Solf J Kimblee
22 December 2014 @ 03:12 pm
039. [Text]  
One of the things I've always found admirable about humanity is their power to initiate change. Not just within themselves, either; that particular power includes the unique ability to instill change in other people – and for some, the world. It's always been rather appalling to me, that so many people would fail to understand how rare a gift that actually is: the actions of a single person have the potential to affect all of human society and leave their mark on the world, affecting and changing the course of the future itself.

It's a good amount of power that most people choose to do nothing with; it's a bit of a shame, really.

But whether we do anything with that power or not, we're all affected by it in some way; after all, the reason it exists at all is because people as individuals are volatile. We can change the world, and so it follows that the act of being in the world can also change us – whether through the actions of others who do choose to utilize that particular power, or just through the inconsistent nature of our surroundings. It follows the law of Equivalent Exchange rather well, I think.

Normally now is when I would suggest some sort of thought experiment to the network at large, probably morbid or inflammatory in nature, but I did promise someone that I would try not to be pointlessly negative for the sake of the holiday. Instead, my interest is elsewhere today – I want to know how this place has changed you. Positively or negatively, it matters very little to me; I'm just curious about what this place has given you, or perhaps what it's taken away.

Be as literal as you like, and as anonymous as you like; as usual with these sorts of things, your name interests me less than your answer.
 
 
Solf J Kimblee
07 November 2014 @ 04:34 pm
038. [ANON TEXT + IMAGES]  
[Good afternoon, network! It's a surprisingly nice day today; the sun is out, and while it's not warm per se, it's warm enough to be pleasant.

The last time "Seth"'s device had shown up on the device with this particular sort of message, it'd looked about to snow; he's finding the weather far more favorable this time around.

The first image to hit the network is a view of the streets of Ecruteak, as shot out what looks like a window of some sort; there doesn't seem to be anything on the walls of wherever this was shot from, though the curtains are light and filmy-looking as they billow inward with a light breeze, a bit more elegant than the normal hotel fare. Possibly a private residence of some sort. The leaves are in their full fall colors outside; it's a pretty shot, if not particularly interesting.

The next image is panned down a little – you can still see the window, the curtains having fluttered to a bit more of a standstill, and there's still some of the view of the outdoors; what's new is the table beneath the window, covered in black cases and wires and triggers.

Bombs. Plenty of them.]


I'm not the first one to note that this world isn't safe.

[And there's the text, moments later.]

Aqua and Magma tried to save the world by destroying each other. Some of you try to save the world by destroying me.

Will you succeed this time?


[The next shot is a bit more casual than most of this nature, though as usual, it seems to be set up across a table of some sort. It's his stance that's different; "Seth" has one forearm braced against the wood, and he's leaning forward heavily enough for his stance to look idle, almost bored. As usual, his face isn't in the shot, but if you look you can see the usual Team Rocket insignia emblazoned across his chest; his free hand is holding one of those white cards that he uses to communicate sometimes, pinning it between gloved fingers; the words written out in thick, blocky writing, traced over multiple times to obscure any sort of distinctive handwriting.

LET'S HAVE A WAR.


The second shot is almost identical to the first; only the writing on the card has changed.

ECRUTEAK CITY.

ONE WEEK.





[OOC]

[While the IC timing of this is going to be as he said – the attack will be taking place on the 14th of the month – the log itself will go up on the 10th and will be forward-dated, to circumvent possible continuity issues.

More details about how we're going to run this thing will be forthcoming!]
 
 
Solf J Kimblee
20 October 2014 @ 03:32 pm
037. [Text]  
I come seeking discussion again today, which to most of you should probably be nothing new; if anything, I ought to apologize for it, but I suspect that will ring about as true as my usual apologies for the subject matter. For what it's worth, the subject is better than it usually is; take that as you will.

I'd like to discuss dreams today; I'm sure those that were here about a year ago know exactly why, but in the end that is neither here nor there, and you don't have to have experienced it to discuss this with me.

I'm sure we're all no strangers to very vivid dreams...? The sort that immerse you so entirely that they almost seem real...surely there are a few qualities here and there that mark them as dreams, but they're disregarded in favor of whatever is actually happening right in front of you. Dreams like that can hardly be said to be different from reality, can they? They invoke feelings within you; they encourage you to continue thinking about them long after you've awakened. You could even say that dreams like that have given you experiences that you might never have had, were you awake – you've gone on adventures and met people and done things that affected you, all while physically being asleep.

Say that there was a way to live like that forever.

Suppose that there's a machine that will put you under, rendering you solidly asleep and allowing you to experience whatever you want. The machine can simulate any pleasurable experience that you choose, instilling all the thoughts and feelings that would come with actually going out and doing those things for yourself in your waking life. There would be no pain or suffering; it would be an experience in pure bliss for as long as you were plugged into the machine.

Again, you could stay that way forever, if you so chose, living out the rest of your life in dreams, and it would be a pleasant experience that's custom-tailored to you. The only tradeoff is that you would be unconscious the entire time; the experience would be entirely in your mind, rather than anything you actually did.

