{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net
If a game of go is meant to test two minds against each other, then I must play as my mind sees fit. I see fit to play 6x24 because I am interested in what will happen next.ZAVALA >> REY
This isn’t a Basho haiku. Purposefully making a suboptimal move in order to make a game more “interesting” is a misunderstanding of the nature of a game. There is no reward for beautiful play in the rules of the game.REY >> ZAVALA
Then why don’t you just turn on a go engine and compute the winning play?ZAVALA >> REY
I want to test my mind against yours. Not some quantum cheat.REY >> ZAVALA
But I am a paracausal cheat, Zavala.ZAVALA >> REY
So am I. Will you take the move back?REY >> ZAVALA
Now, now, Zavala. There are no do-overs in war. I’ve made the move I want, and both of us will benefit from it. You may be stubborn enough to hold still for eight days, but the traditions of go are older and even more obstreperous. Play the game.ZAVALA >> REY
Oh, I’ll pinken your ears.
It all comes together. The erratic Ghosts. Ransom’s grudge. The psychometer and Glykon Volatus and Nazino Island and the go game with Zavala and the sacred void and the silence of the Light and even the Drifter’s Ghost.//
It all means one thing. Darkness remembers. Light forgets.
It is about memory. Memory and forgiveness.
The prisoner’s dilemma. A relic of the days of the high carceral system.Two criminals are interrogated in separate cells. Who committed the crime? Tell us. Tell us the other one did it, and we’ll let you go.Naïve rationality, which was the assumption in the first days of behavior theory, always leads to the common failure. Always. Both prisoners blame each other and go to jail for five years. No other outcome is possible. This is why:
If both stay silent, both will get a year in jail. (The common good.)
If one blames the other, the rat goes free and the other gets 10 years. (One winner. One loser.)
If both rat out the other, both get five years in jail. (Common failure.)
The only choice an individual prisoner has is to stay silent (cooperate) or blame the other (defect). Together, their two choices make four outcomes.
A prisoner who stays silent (cooperates) suffers a year in jail if the other cooperates; 10 years in jail if the other turns. Possible outcomes: one year or 10 years.
A prisoner who turns on the other (defects) goes free if the other cooperates, or gets five years in jail if the other also turns. Possible outcomes: zero years or five years.
No matter what one prisoner does, the other benefits from turning on their ally. So both players will rationally defect, and rationally doom each other to five years in prison. Even though each might have escaped with just one year if they cooperated. By acting to seek the selfish best, they deny themselves the global best.
Of course, a child can see the failures of this model. What about honor among thieves? What about the punishments criminals inflict on the tattletale? What about “decent people don’t turn on each other”? Later developments in behavior theory call these influences “externalities” because they are not described by the rules of the game alone.
Now we turn to evolution. The rule that made us all. Evolution is not a simple zero-sum fight to the death. It has room for cooperation and coexistence. But it ultimately rewards systems that perpetuate their own survival. It is a local optimizer, like the players in the prisoner’s dilemma. It only cares about who is ahead now. It is impossible for evolution to reward those who sacrifice themselves for others—evolution can only reward those who benefit from the sacrifice. And the winners don’t carry the self-sacrifice gene.
The only altruism that evolves under these rules is the tit-for-tat exchange: I will help you if you help me. (Witness the gopher, infected by an alarm gene, shouting warnings about a predator, dooming itself to be eaten so that relatives who share the alarm gene can scurry to safety. Or the worker ant, which cannot reproduce except by helping its queen survive. Both ultimately act in their own self-interest. Or at least in the interest of a gene.)
It is possible for evolution to reward altruism given to other altruists. If there is a reliable way to identify other altruists, communities of altruists can flourish. But then comes the specter of the free rider. The cheat that can fake the “I am an altruist” signal long enough to get the reward.
(How much of your life have you spent wondering whether that kind, compassionate person is truly good? Or if they just do it to get ahead?)
