This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Dr. Greg Mason
Pages: [1]
1
« on: July 28, 2011, 06:15:32 PM »
Ahhh, the benefits of having former TnB members here.
Lovely thread, nice work.
thanks.
2
« on: July 27, 2011, 05:47:10 PM »
The Doctrine of Totalitarian Transhumanism A Philosophical World View for the Combine Civil Authority By Dr. Greg Mason Contents1. Humanity- An Introduction
2. The Failure of the Past3. The Moral of Homogeneity
4. The Moral of Formality
5. The Moral of Loyalty
6. The Moral of Imperialism
7. The Moral of Exceptionalism
8. The Great Lie
9. Humanity’s Future1. Humanity- An Introduction Homo Sapiens- the name given to the human species. This is Latin for "Wise Man." The name suggests that the most important and most unique facility of humanity is intelligence. Humanity’s memory, conditional reasoning, and logical processing set them apart from the rest of the beasts of the wild. Humanity’s intelligence made it adaptable and raised the species to new heights of animal environmental interactionism.
Human intelligence was built on social and emotional foundations. Natural selection favored this ability because it enhanced the survival of individuals, and as a result led to a surplus in reproduction. Humans interacted complexly even in the most primitive of habitats. They formed a strong familial structure, and from that point onward formed even more complex political structures. These structures were at first clan-based and tribal, then theocratic, monarchial and feudalistic, then finally authoritarian, democratic and socialistic.
Each rise in the complexity of political structures would not be possible without the faculty of intelligence. Intelligence gave humanity language, a more complex version of communication in comparison to the grunts, expressions, and gestures of their evolutionary predecessors. Intelligence is the essence of humanity.
Humans are bipedal animals with larger brains, nothing more. Their physique, though quite versatile, is not extraordinary. Humanity’s emotions were partially the basis for the complexity of his intelligence, though intelligence is what made them more significant. Humanity, with its intelligence, can train and condition its own emotionality, mentality, and physique.
Intelligence, though, is not without its flaws. It has created vast sociological problems for humanity in the form of conflicting opinions, unequal distribution of intellectual potential, and overconfidence in logical imperatives. Because of this, humanity, as it is currently, cannot reach new levels of potential. Its primary ability and its main tool have discrete and assessable limits.
Luckily, humanity is intelligent enough to realize this itself. Though even in realizing this fact, humanity cannot overcome its own genetic presets. They are in every cell of every body of every man, woman and child. These sequences of DNA have their individual differences, but overall are extremely similar.
Humanity can potentially modify itself as much as the environment modifies it. Humanity has developed the technology to do so. All it would take is some direct genetic manipulation, eugenic practices, and political circumstances. Humanity for most of its existence has not had all three at once in any society.
That is, until now: humanity is overseen by a highly developed and highly experienced alien species. This species, in its imperialistic authoritarian practices, has spread unity, peace, and harmony throughout the multiverse. They have modified species to unite and progress in the name of one purpose- continual expansion of an empire and giving order to the galaxies. Their ability to biologically manipulate species far surpasses humanity’s own.
Because of these alien beings that combine and harvest species, humanity should take this opportunity to transcend itself. Humanity now can overcome the limits and problems of intelligence and enhance it in some ways, all without sacrificing it completely. Humanity can finally grapple with its beasts and burdens of impotent attributes.
The new humanity will have, as its main tool, a practical form of intelligence- order. Order provides stability and is the goal of universality. Order utilizes the ability to learn, memorize, and categorize in non-abstract and more direct ways. The new humanity will be called homo ordo, for man of order. This transhuman force will reject the former instinctual and emotional complexities that held the old humanity back. It will be ideologically unified. Transhumanity will only include those with the traits most adapted for its purpose and mindset.
The above expressed what humanity was and included a concise explanation about what humanity will be. But this doctrine is primarily about the future human. The concept requires more explanation and validation. Its necessity and inevitably is evident throughout all of human history.
2. The Failure of the Past For humanity, the past is a series of short-term victories and defeats. The past is a series of political failures coupled with scientific, technological, and humanistic triumphs. Each political failure acted as a social barrier to the greater effects of these progresses. Every triumph was constrained in controversy and ideological difference, debate and war.
