, it was a weirdly elaborated topic y'know)

Yup.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Forgive someone for offering their sympathies here (and no, I'm not saying this just because I want you to be my friend's girlfriend now), but your breakup with ChocolateBananaMango, the one that culminated in a video before your device stolen from you and handed to him in order for them to make you look bad in their impersonation gallery (after lying to you with signs to the contrary, if that is a hint), looked like Hell to go through. Sorry about that (hugs).

*sigh*

[the-abyss-watcher]

I see last wills and testaments have been a rather popular conversation to get sucked into lately, going by us. Do you anticipate you're going to die soon? Someone like you couldn't have come that close to dying so recently, right? What do you gather even makes a will relatively authoritative, especially over past texts that can be taken as last wishes, given that more than one thing has been able to "pass" as one (when in doubt, which so-called "crude will" would it be)?

I must say, it's almost fantastic that anyone lives under circumstances where they can trust the authorities at hand to be able to extract an authoritative collection of one's wishes from interactions with many possible impurity-inducing circumstances, enough where they can make their own inspired vision of how the system might be improved, unless that is actually binding (either way, whether going by that or by the laws already in place, it seems you are in the clear and that what you're doing would work).

There's always the chance of dying (as with everyone, though my social experiences mentally tempt it, and I have recently almost slept with the fishes), and systemic quirks mean not everyone has access to a more proper process.

In times like this, both things in question are valid, but due to the gap, the one with more emphasis takes precedent when there's a contradiction.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Yikes, I was hearing about a snippet of something that happened to you, that thing that had to do with your recent ban at the hands of people slandering you will resort to any quip to do so. Is it true that it refers to you and that it's true (or, alternatively put, what's going on)?

You mean who will resort to any quip? Yeah, you are alluding to something that happened to me. The kind of thing that should make themselves look bad but doesn't because people are so selective.

[the-abyss-watcher]

So how exactly does your faith work? What's your daily routine/prohibitions like? How have people seen you? The world wants to know.

It's not like it makes me drastically different from everyone else. To an onlooker, I'd say I'm no different from your generic woman, with generic dress and generic traits. What you've seen covers everything else.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Wow my friend, you have a lot of people out there dedicated to finding the alts of yours and other people, as https://www.tumblr.com/the-abyss-watcher/776572107174871040/in-a-reply-chain-participated-in-by?source=share already establishes. That moment when at https://x.com/ArtCandee/status/1895856765767729228 and https://x.com/KrackedKorn/status/1895866774824120560 and https://x.com/TynanLairdExpos/status/1895867967222792223 (or https://archive.ph/WWvNW and https://archive.ph/Z4uP1 and https://archive.ph/RqtF7), one of your foes comes by and (unless we're living through the off-chance that there are glitches/oversights about what replies were actually in reply to what parent comments) gives pointers about Art Candee, an account/persona with hundreds of thousands of followers (as https://archive.ph/QeJAL shows), being one of their accused's alts... and then you think about it and realize the gravity of it because of the fact that the people everyone on your end have been referring to as the slander brigade are known to not be stupid, as https://lemm.ee/post/55188600 establishes that people recognize, which hammers in the fact that this wouldn't be a warning anyone with their dedication would be giving unless the person in question was the culprit they are hunting the alts of. A real Hannah Montana moment if you ask me, no?

No oversights. In terms of their ability to be on the mark, it's just like the last time.

[the-abyss-watcher]

I would like to ask you about two of your updates you contributed to the ever-famous ten e-cepts (or at least they're famous by now).

I know the ten e-cepts are rules of thumb when it comes to long-distance "digital" communication, such as when a certain response to a confrontation is considered fair game within the specific laws of "physics" of the "digital world" (because that does have an influence over what is considered a wise course of action), or the most proper way to determine when two individuals are one individual while being immune to people taking advantage of their investigations (a memo I see not everyone gets), with these rules also happening to be useful in all facets of life. I noticed that you recently elaborated on them a little, then condensed them, and converted them into a format that doesn't require a long tangent, as a gallery of rules of thumb that is often cited in your groups displays.

I also see you did the same thing with another facet of life, adapting the text of the famous essay known as Death of the Author (or DOTA) into another group of rules in the same format called the ten p-cepts (either that, or you were just saying that they were rules that already exist that you were relaying were followed by people), allowing it to come to light in the process that they are to the "dream world" (and allow people to master control and mass communication via their dreams, which all this establishes stands opposite to technology and is an odd accomplishment coming from someone who is infinitely dream-challenged) what the ten e-cepts are to the "digital world", and that they have the paradoxical status of being the moral opposite to the ten e-cepts while simultaneously being just as applicable to different aspects of life (you're like the philosopher's equivalent to Professor Paradox here).