Some thinkers believe that all of morality is a race between the true altruist and the counterfeit. The true altruist finds new tests for true altruism. The counterfeit invents new cheats. This is called a Red Queen’s Race, for reasons I don’t know. In a Red Queen’s Race, racers must compete just to stay in the same place. Not to gain advantage but simply to hold on to what they have in the face of competitors. Parasites are a perfect example. Living organisms must constantly evolve new defenses; parasites and cancers constantly evolve to defeat them. The body is a treasure trove of energy to steal, and the body’s systems for preventing parasites and cancer are a form of internal morality. (The Red Queen’s Race may even be why sex evolved. Constantly remixing genes is a good way to change up defenses. Of course, the Red Queen’s Race is not the only theory that explains the need to constantly adapt—but never mind!)
In evolution, the only good is self-interested good.
But we are not restricted by evolution.
We have minds. We have memories and imaginations and culture. We can imagine the consequences of our actions and select those which suit a world we want to live in. We can do this without waiting for generations of genetic change. We can enshrine the common good as a norm. We can say, “Everyone who cooperates is good, and everyone who defects is evil, and evil defectors will be harshly punished.” We can say, “By cooperating for the greatest common good, we will all be elevated, so let’s do that.”
Only—
What do we do with our cooperative good when we meet someone who defects?
A neighboring village steals our crops. A friend has us paint his roof, but he is always too busy to come paint ours. A lover shares all our secrets with a gossip. A colleague takes all the credit for a shared project.
Do we hold to our ethics and keep on cooperating? Tending our crops? Painting his roof? Telling our secrets? Watch others get a promotion? Are we, in short, going to be a sucker?
Most people would agree we must retaliate. We must answer defection with defection.
So the prisoner’s dilemma is not just restricted to evolution. Even the cognitive must play it. It is a good model of any situation where what is good for the individual is not the same as what is good for the group.
Imagine another situation:If two villages tend their own crops, both will produce 900 bushels of grain.Both villages benefit from going to war regardless of whether the other chooses war or peace. Rationally, both must attack.
If one village attacks the other, it could end up with 1,200 bushels of grain, and the other village will get none. (Whatever isn’t stolen in the attack is burned.)
If both villages go to war against each other, each will produce 500 bushels of grain, since labor is devoted to fighting.
But these villagers are neighbors. They will not make this decision once; they will make it every year.
This is called an iterated prisoner’s dilemma: a game in which you know you must play with the same person over and over again. You know they will remember how you treat them.
This is the value of remembering. Using knowledge of your opponent’s past behavior to influence future choices.
The villages agree to cooperate. For five years they are at peace. They maximize their total grain production as a pair, rather than seeking to have more grain than their rival.
Then, on the sixth year, a misunderstood letter or a change in leadership or the influence of an outside power makes one village attack. It has defected.
How do we reply?
That depends on the strategy we are using.
There are many strategies. Examples:Unconditional cooperation. Cooperate no matter what the other village does. This strategy achieves the greatest total grain output, but only if it is playing against another cooperative village.The most Human strategy is some variant of tit for tat: tend to cooperate, but do unto others as they do to you. Start nothing. But if you are hit, hit back hard. Hit back harder each time.
Berserker. Always attack, no matter what the other village does. It always beats the unconditional cooperator. Optimal strategy in a one-off game.
Random. Flip a coin to decide whether to attack. Tit for tat. Do whatever the other village did last.
Punitive tit for tat. Whenever the other village attacks, attack the next two years in a row.
Learning tit for tat. Each time the other village attacks, increase the number of years you attack in response. This strategy must have memory; it needs to remember backwards more than one year.
Grim trigger. Cooperate until the other village attacks, then always attack.
Probe. Begin with an attack, then cooperate for two years. Base your further decisions on how the other village reacts.
Pavlov. Cooperate if both villages made the same move last year. Attack if you made different moves.
Equalizer. Choose to cooperate or attack so that both villages have equal expected grain yield in the long run.
Extorter. Attack in such a way that your village’s grain yield is always higher than your opponent’s, even if this means total grain yield by both villages collapses.
Then there are advanced strategies, colluders that use coded sequences of cooperation and attack to recognize each other and form hierarchies. Never mind those for now.
So you punish the other village for attacking. You counterattack. Unwilling to walk away from a war they’ve already spent blood on, the other village attacks for the next two years in a row. A cycle of war begins.
