• It is life itself that we can all unite against
    Suppose that the best way to hasten the extinction our species is actually to increase reproduction rates of our species and therefore to generate excitement for pronatal narratives.

    There could be some calculus by which increased suffering of a mass of lives in the short term warrants a quickening of the end of life in the long term.

    Antinatalists unite! We must pass out pronatal propaganda!
  • Buddhism to Change the World
    In the same way people from India then to be less materialistic and more conformististic because they believe in the law of Karma. — pbxman

    That is to say people from Buddhist countries tend to be more submissive and prone to change the inside than the outside. — pbxman

    I don't agree. This seems like an unsubstantiated claim. — Tzeentch

    Karma is quite an insidious, slippery and engimatic concept because it can be interpreted in contradictory ways. Any material success might be interpreted as a status indicator of good Karma by some Indians today. The notion of Karma might have been used to sustain the caste system but whether this is good or bad is relative to point of view.

    In some sense you can't be held responsible for your Karma if Karma is responsible for your inability to carry out right action. A systematic interpretation of Karma might be an insidious deception of Karma. Ugh...

    Is there a better interpretation of Karma?
  • Total Recall - Voluntary Ignorance Paradox
    you'd never know with certainty, but that's a truism about empirical claims period. — Terrapin Station

    Are there non-empirical claims we can know for certain by way of proofs that do not rely on empirical claims? Sorry if this does not make sense.

    Are all claims either directly or indirectly dependent on empirical observations? And is this also a truism?
  • There is No Actual Profit Gained by Business Activity
    Are you positing a dramatic increase in testicle size and/or sperm production to account for this population growth? — Bloginton Blakely

    No, just the fact of sexual reproduction alone is enough to account for population growth. If we just got rid of men there might be less problems you ascribe to business. (This is silly)

    Business is the action of creating and trading property usually for the purpose of generating an alleged surplus. — Bloginton Blakley

    It could be about trading property to maintain life. An alleged surplus might be relative to what one needs or wants.
  • There is No Actual Profit Gained by Business Activity
    The needs of business created the large human population we have. — Bloginton Blakley

    It could have just as well been the needs of men that created our large human population. Maybe testicles are actually responsible for the human population.

    What is business anyway? And what isn't business? Please tell us in so many words.
  • The Very Hungry Caterpillar
    I don't eat or sleep properly - I haven't eaten all day until just now, for instance - I have terrible memory, and I often act like a sociopath or someone with Asperger's. There are some basic day-to-day stuff that I've just stopped doing, which leads to problems. I'm not communicating with people in my life as I'm expected to. I'm barely coping. All of this is causing big problems for me. I'm not entirely sure what's wrong with me. It's obviously something, even if it doesn't have a name like you get with a mental disorder. Some of this sociopath stuff fits. I got my job through superficial charm, and I use it on customers, but the people I work with have clocked on that I'm a robot, and they expect me to be like them all of the time and not stand there being unsociable, which is difficult and draining. My job requires me to be an actor on different levels almost at all times.

    But there's always a bright side, I suppose. This pizza I'm eating right now tastes good.     — S
  • The Very Hungry Caterpillar
    Jesus, S. Are you inflamed this morning.
  • Sign conversation example (argued to be greater than word)
    This could just as well be about the pleasure of charades in some non-conventional format.

    S + rattle =

    :naughty: :strong: :down:

    :nerd: :fire: :heart:

    Axe + Tree =
  • Another Universal Language and its Usage
    And, as mentioned in the synopsis, I made my little attempt at such categorisation and am curious to know if the result of my attempt, the list, could make sense to other people since it perfectly makes sense to me. — Eseitch

    Could you explain a bit more about your categorization (typology) in your link. What are the details of the method (algorithm) by which you assign a name under (i)Angel (ii)Demon (iii)Great in a grouping of 3. Are the grouped names refuting major points? Are they voices in a dialogue? Does the Great tag represent a synthesis or mediation of content associated with the preceding 2 names?
  • The Reptilian Conspiracy Theory vs Buddhism
    Mythic narrative is always an interpretation which can be re-translated into acceptable or unacceptable (contemporary, historical, fantastical) terms.

    "Soma Sema" was said to be a gnostic meme.

    It translates to the "The body is a prison" (maybe "body prison", or "body tomb"). Double check, I'm terrified of being wrong.

    This is a seed (existential attitude) for story which could portray a perfectly reasonable and contemporary setting.