The failures of the past are numerous, and individually they are too many to count. However, it is possible to identify general culprits and overarching themes. The failures are seen in over-individualization, cognitive dissonance, and over-politicization. The failures are given such a name because they hold humanity back from the transhumanistic goal it aspires to now.
These faults kept us isolated from the rest of the universe. We were confined to fight over small patches of land on a largely insignificant planet. We did not realize that there was competition and conflict on a mulitversal scale.
Humanity, in its late pre-Combine history, would open the gates to a world it was not prepared for. Teleportation technology was our portal to the universe. Within it lay the possibility of joining the multiversal community. But, even with this new technology, we could not stand on our own. We were weak, ignorant, and arrogant. We still viciously fought over petty trifles and were given to irrationality.
Humanity could not, and still cannot, stand on its own because of its faults. That is where the Universal Union (The Combine) comes into play. The Union possesses the proper political circumstances, technology, and eugenic practices to elevate humanity as a species.
But truly, what are these general culprits of human failure? They are in the drawings and buildings of humanity’s past. They are in the textbooks of his education, in the poems and stories of his traditions. They are the social and biological products of man.Fault 1- Social Grouping Disconnectionism As soon as humans’ speciation occurred on the east of the African continent, they began to split apart. They put geographical barriers between their groupings, and these geographic barriers transformed into cultural barriers. In wandering apart in the search of resources for survival, humanity had made unity an unachievable goal.
In place of unity, internal war was venerated. Human social groupings would largely fight over ores, soil, and water. For this process, the social nature of humanity came up with ideological justifications. The idea of humanity uniting to face a universe they did not understand was out of the question. For most of human history, this would remain the same.
Every social grouping that had even a shred of a belief in uniting humanity was disingenuous. Uniting humanity was a term used to justify splitting humanity apart in the form of self-righteous wars that caused more social disconnection. "Uniting humanity" also often excluded certain ethnic, social, and political groups.
Instead of creating social connection, these social groupings created greater social disconnection. Even as humanity overcame the geographical barriers with new forms of transportation, the social groupings differed so much that psychological barriers remained ever-present. Often, in an attempt to overcome such barriers, humanity would create a new group that would only contribute to the creation of more barriers.
A historical example is seen in the crusades of 11th century AD. This medieval war has all the characteristics of human social disconnection including geographical barriers, ideological barriers, war as unity, and ideological justifications for disconnection in the name of unity.
Like with most historical conflicts, the existence of hatred and disconnection were observable before the actual event. The Christian and Muslim worlds of the Middle Ages both held onto an absolute truth, and though their absolute truths were similar, they were oppositional in their minute differences and the different historical circumstances of their development. The end result would be the same as always- a struggle for a symbol of power with the underlying motive of materialistic gain. In this particular event, it was the Holy City of Jerusalem.
As should be logically expected, this struggle over Jerusalem made the place an instigator of war for the rest of human pre-Combine history. The Jewish, Muslim, and Christian religious factions would invest their energies into burning their economic surpluses for the Holy City, a symbol of power.
There are other locations with similar histories. Many times the capital of a country becomes a geographic symbol of power. Or alternatively, the entire country or region itself becomes the symbol of ultimate power, as is the case with China/ “The Middle Kingdomâ€.
The results of such power-struggles are dire; the country itself is never united. There are social groupings within the social groupings. These internal social differences lead to the dilapidation of the state. If the country cannot stand together as a whole, it is easy to conclude that in reality it truly is not together and that its borders are simply delusional lines drawn in the sand.
The impermanent nature of any state is self evident in the cracks which fill with the weeds of diversity. These cracks create social disconnection on the micro-level. The cracks are observable in the way social groups gravitate to a neighborhood and set themselves apart from the others. Once again, a state exists within a state.
Although the current political situation under the Universal Union could be criticized as being no different, that would be missing the point. The psychological nature of humanity has not changed under the Combine yet. Humanity is still engaged in a fight for unity, but through the means of disconnection. But today, the overriding goal is actually achievable. With the help of the Combine, humanity can actually and finally eliminate the group differences that disconnect each other by simply killing them off. The remainder can then be modified to ensure that such disconnection never occurs again.