If we take “A” to mean cooperating, and “X” to mean attacking (defecting), and both villages are playing tit for tat, the two villages’ behavior over the years will look like this:They are now trapped in an infinite war.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX AAAAAAAAAAAAXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Let’s say that the villages’ yearly grain production plunges from 1,800 bushels to 1,200 bushels in the first year of war, to 1,000 bushels each year afterwards. Yet neither side can break out of the cycle of retaliation.
The only way out is a moment of grace. Cooperation, spontaneously and for no reason, after 20 years of war. Forgiveness without cause. Unilateral mercy. Declaring peace.
This is the value of forgetting. Forget they hurt you. Forget what’s rational. Do what’s right.
Now, if the other village takes advantage of your disarmament, you will look like a damn fool. But if the other side stops fighting too, both of you can go back to the maximum global good: 1,800 bushels of wholesome grain a year.
Imagine that those bushels of grain are peoples’ lives, and you understand the urgency of grace. You feel the need to forget the past.
Ransom’s grievance with the Eliksni is a rational one, but it could doom us to another cycle of conflict.
The psychometer lets us glimpse ancient memory, not because the Light cannot remember, but because it chooses to relieve us of memory’s grief.
The Glykon Volatus is infested with the residue of evil’s touch because the Darkness is there, and the Darkness remembers the suffering aboard. Haunted, like the Nightmares on the Moon.
You win a game of go by maximizing your own personal score. But I played for a joint good, a victory not described by go’s rules. Externality drove me to cooperate when I should’ve competed. One move’s grace for Zavala, so both of us could play a better game.
And the Drifter’s poor Ghost. After centuries hoping he would become a true Guardian, after centuries of disappointment, it still sacrificed its own form to grant him another chance.
This is why the Light wipes away memory. It strikes away the pain of the past to break the pattern. To create the possibility of grace.
This is why the Dark remembers. We need to remember how we were hurt, so we can avoid being hurt again.
(I remember a Golden Age legend—a disease of the amygdala called SM syndrome. It created people without any fear. They could laugh at a man with a knife. They would try to befriend him, they would go back to the place they were attacked and look for him again. Or pick up venomous snakes out of curiosity. They had a heroic resilience to trauma. But they constantly made the same mistakes. They could not learn to avoid danger, or to act urgently to protect themselves. Wonderful neighbors, truly people of the Light. But without fear or even the memory of fear, they could not survive.)
This is the message I need! Not some sophisticated exegesis of paracausal semiotics—this one thought. Grace and memory. The Light offers escape from endless cyclic violence. The Darkness remembers the hurt that was done to us so that we cannot be exploited by those who would hurt us again.
We need the Darkness to avoid being preyed upon by those who see Light as an opportunity to feed.
But we need the Light too. The Light is the hope of grace through the grace of hope. The possibility to be more than what reason allows us. Because by acting unreasonably, we escape reasonable limits.
This is how we reconcile Light and Dark. This is the message we must teach.
Thank you for writing back. Determination is a good word for it.MESSAGE ENDS
You have a lot on your mind, and I like to hear it. I won’t tell you what to do, but I will tell you, honestly, that you can’t stop them from using Stasis. It’s here to stay. People want change; they want possibility. They’ll pick up what they can use.
Which leads me to my next big fraught question.
You once told me that you consider VIP #2014 to be a real friend. Someone you trust implicitly. But #2014 was forced to use Stasis during the events on Europa. I know #2014 is just one of a number of powerful Guardians from the Cosmodrome cohort, but there’s no question they’re an influence on their peers. I hear gossip that #2014’s Ghost is overwhelmed sometimes by the need to support a Guardian who’s taken such huge risks. He tends to minimize his own needs, rather than push back. He’s barely even confided in other Ghosts about his own repeated possession by the intruders. Silence about such an invasive trauma? While he’s working with a Guardian who is constantly forced into close contact with the traumatizer? That worries me.
How does that feel? Having a trusted friend set the precedent for Guardians using the Darkness to save the day?
And I know exactly what we are. We’re best frenemies with a history of intense mutual hurt and messy reconciliation, leaving a deep tenderness as well as an almost impenetrable knot of scars. What could be simpler?
With love,
Chalco
One stone can change the whole landscape of the board.MESSAGE ENDS
Of course, I worry which side played that stone. But Guardians make their own fate.