    Sisyphus roles a rock up a hill, only to have it fall down again. Who is making Sisyphus role the rock of the hill? Possibly aliens (those who manipulated those who ordered those who hold S. to the grind). Or maybe the rock that is rolling is the burden of maintaining the body itself... that being, becoming is some kind of absurd work.

    It is important to look for many ways in which a myth (metaphor) reveals truth, even though it could have been stated in more serious terms: "The rat race is not a race for rats." Get your facts straight.
  • The Oxytocin puzzle
    What about if we can't make a clean cut between good and bad, presuming that they're both caused by a single biochemical? — TheMadFool

    We've all heard that correlation is not causation.

    A kind of emotional preference or attachment is somehow correlated with oxytocin levels. As to the specific nature of that preference, a tremendous range of other complicating factors are in play.

    Strong attachment might naturally necessitate a strong discrimination towards what threatens to obstruct or dissolve that attachment. We protect what we love but whether it is moral to protect what we love is a question? Are we free to love whom we love?

    Case in point, how might oxytocin play a role in a preference for treating pet animals well (by law) while ignoring other kinds of animal abuse (industrial meat and egg production). Dogs might make pretty good dog burgers... Except, we love Lassie. Lassie is part of the family... Who are you eating, Lassie?

    Might be interesting to look up cases of oxytocin deficiency. Oxytocin plays a role in empathy and facial recognition (Oh, Sarah, you look so happy this morning, Oh poochy pooch, your doggie smile fills me with sweetness).
  • The Oxytocin puzzle


    Doesn't quite touch the study cited in the OP but still interesting.

    The two-fold behavioral effect of oxytocin might make sense with regard to caring for young from the stand point of being a mother. A mother is attached to young and therefore becomes more discerning or preferential. It might benefit her to distrust out-group members to protect her young.

    "Hate" is probably too strong a word to assign to these effects of oxytocin on human preference between in-group versus out-group members.

    Edit: Actually this is interesting as regards 'attachment as a cause of unnecessary suffering' philosophic frame.
  • The unavoidable dangers of belief and believers responsibility of the dangers
    Religion as passively accepted faith (inherited lifestyle) is not something one might necessarily choose. It happens to you as a consequence of cultural pressure or personal revelation.

    If you are born in some Mormon family, love or respect could be conditional upon accepting certain ways of doing things. You don't really need believe at all. You just need to act as if you believe, follow rules, otherwise you get exiled (let go).

    Some Muslim households will even kill their children if they have transgressed an interpretation of religious law.

    Religious belief is an empty justification for doing as you do, sometimes at great social cost.

    It is only because of different competing values, by which society is ordered, that religious beliefs are registered as dangerous, or harmful.

    It might be universally desirable to do no harm if we have the choice but a sense of "having the choice" might itself be a belief that is gifted to us and that we think we ought to gift to others.

    The gift of free thought surely permits us to advocate for the devil in the same way God would advocate for his believers, by appeal to choice or fate.
  • Cream
    Is our sense of meaning and value in a meaningless world/universe as much of an illusion as something induced by this "cream? Like if you have a pill that would give you a sense of meaning in your life, how is that different from if you invent a meaning to your life when there isn't any external meaning at all? Where is the illusion of meaning and where is the actual meaning? — Christoffer

    I just re-watched Tarkovsky's "masterpiece", Stalker. It provides nearly the same premise, as the wish-fulfilling Zone corresponds well to David Firth's Cream but is beautifully rendered (though long and meditative) as moving toward a point in space. A more recent film is also a Annihilation, which could be a curious derivative of Stalker (moving toward a point of different kind of annihilation, or revaluation of life). You might like to check them out to help extract more inspiration for working toward the philosophy of the subject.

    What appears at first inquiry (curiosity or replusion) becomes on closer inspection a self-transforming or self-identifying paradox (like cream), as if we do not really understand the consequences of our own deep desiring nature (the desire to know the truth, to be or achieve XYZ, the effects of cream on interpreting our desire).

    There is a scary aspect to the affirmation or belief that there is no non-human meaning, no transcendent God that is not a projection of our own being in its blind, primordial desire. Cold relativity and the unboundedness of being becomes quite stark. This is possibly what those who associate with nihilism and existentialism dream about, the absence of anything beyond the folly of our species (as ourselves), and associated feeling of despair ("this is it, the grind, sleeping and eating, it is what it is, et cetera). The more we realize the mutability and temporality of our experience the more we might realize how empty (or full) our own current state is.
  • Three Bad Ways Of Replying
    Pretend you are being charged by the word. — Bitter Crank

    I ought to vow ABSOLUTE SILENCE on that account. (9 pennies).