I also understand that, despite opposing each other, they're also not mutually exclusive. Not only could situations involving one cause a context to wander into using the other (for example, someone in a situation where everyone is following the ten e-cepts could, as a part of their instructions, establish instructions/protocol that morphs into the mob approach of the ten p-cepts as the proper way to honor a situation where the context is the ten e-cepts), but they can also be used in contexts where the other is typical, albeit with some difficulty. And I understand that they were paired together as a part of a project that serves as a hybrid between connecting to your BF and, it would seem, using the ten p-cepts as a form of controlled opposition since it's an ideology you oppose, an attitude that fits well with previous exchanges you've had.

Because of the fact they're all made to make peoples' modus operandis more orderly, what I want to ask is, will they be presented as strict rules in your groups, or will they simply be more like advice?

Let's just say certain conflicts arising from not following them will get a deeper response. Look to responses for more info or elaborations on the second thing.

[the-abyss-watcher]

In a reply chain participated in by TynanLairdExpos (the archive at https://archive.ph/y3I6r shows them and what they said), it is claimed that the individual known as Trickris or Kris Dreemurr (a common name used by Undertale fans) is you, with both the person being replied to and even Trickris agreeing (as https://archive.ph/Yokrr and https://archive.ph/5ZGAE bring to light, or https://x.com/bxtt3rs/status/1894719440886825022 and https://x.com/Trickris/status/1894723482434367516 if you want to use originals). Is Trickris really you? Or is there more going on at play?

[the-abyss-watcher]

I finally understood what https://www.pillowfort.social/posts/5093641 is all about. I'm glad you're going to freely do any roleplay that involves that artifact that turns the disability of anyone who touches it into a super power, as well as featuring these roleplays among your content to make the roleplayers more popular. However, I noticed it lacked a rule system, and wanted to suggest one for everyone to follow.

All the people of each medical condition should get the same super power as each other. For example, you wouldn't have one person who is deaf get super speed and another person who is deaf get the power to fly.

The artifact should not make permanent exchanges, and, until the artifact is touched again, the effect of having a super power in place of your disability should revert back to normal after 12 hours (with the amount of time increasing by 12 hours every time the artifact is touched).

The commonality of the medical condition should match the commonality of the super power in fiction. You wouldn't have someone who is blind get such a trivial power as the ability to shoot ink out of their hands.

The burden of the medical condition should be equal to the level of power granted by the super power it turns into. For example, you wouldn't have someone with heartburn turn into someone who can generate black holes.

The treatability of a disability should match how well the super power is able to exist. For example, suppose a there was a character with a disability that can be treated with a weekly pill. The resulting super power should only work under certain conditions, such as maybe super hearing that only works when it's raining, I don't know.

Disabilities that necessitate an early death should be exchanged for super powers which imbue a higher capacity or control of life in the individual to make up for it, since the temporary status of the powers would not fix a quicker demise.

There should be a difference between inherited disabilities, disabilities that are acquired, and illnesses. Illnesses (like viruses), for one thing, should not count, especially since the power to spread a virus already cancels out the burden of having a virus. Only innate disabilities, on the other hand, should get you non-mundane powers.

When a disability correlates with a super power in particularly obvious ways, especially a real super power, a super power should fit the disability it's replacing. For example, being colorblind and touching the artifact should make you a tetrachromat.

If someone naturally has an actual super power, such as tetrachromacy, the artifact should trade that super power for a disability. Or if a medical condition has both pros and cons, the artifact should trade it with another thing that has both pros and cons.

Medical conditions that are spectrums should only convert into super powers that are spectrums, and each part of the medical condition's spectrum should convert to a specific part of that medical condition's spectrum.

Can these become rules?

Yes.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Dear Supporter,

I hope this message finds you and your family in good health. My name is Eman Zaqout from Gaza. I am reaching you out to seek your urgent help in spreading the word about our fundraiser. I lost both my home and my job due to the ongoing genocide in Gaza and we are facing catastrophic living conditions. 💔

I kindly ask you to visit my campaign. Your support, whether through donating or sharing, will help us reach more people who can make a difference. Thank you for your continued support for the Palestinian cause. Your dedication brings us closer to freedom. 🙏🕊

Note: Verified by several people as 90-ghost and aces-and-angels. ☑

https://gofund.me/b141d50f 🔗

Few things show the failure of peoples' critical analysis more than the fact people don't know what this is really about.