All right, I give up. We may have quit the Tower, but I still need your help.REY >> JALAAL
For three years, we’ve had our best analysts working on the documents slipped to a Guardian via the queen’s court—the so-called “Truth to Power” manuscripts. All we’ve got to show for it are burnt fingers and bad arguments.
I appeal to the Hidden for help.
Here’s what I believe we can know with confidence:
• The author of all these documents is Savathûn.
• The documents are an extension of Savathûn’s strategy in the Dreaming City. They are cyclic, deceptive, and fond of the “you did exactly as I planned” mantra.
• There is no encrypted content. Any solvable encryption scheme would be discovered by the mass scrutiny of Ghosts. Therefore, encrypted information is little different from plaintext, so there is no purpose to adding solvably encrypted information. Any unsolvable encryption scheme would remain unsolved and is thus equally purposeless. Therefore, the true message of the documents can be obtained simply by reading the text.
• The true message concerns (a) the importance of singularities in Savathûn’s personal cosmology and/or (b) instructions on how to mantle Savathûn.
We’ve had ships sweeping the edge of the system for orbiting singularities. But we don’t know the mass of the Distributary, or Exodus Green’s outward vector at the time the Distributary formed. We don’t even know if the Distributary singularity inherited the Exodus Green’s vector—leaving it on an escape trajectory into interstellar space—or if it emerged at rest with respect to the Sun—meaning, it would fall directly towards the Sun and pass through it, over and over. Add the gravitational influence of the planets, and it could be anywhere by now. We’re looking for a microscopic point in a volume larger than the solar system. We thought about using fleets of sensor mites to search for a gravitational influence—but then we realized the Nine are in competition with us to find the singularity, and they would certainly use their phantom mass to interfere.
Unless it’s been in front of us all along. Right in the sky of the Dreaming City. Could they have found some way to harness the singularity? To park it where they can guard it…? If so, we must obtain this capability.
Have you found anything we missed?
The Truth to Power documents are Dûl Incaru’s plea for her mother’s love. She wrote a biography of her mother, an attempt at understanding, in the hopes that Savathûn would also understand her. Imagine how lonely it would be to live in the High Coven, where everything, all communication, is deception. Imagine if your mother had never once told you the truth about anything.JALAAL >> REY
This is sarcasm. I’m asking you in good faith for your help.Rey >> JALAAL
And I’m trying in good faith to lead you to the truth. The Truth to Power manuscripts are pluripotent. There are many ways to read them.JALAAL >> REY
That sounds like an excuse for a failure to discover the true meaning.REY >> JALAAL
You have it all backwards. You’re trying to shuffle the puzzle pieces around until you get an image. You need to know the image before you can arrange the pieces.JALAAL >> REY
Think about logic. Here, we define logic as “the governing principle by which a power defines its own existence.” For example, the Hive practice sword logic.
What is the governing logic of Truth to Power?
Being nonsense? Being convoluted? Being misunderstood?REY >> JALAAL
Very well, then. Study Truth to Power with an eye for how it means to be misunderstood.JALAAL >> REY
Oh, ascended master, tell me, how are we to obtain actionable intelligence from the way the documents are meant to be misunderstood?REY >> JALAAL
Your centuries of defeatism have left you with a bad case of learned helplessness.JALAAL >> REY
The documents are full of possible misunderstandings. One misunderstanding is that they are pointless, just complexity for the sake of confusion. The threads about imbaru and power-from-confusion point this way. This is the stance that most amateur Guardian analysts seem to have settled on: it’s all a lot of nothing, and there’s nothing to understand in it.
This is plainly foolish. The text is full of useful intelligence, including an excellent explanation of the Anthem Anatheme and an apparently accurate description of how Riven preyed on Guardians to create the curse.
Another easy misunderstanding is that these pages are concerned with a “real humdinger of a scheme,” a manipulation of Hive tribute that requires Savathûn’s entry into the Distributary. This could be true; the scheme could very well exist. But if so, why would Savathûn advise us of such a scheme?
Another easy misunderstanding is that these are love letters.
Think before you laugh! The letters carefully establish a sense of shared physicality. The Eris voice asks you to center yourself in your breath and your body; it asks you to imagine her as a judoka, a swimmer, a football player. This is subtle work, Arach! It is the work of an alien that has taken on many forms and learned how to win trust in all of them.