    And if time is also money... (5 pennies + y seconds)

    (Parenthetically closed words ought to be charged at a different rate)
  • Three Bad Ways Of Replying
    1. A reply which doesn't make proper use of the quote function.
    2. A reply which is too lengthy.
    3. A reply which doesn't make proper use of the quote function and is too lengthy.     — S

    4. If you can't follow these S rules and thus by habit become associated with what is S "bad", you can still post in the Lounge.

    Just make sure you poke S with a stick now and then.
  • Cream
    This probably belongs in the Lounge, since no work has been done to answer your own question besides what one might extrapolate from the video you presented (someone else's work).

    How would we view ourselves as human beings? — Christoffer

    My opinion is that desired properties of cream as presented (fixing anything that easily) would have destroyed human life long before a business cabal would've put a quash on it. That destruction might have taken the form of everyone evaporating into light (which could as well be a metaphor for death: a radical change from state A as a known state to state Z an unknown state).

    There is a lot in that video that is hard to parse (to go from metaphor to whatever the manifold formal arguments and well worn questions might entail). Pick an aspect, write an essay, then argue points. You have to do it in the standardized way or else no one is interested.

    The real cream is probably a symbol for the totality of life (the slime that weaves the whole dynamic web). Death is what dissembles that may provide avenues for new adaptations. The death of an individual is a little death but he, she, it lives on by others who are all supported by the total system. Any severe disturbance like cream might upset the balance in such a way as to eliminate humans in one fell swoop (that is just saying what the film presents to us). Cream would seep on though, facilitating whatever wills itself to continue, if there is such thing as will ( maybe a property of continuity that the cream responds to) inherent to any non-human creature.

    Edit: Cream could likely be a metaphor for any technological application that radically alters the total system and the necessary politics required to conserve or progress a desirable type of life (family, community, nation, world) using some kind of cost and benefit analysis.

    "If you are going to allow technologies into the market place that destroy people's jobs, it is your responsibility to find a way of replacing those jobs, or compensating those people." This is a line from Brian Cox on Joe Rogan's podcast talking about the social and economic costs of replacing middle class jobs with AI technologies. Worth thinking about.
  • The Dozen Locker Dilemma
    Oh boy, is that a mistake! Reality is subject to entropy - which means the easy road leads ever downward unto stagnation and death. Everything good is uphill, and going uphill requires effort. We need to expend energy just to stand still - or we fall apart. It's an absolute physical law. — karl stone

    Ain't nothing wrong with falling apart but I want to believe the principle that it is absolutely good to endure as along as possible. The energy used to go uphill causes other things to do downhill.

    The unusual perturbation of global weather due to burning stored energy to go up hill will cause some things elsewhere (life) to fall apart (go down hill). China absorbs the pollution of global consumption. The horizon of a local arboretum is contaminated with windmills. Once thriving fertile grounds turn to desert. Mosquitos carrying malaria (the biggest killer of all time) expand their territories. Then we try to adapt, still at cost of future adaptation.

    My parents both worked full time jobs. My father was next to non-existent (like his father before him). My brother was a mean bastard who believes himself to be a victim (possibly rightly of being unloved and emotionally abused). He was the most successful of the progeny, who severed relations to his family.

    In 6 grade I put on a puppet play about suicide. The hero (Superbunny) tried to save someone who jumped off Niagra falls but was moments too late. My teacher was disgusted, I then became target for a few occasions of class humilation ("this is an example of what not to do"). My friend, who played the hero puppet, was an ostracized kid whose family situation terrified me. He was being supported by his Stepmother (father missing) one got the impression that she'd love to be rid of him. If I was in his place I didn't think I'd be able to cope.

    I feel myself to be alone in the universe, sometime amidst people I love. But maybe by a measure of action (of doing) it can be said that I don't love anyone. I can't call my indifference a type of love.

    I believe in the power of Metta (love and compassion practice). We could have been anyone. We could have been the placid cow, chewing cud, enraptured in bliss, or the cow seized with existential fear before the gate of an abattoir. Or we could have been stuck in a cattle car headed to a concentration camp, separated from mother and father. Mother might have had to choose whom to leave behind.