However, people are disconnected not only by groups, but also by individuals. Individual differences are the main contributor to group differences. These differences are the sources of all human confrontation, both physical and mental.Fault 2- Over-Individualization The individual is an open system. It is in constant interaction with its environment. All humans are inevitably individualized. No human's genetic inheritance or environmental circumstances are ever the same. Instead, they are radically different and detailed on many levels.
Individuality was an adaptable trait for most of human history, or at least it seemed to be. It enabled human groups to delegate different tasks to different types of people. A strong individual could constitute a valuable manual laborer or soldier in combination with some personality attributes. An intelligent man could make a valuable tactician or intellectual in combination with some personality attributes. It all made sense, since all the individuals of the human species had their weaknesses and strengths.
Ultimately, these individual differences would set us apart as much as they would bring us together. The man whose main societal value was his physical strength would envy the intellectual worker for his intelligence and vice versa. This envy and competition was a fact of life and of natural selection.
But this competition for resources in the environment between individuals still did not strengthen humanity’s eusocial evolutionary force. Instead, it made humanity more liable to internal destruction and decay. It threatened humanity’s survival as a species.
Again, individuality was only necessary because of what some individuals lacked, instead of what some individuals had. One person had to make up for the disability of another. No significant portion of the human population could attain a notable, productive level in all human traits of personality, intelligence, and physiology. Instead, an average was accepted, and the average itself was not at all exemplary by any measure.
Individuality and individualism put the differences that cause conflict at the forefront of human thought. Every social scenario of humankind has a strong potential for disagreement, jealousy, or shame. It naturally happens as a result of individuals comparing themselves to each other.
Rather than accepting his individual traits (which are very fluid anyway), the individual seeks to change them or change the perception of himself. But whatever the individual becomes is an inevitable result of genetic-environmental interactionism. The individual cannot overcome these limits. In turn, the individual is often in a state of discomfort or existential crisis. The individual does not know his place in the world and is constantly overwhelmed with information determining it for him and telling him what it is.
The individual is the social unit that creates inequality; the individual is its foundation. All hierarchies arise from individual differences. The individual then is the creator of conflict and group differences. He inflicts damage on himself by merely existing as he is, dissimilar to everyone else around him.
Because of the properties of individuality, all humans on the detailed level are abnormal. The norm then disagrees with itself, and is only superficially normal. Instead, humanity is flooded with diversity, diversity which is not needed to survive and propagate the species.
There is no escape from this problem if humanity is to remain the same. The collective will constantly have to reconcile itself with every individual, and the reconciliation will always be temporary at most.
This is the cyclic state of rise and fall, a rise and fall that many intellectuals and even intellectually average people throughout history took note of and lamented over. Progress was slow and often regression occurred. Humanity would correct one mistake, but in the process make another. In many aspects, with all that humanity has ever built, it has waited for to fall and has secretly always expected it to.
Impermanence is the tension that shallowly lies underneath the skin of society. Anything the human species builds wears away: from its buildings, to its works of art and literature. Everything is decayed or forgotten even as it is built. The impermanence itself is partially founded in the fluid nature of individuality.
Impermanence spreads inconsistency, and inconsistency in turn spreads discomfort, unease, and unrest. The unrest common in all societies, even when all biological needs are sufficiently fulfilled, is a product of the impermanent nature of individuality. Even an abundance of material goods would not solve this problem, because they would be unequally distributed due to individuality. If anything, the extra objects would create the opportunity for more unrest.
Even in states where materials were widely distributed, unrest was all too common. The United States, for example, experienced a rise in the instance of psychological afflictions such as depression and narcissistic personality disorders. This rise in psychological disorders began in the mid-20th century and continued throughout the 21st century. It embodied the problem of individuality because it created too many diverse debilitating disorders to deal with effectively.
