Untitled

Asking this as an outsider; what's the difference between you, your slanderers, your opponents, and this meme?

I have a multi-part question about that, one I would like to ask where you're urged to answer everything but in a thirty-six word answer.

What even are your views on this meme, or at least the ones that are canon to the doctrine/dogma of the self-applied code of ethics that is applied to yourself and all your groups/functions?

People who use it imply they're talking about narcissism, right? But when I hear remarks like "if it did happen, then it wasn't bad, and if it was bad, it's not that big a deal, etc." but it's not like these aren't natural responses people totally don't give each other just out of disagreement with each other; otherwise, would some of your haters be doing just that when one of you claims truth is never an evil while the other claims it can be incomplete, abused, and taken the wrong way to destructive effects that beg the question of whether people can handle the truth?

(e.g. "I may have told your child they were adopted, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!" or "I may have told these complete strangers about the one time you did something shameful as a child, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!"... what's the difference? It's a moral dispute, right? How is it different from a politician saying "I just sacrificed the autonomy of a certain territory because the motherland needs its resources, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd" or "I just mandated that divorce require both parents to agree to it, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd"? Does this not technically make people who spread the meme the real narcissists because they're implying people who disagree with them are wrong?)

If someone actually has narcissism (or NPD since you and your acquaintances have implied in discussions before that it should be seen medically if it's to be), and it's a spectrum (because it is said to be a spectrum), how do you apply the possibility that the meme might represent a scale, with narcissists owning up after a certain point (e.g. a supposed narcissist apologizing and making amends once it gets down to the "I didn't mean it" level or the "you deserved it" level)?

If two people were using the meme as a retort against each other, how would you know who is the actual narcissist, if the defense could be used as a shield that treats disagreement (or objection to the narcissism label) the same way? Perhaps someone can chime in on the already-cerebrated takeaway that you are freer from the label than them due to you having apologized for things before and they haven't.

Is what all of the confusion here entails also one of the indirect, seemingly minor implications of the Mary Sue conversation you previously had?

And not just because you might actually conclude I'm testing you, how do you square the answers to all of these questions together?

Also, especially given parallels to the topic of NPD have been discussed enough to be second-handedly alluded to, what would be the answer that most reflects you if someone were to ask you if you have NPD/narcissism? There was a conversation once that brought up histrionic disorder, but it was vague.

It revolves around a scene whose uploader is conveniently named after you, if you know what I'm saying (like you're subtle).

People need to know that people with NPD can honor boundaries too, and that's what's important. You can bestow a relativity of boundaries on anyone, with conditions and conditionality as the barriers. And if you do it a certain way, it's naturally worth it.

Due to a certain culmination of the philosophy therein, as of now, I may say that the person/entity who corresponds with the name @the-abyss-watcher is officially called upon (in a form of an answer where each sentence has exactly twelve words, no sentence that needs to be spoken is unspoken, each sentence doesn't violate the four maxims of conversation in relation to the last, the number of sentences is divisible by six, and there is no artificial word/sentence quantity boosting or reduction involved, a common style of guardrail so she's not too roundabout) to clarify how her self-applied code of ethics she applies to herself and all aspects of life, especially the theological and political aspects (because it blows even physics and traditional Marxism/Communism out of the water; hopefully no regime attempts to eradicate the people involved based on their non-conformity), squares with the messages discussed inspired by the Piraha and Adario.

Surely one may point out object permanence is a law of physics.

There will be those who ask if they are materialist or solipsist.

Nevertheless, I see the answer as a hybrid between rebuking and humoring.

To be misguided in this sense isn't the same as being inarguable.

Let me start with the "theology" part since it's more on topic.

Note there is a difference between theological "schools", like Tolkien, Chesterton, etc.

They design their "schools" in ways that it separates right and wrong.

"What is right" and "what if X is right" are different questions.

This is a good way of illustrating where we might diverge ourselves.

If they wrote to justify, I have been said to considerably incorporate.

Note that being one with my "school" lacks a required complexity level.

You know how Indianized my way of thinking is due to family.

The Indian tradition is called one big web of spiritual logistical inference.

Simple things can be a proxy for complicated things if well thought.

And so here we are, with complexity not being on the side.

Note that Tolkien, etc. was said to believe and ask questions later.

An acquaintance of yours mentioned elsewhere a theological concept you had discussed with him that he is calling a shower thought, and I remembered you not only created a certain prayer that also touches upon pieces of the concept, but in your public collection of thoughts that acts as a code of ethics and terms of service you apply to yourself and all your groups, the universe's monism and dualism were also touched upon.