    We should try to treat people well. Vile nihlistic children, puerile hellions seeking the flame annhiliation, and ornery wearied masters seeking five star accommodations. All will be invited to be. They have been.
  • Musings of a failed Stoic.
    Doesn't Buddha kind of represent the ultimate stoic.

    Thought or feeling for him would not be a problem given an austere regime for training for equanimity in chaos.

    Stoicism would likely involve training oneself not just by Wallowing (the limiting cycles of your activity and responsibilities), but by enduring what isn't necessary to endure. Taleb's concept of antifragility might be useful here. Someone who voluntarily endures what they normally avoid is better equipped to handle the unsuspected unpleasant. Common sense?
  • The Dozen Locker Dilemma
    Is the Taj Mahal a locker?

    A place to store memory of your loved ones.

  • Dangerous Knowledge
    ↪TheMadFool


    Given your name, TheMadFool, you might be projecting a secret wish, unless you know something that is twisting your noodle into an odd shape. Soon to be TheSaneGenius, I hope.

    Most geniuses probably weren't mad. It was the inability of the folks around them to understand them that likely drives psychological illness. What you think others think of you can cause great stress. If everyone withdraws and you lose your social status and income, are threatened with the rack and thumb screws, then yeah, insanity might be quite natural.

    A lot of contemporary illness is induced by existential distress (paralyzing fear) and the inability to moderate one's lifestyle (food, physical activity, social needs). Most time is spent working for shit income in the dumb rat race, with little left over to cultivate the self. Society doesn't give a lick about the mad or the so-called unspecialized "normal" apes.
  • Dangerous Knowledge
    This expression "dangerous knowledge" is like a flag on the peak of a mountain. The unclaimed mountain could be a metaphor for an entire world from a point of view (transpose the flag to the surface of the Moon or Mars).

    It might be comparable to "dangerous experience." Why would anyone want to physically go to Mars? They might actually believe they are living in a simulation (remarkable!). From risk-averse life-affirming position, it seems irrational. For a lot of folks life is so absurd as to render the rational as a kind of valuation about what folks believe is rational. When someone says, 'such and such is irrational' is probably a valuation (judgment) never a truth. If rational is x, then...

    We presume "philosophy" is worthwhile because of conserved memes (inherited or copied beliefs). Someone once said "an unexamined life is not worth living". This has somehow been conserved in relation to the projected value of the works associated with the man who said "an examined life is not worth living". Many many many men and women ask themselves daily, "is this life worth living." For some it is just a terrible feeling, pain, for what they see is necessary to avoid death. If only they had some "dangerous knowledge" that might undo what they believe is necessary.

    If you take a random sample of 100 people and lock them up in solitary confinement for 1 year, what % of those people will have taken their own lives (by what curious speciic means)? What % of those people will have had revelation about the value of some better orientation life? What % will be unchanged, neither positively or negatively affected? If this was law in some society, what behavioral effect might it have in that society?

    "Dangerous knowledge!" Whoa! What a meme this is.

    Put a box in your child's room that says "Dangerous, do not open!" and see what happens. Put a tree in the garden of Fleabin with a sign that says "This tree is poisonous, do not eat its fruits." You never know until you try, unless you already know because someone has tried.
  • How should Christians Treat animals?
    Christianity ideally ties one to vegetarianism, with eggs and milk coming from humanely raised animals who aren't slaughtered after giving up their usefulness. — NKBJ

    (Not addressed to NKBJ but to All)

    From a practical standpoint, finding milk from animals that aren't going to be slaughtered is not easy. My boss warns against red meat as "bad news" (Vedanta related ethics) but he sure loves his market bought cows milk and butter, which nonetheless is a byproduct of a grim process of separating babies from their mothers, both of which go to slaughter.

    Lots of folks of older cultures gave ritualistic thanks to the meaningful sacrifice of animals, especially because that sacrifice was a necessary condition of survival. The Ainu of Japan used to raise bears as pets for a while, treated them as a member of the family, then slaughtered them with great piety (or so I read).

    Meat consumption has a ripple of measurable effects on the global ecosystem but so do vegetables (see corn, cotten, soy and oil palm). Growing food at scale is an existentially nasty, ethically questionable, but necessary business. Collateral damage includes poisoning folks with chemicals and animal feces (see hog farming in Southern regions of U.S.) One might want to frame the ethics of an action with regard to a balance of the total system we live in. Any conclusion or consensus is unlikely going to change the universal biological appeal of meat however.