I'm sorry but no, there are probably certain lords/princes in Nigeria who could help better if they were in my place.

[the-abyss-watcher]

So we have been in the same spotlight before, and everyone had asked me to come to you regarding a situation, and so here I am. I can explain myself in several ways, but the most fitting I think would be to remind you of the six rules of thumb of apologizing and forgiving which are associated with me, which are inspired by the ten e-cepts at http://www.deviantart.com/triagonal/art/The-Ten-E-Cepts-written-based-on-one-s-experience-899257268 and which I call the ten f-cepts.

Whether an apology is acceptable, and what traits make it acceptable (e.g. whether they think apologies are better when concise, elaborate, improvised, formulaic, immediately after a misdeed, a while after a misdeed, in person, not in person, etc.), are up to the person to which it's to, and detail criteria for an acceptable apology is in no way objective. If the wishes of the person receiving an apology are up to interpretation, an unacceptable apology is the fault of the person other than who is trying their best to apologize.

Nobody is entitled to either apologies or forgiveness except where they are due, due to their foundation in ethics, such as if they are promised, and to treat the act of apologizing or forgiveness shamefully or backhandedly in any way weighs the practice down into the depths of neglect. Such situations are as opposed to matters where the misdeed in question has subjective, non-ethical qualities. In fact, an apology or gesture of forgiveness that ends up amounting to nothing worthwhile might as well not be done if not done on one's own accord, which depends on their heart, not the definition of a good heart laid out by those expecting an apology. Not only does forgiveness incentivize apologies, but in refusing forgiveness to someone, you risk contributing to an unapologetic individual, which is why I often say that, by being as forgiving as you and I are, one is actually doing humanity an enormous favor and saving it from a form of diplomatic deflation that takes generations to heal from, as we live in very unforgiving times.

Apologies and forgiveness are two halves of one exchange. If you promise forgiveness to someone who fulfills the criteria for what you deem a correct apology, and you don't end up giving that forgiveness, it is theft. If you make it ambiguous or seemingly unlikely that you will forgive them in exchange for a correct apology, and they don't apologize, it is understandable, and it is only fair for a to-be apologizer to be able to ask if they will be forgiven in return, as opposed to being shamed for asking, as if they didn't ask, still apologized, and didn't like the outcome, it would be on them. Likewise, if an apology is deceptive, whether because whatever promises are in it have been betrayed, it is misrepresented later on, etc. it too is theft, and throws their act into question.

The spirit of apologizing and forgiveness is intertwined with the idea that each individual is their own person, and, even in a world where nations and their rulers are expected to apologize for past war crimes and leaders of certain groups are expected to weigh in on things such as acts of terror, it is therefore not up to anyone to apologize on behalf of anyone without the permission of the person who is supposed to apologize, forgive anyone without the permission of the person from whom the forgiveness would be relevant, or to validate, invalidate, or shame an apology or gesture of forgiveness in hindsight, nor is it up to anyone to treat an apology or forgiveness as the conclusion of an ethical issue when there are factors in an issue that are independent from the full discretion of the individuals who could otherwise say they can call the shots on such an issue. For the same reason, a sound mind is necessitated for both apologizing and forgiveness, and something said or done while someone is a non-dependent and sober should be seen as being able to override things said or done while someone is a dependent or non-sober, except in scenarios where the non-soundness of mind is voluntary on the part of the individual. A proxy or "substitute mind" for, say, the drunk, appointed by them while of sound mind, serves as the outcome that fits best, and such proxies can give apologies or forgiveness on behalf of the individual whom it would be relevant to.

The idea that an apology or forgiveness necessarily has to be seen as permanent is a stereotype. Life has so many moving parts that it is understandable, in certain situations, if someone wants to withdraw an apology from the past or withdraw their forgiveness from a past event, so as long as they tell the person to whom it's relevant to ahead of time, in such a way that there is time to react, that everyone knows and can comprehend what is going on, and so that everyone can apply their own side of the deal.