The unrest traveled across the world to other countries where products/materials weren’t at all common, causing more unrest for individuals. Wars sprung forth from individual differences and the comparisons between individuals and their resources. The desires of the individuals overwhelmed the individuals themselves. Such processes of transmission become an endless search for a point of equilibrium that never arrives.
Fault 3- Moral Incoherence "He who is by nature not his own but another's man"- Aristotle on slavery Individual humans’ judgment of what is right and wrong determines what humanity does as a whole. Concepts of right and wrong have the power to protect humanity from harm. Right casts the light of good and prosperity on one direction and wrong places a shadow of darkness and evil on the other. But unfortunately, human morality is made to be inconsistent.
It is sad that such a fundamental structure be subject to the will of a harsh and circumstantial mind. In one era, slavery is justifiable but in another it is not. Sexuality is a constant battleground of right and wrong with no perceivable victors beyond what a majority and culture dictate. Lies are denounced as evil, but so-called noble or white lies are acceptable. There is a constant slippery slope within humanity regarding its morality.
The lack of absolute guidance leads to absolute chaos. Every century has its moral outrage, and every succeeding century looks back, proclaiming a rise of evil. The indecisiveness is always evident in every social grouping.
Moral incoherence is another example of a factor that leads to disunity. The lack of moral coherence stops any possibility for the existence of moral universality. In place of moral universalism, we find socially psychopathic cultures and sanctimonious institutions.
The moral relativism of humankind is a type of neurological affliction present in his inability to assess nature objectively. Humankind’s god becomes a character of self-contradictions, rather than of perfection as it is commonly understood. Its assessment of nature is chaotic, and even if realistic it is unproductive.
Moral incoherence justifies murder, weakness, and overindulgence. The thriving of murder flourishes in the disregard for moral laws, which results in impulsive aggression. The thriving of weakness survives on the shoddy value that the weak must be protected by the strong, despite all of the harm the weak do by existing. The thriving of overindulgence is reliant on a disregard for the moral of prudence either as immoral in itself or irrelevant to drives for impulse gratification.
Humanity must realize that morality is an objective tool. Morality must be used practically to ensure the survival and transcendence of the human species. In the past it was not used with good intentions, and the end result was an indecisive world where the only entity that held morality together was the average.
But the average was easily given into circumstance. Humanity would have found itself with slaves again if it did not have machines and factories. In a drought, a pacifistic nation would suddenly wage war on its allies for food.
The impermanence of morality when tolerated leads to ever-increasing opportunities for disunity. Disunity leads to conflict, which in turn leads to self-destruction. The idea of absolutism was destroyed the moment it was conceived, because the moment it was conceived there was controversy about its validity.
Moral incoherence is a force of social disconnection and another possible state of unrest for the individual. It is a creator of inequality in justifying or dismissing equality and allowing itself to vary between individuals. Individuals, in their ignorance, hold to moral incoherence.Fault 4- Philosophical Impracticality In human existence, there has always been tension in an individual’s thought processes. In questioning and assessing the nature of reality, every individual naturally comes to an individual conclusion. But in the long run, these conclusions all contradict each other in some way, though they may have similar themes and taxonomies.
This is the mindset of philosophy- questions without answers because of the contradictions in human thought. Questions without answers exist because of the inability to settle for one standard of proof for the existence of truth. The realm of logic is muddled by these contradictions. People believe things while simultaneously not believing in them.
Philosophers support the physical world in some theories, usually where it is most useful for their values, and then reject it in others. The idealism of Plato holds that universal perfect forms of all things must exist above the physical manifestations of objects. He holds that the physical manifestations are imperfections caused by human perception. What is his basis for this? His basis is the limitation of an individuals’ perspective, the cave analogy.
This may serve well to teach us the important but fairly obvious lesson that we can only see from our own perspective. Overall, it is impractical and does the physical world—that at least the individual perceives himself to be existing in— no justice. It merely provides justifications for innocuous philosophies and ideologies. These type of belief systems will say the world is flat simply because you can’t prove them wrong with anything but the physical world as perceived by your senses.