So there are these ideas that revolve around the understanding that a strict code tends to succeed more than a loose code.

"Goshfrog, that's a joke thread!" When is it ever funny to joke about adults and children in a romantic relationship?

Furthermore,

Requesting a fanfic where you, an adult, are on a date with a child? When has this ever been okay? Am I in the Twilight Zone?

After getting banned, Triagonal made use of a loophole in order to continue making contact with the child. I can't say for sure if the child had Triagonal blocked before this, but their reply makes me believe that they were not happy to be contacted by Triagonal. The fact Triagonal had to exploit a loophole in order to contact the child makes this obviously much more sinister. Moreover, why would an adult ever invite a child to a discord server while describing the goings on as 'steamy goodness'? A phrase that is used to describe adult content.

Now, jumping back up just a little bit, "Everybody else misunderstood what I was doing." That sound familiar, doesn't it? Where have we heard such a sentiment before, I wonder? The child in question also has some words on Triagonals inappropriate behavior Some word salad that boils down to "It's not my fault if you guys misinterpret the romantic phrases I use towards a child"

Let me start with this. It's "boohoo", not "booboo". "Booboo" can mean either one of two things, either a wound you got on the playground or (more likely, since you're using it to refer to a person) Yogi Bear's sidekick. "Boohoo" is the sound of crying (I'm not sure what heck of a language uses "boohoo" for that, but people use it that way). Rest assured, I passed the captcha to prove I'm not a bear.

Second, let me just get out of the way that whoever you blocked you can tell the people on KF and AA aren't alts of any of us who you haven't blocked. You officially have that power now. That conspiracy theory can be put to rest. I know Cat was looking for ways to determine who was who.

Third, let me get to the point.

It's not raising the required amount of evidence to point out that sharing the same three things from more than half a decade ago across multiple PSA's as if it's a gamechanger each time does make some of you sound like broken records, especially when showing words proves what the words said and not what was going on behind them.

I would not feel concerned to say this had I not been dragged into this by people who think I'm her.

It's also worth noting the two accounts which are said to be the "victim" are not even the same. They're not the same person. There's a ton of Dans in the forums. The two people don't even have the same browser fingerprint. Triagonal is friends with one of them.

What do you even call it "a loophole" based on? Do you... have proof of this? Do you have proof it was a bug and not a feature? Did the Team account ever clarify that at some point? Or are you interpreting? Because a lot of this has always been interpretive. Hence why many of you think I'm her.

But more to the point, you're taking verbal technicalities (especially the chat-related one, which I should note could've been fabricated by anyone with fonts and a blank template, if we're getting technical) across scarce moments in time and saying you know what the people were thinking. Strong speculation is still speculation. You got a whole vibe from the word "steamy", and that says something.

All of this is assuming the hate art made by you and your peeps (which trumps mere memes which nobody here has gone beyond) isn’t already a sign of your own fanaticism…

…with some artists even hate-art-mined as recently as a week ago in hopes of taunting her with art made by unsuspecting artists containing things like known phobias/weaknesses/experiences to add a touch of nuisance if someone works as a stand-in for her…

…with the harassment being so bad that the admins who nobody might ever high regard for have decided they were fed up upon the first glance of what you just said.

This is my demi-sister's HTF OC Swirls. She's a green and yellow squirrel with numerous birth defects like wonky lazy eyes a head marking and no tail marking. This was due to their mother falling down the stairs while pregnant with her and Nutty. Swirls wear a white hat with a red ball on top and a darker red string which has a pink and blue sprinkle pattern with matching clips on their tail. She also wears a white bow on her right ear that has a red swirl and a white bowtie with red stripes. They're Nutty's twin sister.

Gender: Woman

Sexuality: Aroace

Pronouns: She/her they/them

Crush: N/A

Personality: Sweet and kind, loves to hang out with their brother. Can be a bit crazy. Loyal.

This is my HTF OC Cloud. She's a white and blue chinchilla-sheep hybrid.

Gender: Woman Sexuality: Lesbian Pronouns: She/her they/them Crush: Pancake (My other HTF OC) Personality: Shy, quiet, sweet, polite. Very soft-spoken and timid.

Asking this as an outsider; what's the difference between you, your slanderers, your opponents, and this meme?

I have a multi-part question about that, one I would like to ask where you're urged to answer everything but in a thirty-six word answer.

What even are your views on this meme, or at least the ones that are canon to the doctrine/dogma of the self-applied code of ethics that is applied to yourself and all your groups/functions?