There exists a saying that says that time heals all wounds, which also acknowledges that we are finite creatures who can do very few things which can be considered infinite in a way which would absolutely make forgiveness inappropriate, with the distinction between the finite and the infinite being important because it corresponds with the concepts of something being conditional or unconditional, the former of which we correlate with the idea that something can be apologized and forgiven for, but time cannot absolutely be seen or guaranteed as a substitute for an apology. However, there is a difference between a lack of forgiveness (which is often dubbed as a grudge), an itch to make life more difficult for someone in some kind of way, slights against an individual with imply circumstances which should not be dragged into one's feelings for someone lest the person who would otherwise expect an apology should themselves feel sorrow for how they go about their feelings, the act of exiling or incurring the exile of the individual they have ill feelings for, etc. and how you feel towards an individual should not imply any collateral damage towards circumstances which are rightfully in place, such as bringing about cancel culture onto an individual in order to remove them from public consciousness which is irrelevant to the factors of right and wrong which are intertwined with the acts of apologizing and forgiveness in that situation.

The practice of apologizing as it currently stands is based in the esteem many people put in intuition, but that only ends up allowing it to be manipulated to the point where the practice becomes corrupted beyond appreciable. We have met before, and I came to you because I wish you to apologize to me in the most typical concise form for challenging what an apology means, which will also be synonymous with declaring that you agree with what I have just said, and in return, credit for the rightful ownership (and, in a way and in the practical sense, their creation) of these six organized and written rules of thumb 100% goes to you as proof of my forgiveness. I am well aware that, even if you didn't make it yourself, you go by what http://www.behance.net/gallery/157477253/If-any-guilt-is-ever-held-against-you-regarding-me says when people want forgiveness from you.

I am in fact sorry, my friend. I truly am.

[the-abyss-watcher]

Alright, so let me get a few things straight.

You posted all the stuff related https://archive.ph/yIp5f about RP. And based on the way you explain it, it seems to be to all your RP's what the Nicene Creed is to Christianity, an intended commonality even if as vague as can be (even if the only thing that comes up during a session is a few words referencing one's powers), based on your area of expertise during RP.

And your IP (intellectual property) policy related to http://archive.ph/I3gUP also pertains to all other forms of matters of intellectual slight, such as espionage (be a good samaritan, and openly share the fruits of all obtaining of knowledge of you), trespassing (honor that which you encroach on, and openly distribute all gained), exposing people (honor the subject and channel whatever it was for to peoples' good), theft of fire (honor the originator, and know no one human can own any one flame as all fire is for all of mankind), etc... all correct?

Would it all not be the case?

[the-abyss-watcher]

On hold calls are tough. Seeing someone on the net so-to-speak gives an opportunity to make it up to them. Hopefully nobody gets in trouble for that (which would explain anonymity), though as a friendly intern, this would be unlikely.

An earlier conversation begged to be finished. How much do you actually connect to your MS? Inquiring minds want to know. It would help if one reduced the number of diagnoses when the opportunity arises.

Your luck with communication has, without a doubt, not gone unseen. Don't worry, I'm not here to judge that. But it's one of those things. I see this judged a lot. The moment the vagueness (or "big words") kicks in, people out you for it.

Another relevant experience is having a hard time formulating things to say in a conversation. Being compared to a brick wall must hurt, right? People become underwhelmed by a lack of fast conversation and lose interest in the other person.

When someone does try to keep up in a conversation, or sometimes even when they're going at their own pace, sometimes what comes out is highly inappropriate. Who was it again who said this was their biggest controversy?

Time and time again, planning and the ability to plan are in the same league. An easy thing to mistake for mental laziness, as if I need to remind anyone here of that; some people really cannot do so much as comb hair as they can't map out the best strokes.

Aphantasia is another word that comes up in the context. It's the active ingredient in brain fog, you will notice the lack of mind's eye. No backlash here, but it makes people fail to understand, for example, hopelessness at putting things together.

One more thing worth bringing up, anhedonia also comes up, being higher on the scale than depression but below the normal range that one feels. Yet people lash out at this like all the other things because it comes off as insensitive to the emotional.

It is every doctor's desire to treat more with less. Is it not agreeable then that frontal lobe MS might actually be the single thing everything can be connected to rather than any of these being separate? Worth talking about in any upcoming appointment.

As someone w/ patient experience, it also wouldn't not be fascinating when one thinks about how everything society considers bright and beautiful is associated with that part of the mind (persecution much?), e.g. nothing missing in the TL would be unforgiven

It's difficult to feel sorry for the future version of society where putting its eggs all in one basket evolves into invitation for the wrong people to weaponize things in such a way that order becomes permanently disoriented being surrounded by what it doesn't understand.

I am no stranger to the complex measures necessitated before things come to a rest. The people mentioned have the go-ahead here.