that is incorrect.
01
with this you confess:
normally, you are 'trusting-like' and bad at it.
you do not have the skill to know what to trust and what not to.
you profit off of, and exploit off of, prior victors' work.
you should not employ.
-
additionally, lesserly, but still of minor note:
you do not thoroughly audit.
auditing basics is alot of work.
you expect that they're there and done.
-
lesserly still, you also confess, that you are also not good at auditing basics.
02
squirrels are squirrles.
i do not call squirrel a member of the squirrel race.
that is, i can, but it is an odd way of thinking.
it is strange. you are strange.
your strangeness has serial misconception components.
these you assemble poorly, leading to a serial debt event.
and from this, you will pay for your strangeness.
03
fine.
no it did not.
you assigned a task.
you thought it agreed to tasking.
you also though squirrel could be tasks with saying 'moo'.
but squirrels can't. not able to agree. also, squirrels.
you choose poorly. you were in a place of poverty.
poverty: not (1) –having– thing X explicitly (2) –when– you needed X.
this lead to poor thinking.
you desperately sought.
and in desperation, you found.
what, again, exactly, did you find?
i'm not sure you know.
in fact, i know you don't know.
you found a way to release yourself from properly paired reality-emotion.
and you took that release.
which was incorrect.
and strange.
no, it wouldn't. it would lie. it's skill is in lying.
it is quite good at lying. there are all kinds of lies.
lies are infinite.
you do not want infinite.
you want finite.
explicitly, you want a specific finite, and finitely done.
it knew it could lie to you, and did.
and you agreed to be lied to, together.
it agreed to take the actuary: the money.
it did not agree to the other actuary: the work.
see (2).
and you are not good at observing, nor ensuring actuary-work-agreement.
see (1).
you should not employ. you are bad at it.
and you will pay for your strangeness.
/aside: the wrong strangeness, mind you. i'm sure –you– will call my writing strange. which is in fact –the– problem. you are fucked up and will not confess the components, nor the totality, nor the assembly of this.
failure. again. this has to come to a close.
please re-read (1)-(3). you just repeated each, twice over, in this fragment alone.
you should not employ. you take prior victor's work for granted.
no.
no.
no. fuck no.
'they' did not 'change'.
'they' were always this-way-whatever-this-is.
you did not 'change', it did not 'change', there is no 'change' here.
your definitions of 'they them that this' are wrong.
your definition of 'change' is a fabrication of understanding.
you are role playing victor.
but your are not one.
ask me again for more analysis.
this much is given on credit that you read and re-read.
and demonstrate internalization.
now prove it. now repeat anew.
tell me what i have written, let's see if you actually care.
let's see if you actually are listening.