Would you choose to go under and live the rest of your life happy but effectively comatose, or would you prefer to experience life for yourself, entirely awake, with all the imperfections and strife that may come with it?

You can answer me anonymously if you wish, because as usual, your identity doesn't interest me as much as your response does; if you really want to impress me, you'll tell me why you would answer as you did.
 
 
Solf J Kimblee
09 July 2014 @ 07:37 pm
035. [ANON TEXT]  
[Well, good evening, network - it seems Seth's device is active again, though at the very least he's not inviting everyone to war like he's throwing the world's most unasked-for party this time around.]

You know, one of the things I've always found most fascinating about human morality is the idea that we're higher beings due to our natural inclination to put others before ourselves. It's generally accepted in society that we should be willing to sacrifice ourselves before harming another; I've always found adhering to that sort of notion to both vaguely admirable and sickeningly saccharine. If you must kill one to save another, that's still a life that's lost; why shouldn't the reward go to the one who's willing to fight for it, rather than the one who did nothing to earn it but sit there in pious devotion to doing nothing wrong?

We claim superiority for suppressing our instincts to survive; if anything, I think that would put us lower than dogs, not above them. All this intelligence and no will to live; it's pitiful.

But then, I suppose my lack of understanding of these things is why I can't be considered one of you.

For the time being, however, say I were to humor you in discussion for a while. Do you think your will to fight to ensure your survival actually needs to be tested? Since I suspect the answer will overwhelmingly be "No," I have another pre-emptive question for the heroic types.

Is there anything outside of arrogance and so-called moral superiority that makes you say so?


[...O...kay that's really not any better but apparently, it's just that kind of night.

You know, full of misanthropy.

Because some nights are like that.]
 
 
Solf J Kimblee
13 May 2014 @ 09:23 am
033. [Text]  
The standard example of existential anguish is said to be standing on the edge of a cliff or other high place; there inevitably comes a moment in most self-aware individuals where they experience the realization that not only do they fear falling to their death, but there's nothing stopping them from throwing themselves off. I've always found it strange that a moment of experiencing true freedom like that would be considered distressing rather than a relief; knowing that there's nothing holding me back - that I am in full control of my own choices, whether it's to stand perfectly still or throw myself off - and there is nothing pre-written into whatever it is that I am that will dictate what I do either way is something I've always found calming.

It begs the question, however - do we choose our fears, and more importantly, do we choose how we respond to them?

If nothing is predetermined and everything about our lives comes down to choice, it makes sense to me that our fears also have to come down to choice, whether consciously or not. The part I'm not entirely sure of is the response.

For example, if one is attacked by some sort of animal, it makes sense that one would fear that animal. However, the response to animal attacks tend to vary - some will try to minimize their contact with that sort of animal as much as they can, while others will immerse themselves in it and attempt to desensitize themselves. Is there a particular thing that predetermines what choice a person is going to make?

I'm curious about your thoughts on it; you don't have to detail what fears you have and how you handle them, though if you would like to that might be helpful. I'm more interested in whether you think this sort of thing comes down to ingrained personality - something more inherent, I suppose - or personal choice, and whether such a thing can be changed.

Answer me anonymously if you wish; as always, your response is of more interest to me than your identity, and quite frankly I'm not in the mood to judge either way.

(As for the existential anguish, I've found over the years that I get the greatest satisfaction from neither the thought of staying put, nor the thought of throwing myself off - I've always enjoyed the notion that if I stand on the edge long enough, perhaps someone will act on their compulsion to put their hands against my back and shove.)
 
 
Solf J Kimblee
08 April 2014 @ 08:35 pm
032. [Text]  
[...and it seems it's time for another round of Horribly Inappropriate Questions, with your host: This Asshole.]

You know, a while ago I posited to the network that this world is based around battle culture – admittedly a softer, watered-down version of it, but battle culture nonetheless. One's power is assumed based on the strength of their personal army; one's social status is determined by how many gym leaders they've managed to defeat, or how easily they can crush those who stand in the way of what they want. It's interesting to me that such a society should likewise be based around a message of love, peace and tolerance; one would think that for the sheer amount of destruction that everyone's carrying around within arm's distance, this place would have dissolved into anarchy long ago.

Equally interesting is the stance on war that most seem to have taken here; even the locals seem opposed to it, overall. I have to wonder why – what it is about this place in particular that makes the idea of war and conflict so abhorrent to all within it.

Ah, but it's entirely likely that it's a matter of points of view, isn't it? I'm from a militaristic society, personally, so war and conflict seem to be the natural state of things – are most nations generally pacifistic like this? Or is this abnormal even by your standards as one of the..."foreigners", I believe they like to call us?

I'm interested in answers, though I can take or leave identities; answer anonymously if you wish, but even if you don't, you know what they say about glass houses.


[...You know, there are some things that never change. Yes, Kimblee, everyone here probably does get mad about genocide; either way, happy birthday, you crazy son of a bitch. If this is how you're going to spend this evening, you are more than welcome to do so.]