    Ribs are good with a nice rib rub. Slow cooked in a mesquite smoker, for fall off the bone goodness.

    Ribs are bad in mass, as they cause rivers of toxic effluent which never seems to be in your backyard or in your river. Those ribs haven't cause your son or daughter to be born with asthma. That has nothing to do with you. Or does it?
  • Entropy and Civilization
    Life is said to increase the rate of entropy to maintain its complex order but relative to the way a single star disperses energy all human caused destructive events are negligible by such a comparison. If life actually increases the rate of entropy globally then why wouldn't a collision that destroys all life reduce the rate of entropy globally. I think we have to talk about the enthalpy and entropy of systems relative to one another.

    I don't understand entropy but I'd like to. The higher the rate at which a system disperses energy the higher entropy it has I think. Apokrisis is the one to ask on this.

    Unless mankind could initiate vacuum decay, nothing we could do would change the natural trend of the universe (beyond the boundaries of earth) in a meaningful way. Unless flying little data-collecting drones out into the great beyond is worthwhile.
  • Punishment Paradox
    No, We do not punish the innocent, there is no paradox. — DingoJones

    Likewise Nature, just like Justice, is blind.

    No one is innocent and no one is guilty but shit happens. Elephants and Orcas are born into the circus. Bulls go to slaughter. Both (the innocent and the guilty) can suffer the absurd outcomes of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, according to existential requirements of arbitrating apes.
  • Entropy and Civilization
    If we had a cosmic entropy meter its needle would show a sudden advance every time such cataclysmic events happen. — Jacob-B

    There is the linear ‘wear and tear’ of the universe; the dispersion of matter and dilution of energy, and there is non-linear catalytic jumps caused by supernovas, a collision of galaxies, and black holes. If we had a cosmic entropy meter its needle would show a sudden advance every time such cataclysmic events happen. — Jacob-B

    Vaccum decay is strange. Could humans initiate vacuum decay in theory ( as a malentropic event)?

    In Hawking’s book, once the Higgs Field becomes metastable, the vacuum decay bubble will emerge. Being at a high energy state, it will quickly move to consume everything at a low energy state, or everything else around it. The vacuum bubble moves along destroying atoms, turning everything it encounters into hydrogen. — Phillip Perry,

    https://bigthink.com/philip-perry/physicists-accidently-discover-a-self-destruct-button-for-the-entire-universe

    This sounds like a reset to a lower entropic state (earlier type configuration of the universe), though how the hydrogen is spread in time and space, along with current rates of universal expansion, would probably make up a universe that is not comparable to a younger version of our universe on the largest scale.
  • The purpose of life (Nihilist's perspective)
    It's not your fault you're lost but neither should that be cause to harm others from an inner spring of resentment. Do no harm, though that may seem impossible under stipulated conditions. Death can happen at any time.

    Everyone is lost, except those who have decided they are not and submit themselves to what the believe is necessary in light of their attachments (Life).

    Imagine someone less fortunate than you, tortured by fate, and love them. Even a gesture of artificial love (empty of authentic feeling) is better than nothing at all. Feel good that you know what it means to love your friends and family.
  • Meinong's Jungle
    And it's like a learning-disabled level confusion--maybe because we're playing a game where we're trying to create problems to solve because we're bored? (and we unfortunately do not want to tackle more challenging but practical problems like making sure that everyone has housing, health care, etc.)--to be confused whether we're talking about what we're imagining existing as something other than something we're imagining. — Terrapin Station

    We should all just keep reposting this post. This would've been a great modbot response in the old PF.

    :rofl:
  • Virtue of Truth
    Nietzsche, Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense

    The liar uses the valid designations, the words, to make the unreal appear as real; he says, for example, "I am rich," when the word "poor" would be the correct designation of his situation. He abuses the fixed conventions by arbitrary changes or even by reversals of the names. When he does this in a self-serving way damaging to others, then society will no longer trust him but exclude him. Thereby men do not flee from being deceived as much as from being damaged by deception: what they hate at this stage is basically not the deception but the bad, hostile consequences of certain kinds of deceptions. — Nietzsche, Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense
  • Matter over Mind – Consciousness…Fundamental force or chocolate cake?
    To us, the difference between a person and a chocolate cake is obvious. We have a clear understanding of what is the one or the other. — Mind Dough

    It's obvious in a particular and common context of interactions but if you were to set up a finer grain measure of comparison, for some possible reason, there might be a less clear understanding of the difference between what is human and chocolate cake. The cake disappears in digestion to become something else (as its divisible constituents undergoing biochemical transfomration). The difference is clear because its useful to know that clear difference.