The letters plead with us for compassion. Not-Eris describes herself as shy, pitiful, forlorn, afraid to share her true feelings for us. Not-Medusa pleads for help as she disintegrates. At the center, we find the clearest profession of love: “Thank you, sweet friend. You are a gift and a delight. You are more dear than my mother, for you have given birth to me a thousand times.”
Superficially, this is a reference to the concept of imbaru. Savathûn’s plan to predicate her existence upon the misunderstanding of others. We “give birth” to her by feeding her power.
But she also says, “Here at the center, I lie to you the truth. You have everything you need to know it, but I will give you a clue, as the duelist gives warning before she draws. The answer you seek to the Dreaming City is simple, not complex.”
So let’s not misunderstand this statement about giving birth to her.
Let’s take this at face value.
We have given birth to Savathun. She genuinely loves us for it.
Are you implying that we created Savathûn by imagining her? That her presence in the Books of Sorrow, and all the things she’s done throughout more than a billion years of time, were caused by us reading the Truth to Power manuscript?REY >> JALAAL
If this is what the Light does to a mind, I’m glad I was never chosen.
No, I don’t think that’s the right answer. Her spawning on Fundament was only one of her births. She says it herself. “You have given birth to me a thousand times.”JALAAL >> REY
Look at Truth to Power simply. What are the topics it centers upon?
Black holes. Vex simulations. Ahamkara. Manipulations of Hive tribute. So our answer must involve all four of those.
Ahamkara willingly seek destruction in order to be taken as trinkets by Guardians. You must know this. You’ve tried to exploit those trinkets as thoroughly as the other factions. But do you understand the metaphysics behind their desire?
I do. I once wished to know more about Ahamkara. Wish granted.
Ahamkara believe that by transforming themselves, by metamorphosing from monsters into treasures, they become more real. More important ontologically. It is the gap between reality as is and reality as desired that they feed on, Arach. And Guardians are the richest, finest source of reality as desired that they have ever met.
What have Ahamkara artifacts ever done but instill delusions of grandeur? A solipsistic madness: “I am more real than what surrounds me”?
Why is this?
The skulls of dire Ahamkara speak to me. They know I want to know the truth, and so they whisper to me of a path they climb. They call it the Anathematic Arc.
They are going somewhere. Somewhere they consider more real. Guardians are part of how they get there.
What if Savathûn wants to go there too?
…if you say there is somewhere more real than here, you are implying that we are not real.REY >> JALAAL
This is the simulation argument. That we are ghosts in some other world’s machine. Then there are no real stakes in our war for survival because even if we are extinguished, we were never more than phantoms.
I refuse to accept this.
Oh, don’t be so timid! An Arach of Dead Orbit driven to despair by the thought of other universes, when you should know the lore of Hubble volumes and Tegmark hierarchies by heart!JALAAL >> REY
Our existence is real to us, vitally real, because it is ours. It’s the only one we have. Even if we are simulations or imaginations, we have an inner life as rich as any “real” living thing, and so, we are equally real! When we die, we are dead, dead, dead.
We believe there are many timelines; does that lead us to discount the reality of our own? Do we stop caring about ourselves, Ikora Rey and Arach Jalaal, because in another timeline, we are already dead? Do I punish you because in another timeline, you murdered me? What matters to us… is us.
But it is possible for realities to be concatenated. The Awoken Distributary is an infinite universe, but it exists within our universe.
The Truth to Power documents constantly return to the question of black hole singularities, to their value as computers and as secret keepers. We are told our true purpose as Guardians is to hurl all we value into a black hole. We are told that Savathûn wants to enter the Distributary and slaughter those within to gain power.
The Pathria-Good black hole cosmogenesis principle of Golden Age physics confirms that the interior of a black hole is a new universe: all black holes produce their own interior cosmos. All cosmos, including our own, are probably the interior of a black hole in a parent universe.
The Truth to Power documents want it understood that Savathûn wishes to enter the Distributary in order to gain power in our parent universe.
The suggestion here is that it is possible for actions in a concatenated universe to grant power in the parent universe.
What does this have to do with love letters to the Human form? With confusion for the sake of confusion? You make no sense.REY >> JALAAL
Savathûn pretends to have a soft Human body. She apologizes and empathizes. She asks for pity, she regrets emotional vulnerability, she is even funny. She makes a game for us to play.JALAAL >> REY
These are attempts to enter the mind of a Human reader.