People who use it imply they're talking about narcissism, right? But when I hear remarks like "if it did happen, then it wasn't bad, and if it was bad, it's not that big a deal, etc." but it's not like these aren't natural responses people totally don't give each other just out of disagreement with each other; otherwise, would some of your haters be doing just that when one of you claims truth is never an evil while the other claims it can be incomplete, abused, and taken the wrong way to destructive effects that beg the question of whether people can handle the truth?

(e.g. "I may have told your child they were adopted, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!" or "I may have told these complete strangers about the one time you did something shameful as a child, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!"... what's the difference? It's a moral dispute, right? How is it different from a politician saying "I just sacrificed the autonomy of a certain territory because the motherland needs its resources, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd" or "I just mandated that divorce require both parents to agree to it, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd"? Does this not technically make people who spread the meme the real narcissists because they're implying people who disagree with them are wrong?)

If someone actually has narcissism (or NPD since you and your acquaintances have implied in discussions before that it should be seen medically if it's to be), and it's a spectrum (because it is said to be a spectrum), how do you apply the possibility that the meme might represent a scale, with narcissists owning up after a certain point (e.g. a supposed narcissist apologizing and making amends once it gets down to the "I didn't mean it" level or the "you deserved it" level)?

If two people were using the meme as a retort against each other, how would you know who is the actual narcissist, if the defense could be used as a shield that treats disagreement (or objection to the narcissism label) the same way? Perhaps someone can chime in on the already-cerebrated takeaway that you are freer from the label than them due to you having apologized for things before and they haven't.

Is what all of the confusion here entails also one of the indirect, seemingly minor implications of the Mary Sue conversation you previously had?

And not just because you might actually conclude I'm testing you, how do you square the answers to all of these questions together?

Also, especially given parallels to the topic of NPD have been discussed enough to be second-handedly alluded to, what would be the answer that most reflects you if someone were to ask you if you have NPD/narcissism? There was a conversation once that brought up histrionic disorder, but it was vague.

It revolves around a scene whose uploader is conveniently named after you, if you know what I'm saying (like you're subtle).

Asking this as an outsider; what's the difference between you, your slanderers, your opponents, and this meme?

I have a multi-part question about that, one I would like to ask where you're urged to answer everything but in a thirty-six word answer.

What even are your views on this meme, or at least the ones that are canon to the doctrine/dogma of the self-applied code of ethics that is applied to yourself and all your groups/functions?

People who use it imply they're talking about narcissism, right? But when I hear remarks like "if it did happen, then it wasn't bad, and if it was bad, it's not that big a deal, etc." but it's not like these aren't natural responses people totally don't give each other just out of disagreement with each other; otherwise, would some of your haters be doing just that when one of you claims truth is never an evil while the other claims it can be incomplete, abused, and taken the wrong way to destructive effects that beg the question of whether people can handle the truth?

(e.g. "I may have told your child they were adopted, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!" or "I may have told these complete strangers about the one time you did something shameful as a child, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd!"... what's the difference? It's a moral dispute, right? How is it different from a politician saying "I just sacrificed the autonomy of a certain territory because the motherland needs its resources, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd" or "I just mandated that divorce require both parents to agree to it, BuT iT wAs NoT bAd"? Does this not technically make people who spread the meme the real narcissists because they're implying people who disagree with them are wrong?)

If someone actually has narcissism (or NPD since you and your acquaintances have implied in discussions before that it should be seen medically if it's to be), and it's a spectrum (because it is said to be a spectrum), how do you apply the possibility that the meme might represent a scale, with narcissists owning up after a certain point (e.g. a supposed narcissist apologizing and making amends once it gets down to the "I didn't mean it" level or the "you deserved it" level)?

If two people were using the meme as a retort against each other, how would you know who is the actual narcissist, if the defense could be used as a shield that treats disagreement (or objection to the narcissism label) the same way? Perhaps someone can chime in on the already-cerebrated takeaway that you are freer from the label than them due to you having apologized for things before and they haven't.

Is what all of the confusion here entails also one of the indirect, seemingly minor implications of the Mary Sue conversation you previously had?

And not just because you might actually conclude I'm testing you, how do you square the answers to all of these questions together?

Also, especially given parallels to the topic of NPD have been discussed enough to be second-handedly alluded to, what would be the answer that most reflects you if someone were to ask you if you have NPD/narcissism? There was a conversation once that brought up histrionic disorder, but it was vague.

It revolves around a scene whose uploader is conveniently named after you, if you know what I'm saying (like you're subtle).

Many of you asked for more of my cosplays; now let's play a game of Find Waldo. This was at a cosplay convention some time ago. Can you find OP?