    Just like a question of when does life begin, for a moral consideration about a woman's choice to abort, when does cake end (this is not controversial). Furthermore, what is the empirical truth of chocolate cake consumption? Cake takes its meaning from everything else from which it takes its meanings.

    Drawing boundaries is easy if those boundaries are somehow apparent, natural, given, settled in court, are justified by the miracle of utility, the applications technology, but things get fuzzy at extreme scales.

    I don't know how humans cope with the amount of information out there but the mind has an interesting capacity to synthesize, reduce and unify toward socially or individually desirable ends.

    Consciousness is a mystery but it is as mysterious as the thing it isn't (whatever that might be). It might be as mysterious as that which it unveils: chocolate cake as something other than it is.
  • Wisdom
    Duckrabbit sips espresso as he gazes into the the 1st mirror.

    Mirror, mirror, on the wall, which mirror captures my essence?

    1st mirror replies: "It is I, my lord, the 1st of mirrors."

    2nd mirror laughs: "It is also I my lord, the 2nd of mirrors."

    Duckrabbit picks his nose with a tentacle.

    "This coffee is the worth the blood of innocence."

    (Edited by S.)
  • Meinong's Jungle
    ↪S


    What is the internet?

    I hope it isn't self-evident.

    Oh, future AI lords, constrain our imagination that we may live another day. Create an existential quantifying function.
  • Meinong's Jungle
    I am the king.

    Long live the king. Subjects of Meinong, bow to me.
  • Meinong's Jungle
    Therefore I win. — S

    What did you win?
  • Meinong's Jungle
    ...?...
  • Meinong's Jungle
    We can imagine things that aren't the case — Terrapin Station

    What is the case? About what is the case?

    What the hell is going on here?

    It is probably also self-evident.

    Elephants don't use snakes as blow darts.
  • Human Nature???
    What is human nature? — BrianW

    One quote I like (as we've all encountered it) is by Protagoras (490-420 BC):

    "Man is the measure of all things: of the things that are, that they are, of the things that are not, that they are not."

    Our species name, Homo sapiens, given by Carl Linneus is latin for "wise man", which given the precarity of our future might turn out to be a crude irony. Investigating alternatives of the specific epithet (ie. sapiens) will give us an idea of what characterizes the nature of the species in a single word. There is a great list in the Wikipedia: Names for the human species.

    Ants and bees build cities/collectives with castes (preordained classes).
    Apes and other social mammals have their politics (competitive hierarchies of social organization).
    There is likely a rudimentary communication which prefigures symbolic language in a lot of social animals.
    Some birds engage in inherited arts (dance, plumage, collection and artifice) for the sake of appealing to the opposite sex.

    The consequences of applied technology is probably the greatest visible mark of the human animal. It dwarfs us and will be around long after we are gone. As a species we transform environments in the most extreme ways.

    To close the broad field of inquiry about what is "human nature", which includes what any artifice could possibly unveil about our species, we can imagine the alternative names of Homo sapiens.

    Homo avarus
    Homo demens
    Homo economicus
    Homo faber
    Homo hypocritus
    Homo laborans
    Homo mendax
    Pan narrans
    Homo sanguinus
    Homo technilogicus

    Each name could be the title of an essay describing that aspect of human nature. So what is the corresponding canon (library) worth reading by which Homo philosophicus might discover something about himself worth discovering?
  • Society and testicles
    How many testicles did it take to make this thread?
  • To Paul from 'Spaces'
    Is that you, WK? Good to see you are still active in the entropy amusement park. How are things in your part of the Pacific? I guess that's Paul narrating the radio stories? — Daniel V

    Things are ok. Hope life is treating you well.

    I suspect that is Paul's voice in The Replicator (his story). The second link is to his webpage. You can try and message him through the ko-fi.com profile.
  • To Paul from 'Spaces'
    He posted around the transition time (sale of PF) under his moniker, Paul. Though if he is still posting under another alias, I don't know which.




    https://www.quietplease.org/originals/
Home » Nils Loc