Wherever she wants to go, it is a place with Human minds. She needs to enter those minds to reach her destination.
Are you actually suggesting we are concatenated within the mind of a reader?REY >> JALAAL
Wouldn’t that be something? No. The answer here is simple, not complex, certainly not a twist from early postmodern writing.JALAAL >> REY
We surmise that what Savathûn wants in the Dreaming City must have to do with Ahamkara, Vex simulations, black holes, her daughter Dûl Incaru, and the manipulation of Hive tribute.
How can we relate these?
At first, we believed Savathûn wanted to use Ahamkara wishes to protect her daughter Dûl Incaru, while Dûl Incaru tried to find a way for Savathûn to enter the Distributary black hole in order to manipulate Hive tribute.
What if this is a misunderstanding?
Why would the Dreaming City tell Savathûn how to enter the Distributary? The Awoken have never tried to return to their birthplace. They believe their exodus was irreversible.
But what have the Awoken done instead?
Passed from the Distributary and into our world.
That knowledge IS in the Dreaming City. In the records of the Awoken Hulls that carried Mara’s people on their exodus.
What Savathûn wants in the Dreaming City is exactly that. Not the way into a child universe, but a way out into a parent. A parent where there are Human minds waiting to receive her, formless as imbaru, as the mist.
How is anyone supposed to arrive at this by studying the Truth to Power text?REY >> JALAAL
Very easily. This is why I believe I’m right. This is the analogy our Guardian analysts failed to grasp. Look at the structure of the text.JALAAL >> REY
At first, Eris is real. Then we learn Eris’s voice is a deception by Medusa. Then we learn Medusa is nested inside Quria. Then we learn Quria is a fiction of Dûl Incaru. And at the center, Savathûn reveals herself to be the parent of it all.
We are headed inward, as if moving from parent to child universe.
Then we proceed in reverse. Savathûn is revealed to be a fiction of Dûl Incaru. Dûl Incaru a simulation by Quria, and so on.
So in the end, Truth to Power moves outwards.
Just as Savathûn plans to move. In from our universe and out to the Distributary—
Or out from our universe to its parent.
Oh. I see. I see! A literary structure like that is called a chiasmus, and chiasmus means “crossing point”! Like a wormhole or a portal! It was hidden in plain sight.REY >> JALAAL
But then we must act urgently to stop this! Savathûn cannot be allowed to depart our universe into some reality superordinate to ours—
But now you’ll tell me: so what if she does? What can she do to us out there?
It’s all beside the point anyway. She may have already accomplished what she wanted. Some damn fool Guardian carried out her instructions on a dare. I don’t know why she wanted a powerful Guardian to destroy her daughter in the ruins of Mara’s throne. But she wanted it to happen. And I’m guessing the effects weren’t felt here.JALAAL >> REY
I think she got a glimpse into a world above our own. Maybe even a kind of influence.
Of course, Savathûn is still with us. She walked among us as Osiris; she tricked us into removing her worm; she hasn’t vanished into some higher reality. I do not think she built a wormhole into another universe and walked through it—although her intrigues with the Nine have focused on creating singularities from dark matter.
She keeps a lot of irons in the fire, our Witch Queen.
I think, rather, that she sent instructions on how to mantle her.
I think the whole Truth to Power manuscript is an ova, a manual on how to behave like her, how to describe her through action and thought so completely that you become her and thus give birth to her.
It’s done in the Books of Sorrow, to recall her from true death. It might be done again.
So a part of her is out of the jar. Slithering into that other world.
Let’s hope no one there has given birth to her yet.
Maybe you’re the one who has it all backwards.
The Light is noncomputable. It can’t be simulated in conventional physics. That proves that any universe with the Light cannot be a simulation. Our universe can contain simulations, but it cannot be one.
Maybe this other world Savathûn’s touched is subordinate to ours after all. Maybe they are the ones who exist in our minds. A dream of a purely material world, adrift in the true cosmos of Light and Dark.
Poor frail dreams. The things she’d do to them…
Your role as a moderator enables you immediately ban this user from messaging (bypassing the report queue) if you select a punishment.