Shit free-will, either I’ve been reading too much of your posts or you’ve been interacting with too many of us near-normals.... Your prose seems a bit more refined and easier for even a normie to understand with minimal internal repeating and restructuring. Don’t take this as an insult or anything, I just don’t want you to lose your touch. Your style was weird but damnit it was unique, special and an interesting read.
Your prose seems a bit more refined and easier for even a normie to understand with minimal internal repeating and restructuring
What if you're describing the consequences of your own growth of understanding? If you read that much of me going over the same stuff over and over again; then it becomes harder to ignore getting inspired; and the more one adapts to perceived inspiration; the more one grows comprehended information.
Meanwhile I get more and more proficient in stripping languages of all the suggested rhetoric and inversion; which allows me to de-masquerade ignorance; which when responding to me has few tools left to hide behind.
you’ve been interacting with too many of us near-normals
Within ALL each ONE represents the balance of inspiration for self sustenance or temptation towards ignorance for choice of reaction. I can get the same inspiration out of milking goats; while watching an infant sleeping next to me. It's not what others represent; but what I choose to shape out of it.
Don’t take this as an insult or anything
It's continuous insults and praises that inspired me to teach/learn myself about placement of evaluation (choice) within value (balance). Just a couple response back someone told me I write a language that nobody understands; and you are with the opposite suggestion. Well; it turns out I'm balancing within value; while the suggested value by others represents a temptation for me to ignore my placement. I resist that. The suggested wants of individual others do not represent collective need.
I just don’t want you to lose your touch.
Want vs not want (reason); while ignoring need. What if input defines output? Also; Stan Bush told me that "It's in the blood, it's in the will" and that "You got the power; you got the motion; you got the touch".
Your style was weird but damnit it was unique, special and an interesting read.
A rhetorical obituary. No rest within movement tho...
Shit free-will, either I’ve been reading too much of your posts or you’ve been interacting with too many of us near-normals.... Your prose seems a bit more refined and easier for even a normie to understand with minimal internal repeating and restructuring. Don’t take this as an insult or anything, I just don’t want you to lose your touch. Your style was weird but damnit it was unique, special and an interesting read.
What if you're describing the consequences of your own growth of understanding? If you read that much of me going over the same stuff over and over again; then it becomes harder to ignore getting inspired; and the more one adapts to perceived inspiration; the more one grows comprehended information.
Meanwhile I get more and more proficient in stripping languages of all the suggested rhetoric and inversion; which allows me to de-masquerade ignorance; which when responding to me has few tools left to hide behind.
Within ALL each ONE represents the balance of inspiration for self sustenance or temptation towards ignorance for choice of reaction. I can get the same inspiration out of milking goats; while watching an infant sleeping next to me. It's not what others represent; but what I choose to shape out of it.
It's continuous insults and praises that inspired me to teach/learn myself about placement of evaluation (choice) within value (balance). Just a couple response back someone told me I write a language that nobody understands; and you are with the opposite suggestion. Well; it turns out I'm balancing within value; while the suggested value by others represents a temptation for me to ignore my placement. I resist that. The suggested wants of individual others do not represent collective need.
Want vs not want (reason); while ignoring need. What if input defines output? Also; Stan Bush told me that "It's in the blood, it's in the will" and that "You got the power; you got the motion; you got the touch".
A rhetorical obituary. No rest within movement tho...