These philosophical systems barely need to be rejected. Their ultra-skepticism is hypocritical in itself. These systems try to create a system of knowledge based on no assumptions, but they only lead to self contradicting rhetoric. They state that everything must be doubted, yet then in the same instance provide a conception which is somehow true. In reality, this perspective gives us nothing practical. Without being hypocritical, all we can write from its perspective is that we know nothing.
It is this absurdity that also contributes to moral incoherence. In the philosophies of Nietzsche, Kant, and Plato, we find constant moral contradictions. They all argue for absolute truth, yet find themselves either with no morality (as with Nietzsche), or universalism that is picked apart by other thinkers (as with Kant and Plato).
All of these philosophies have had their day. They have contributed to human diversity and inspired human thought greatly. But at the end of the day, their ideas are nothing but pipe dreams. Science/ nature and practicality are the only philosophical realms totalitarian transhumanism concerns itself with. All past philosophies made their contributions, but are reductively manifestations of cognitive dissonance and disunity. Nature is our provider of morality as it inevitably always was; it has no fallacy in existing. Practicality is our guardian from over-abstraction.
Fault 5- The Political Manifestations Since the beginning of human culture, the political world has been a reflection of human faults. Social grouping disconnection, over-individualization, moral incoherence, and philosophical impracticality might as well have been the creed of every government prior to the Union era. They largely were the creed of those governments and their leaders.
In fact, these faults were manipulated brutally by political institutions to maximize their power. Instead of being struggled with, these detriments were glorified; the aggregate result of which is a vicious cycle of social degradation. Instead of overcoming its shortcomings, humanity gave them power; the power humanity’s leaders wanted desperately.
Throughout the course of history, there have been several prominent models of government and political practices; namely democratic models, authoritarian models, and socialistic models. Each model perfectly perpetuated human faults. Their strengths were effortlessly weighed down by their weaknesses.
The political mindset in itself is the love of hatred, disunity, and lack of coherence. This is because the lack of any true unity and coherence allows for the potential to gain more power, particularly for individuals who have none. If there is no real answer to the problems, no absolute political ideology, then those individuals can provide one and empower themselves. Perpetuating the lack of truth, the lack of unity, is ever favorable to the political mind.
These three models need to be examined and stripped of their legitimacy. Each is a monster on its own. Their thought processes are contingent upon a mind that will no longer exist in the future of humankind. Their love of doubt will die with the tranhumanization of the species.
Regarding Democracy Democracy’s allegiance is to the individual. To the individual, democracy gives free speech, equality, and an elected government. But in these supposed values, the faults of humankind gain their own way. In the corridors of human imagination and desire, there is nothing that can be abused more than individual rights.
In free speech is the possibility for extreme amounts of social grouping disconnection. Excessive and often unviable criticisms of government and each other lead to the promotion of lies and hatred, which divide the species. The idea of free speech in itself is a fraud. It is always directed by dominant institutions of media, which direct the populace towards their interests. Immediately, a horrible power struggle is made present.
Free speech is the promotion of the impossible. Free speech is a denial of the fact that an individuals’ thoughts are completely dependent upon the environment in which they live, and therefore conditioned. In turn, free speech helps to promote inefficient thoughts while throwing efficient ones to the wayside. Efficient thoughts are only just as important or unimportant in certain individuals’ minds.
True equality is impossible in a democratic state. Too much individuality is present. The sheer amount of variation and thought immediately leads to social stratification. The support of racist measures was not uncommon in many democratic states, including the United States throughout the 1700s to 1960s. Sexism wasn’t uncommon in democratic states either, despite the democratic value of everyone having a voice. Democracy was unable to purge itself of these social beliefs. Instead, democracies internalized them. Even as progressive reforms were made and laws were made to bar such ideas, they continued to persist.
Elections are a practice in corruption. The elected official has two items on his agenda at all times: money and public relations. Those are what his vote is dependent upon. The quantity of money he gets helps his campaigns and allows him to hold sway with large corporations. The elected officials’ public relations are essentially how the public views them. It is all dependent upon the smiles they make, and whether they are understood to be common men.
This is how politicians that were largely understood to be completely incompetent were able to be elected and reelected as presidents. George W. Bush was largely considered a laughingstock when reviewing what his actual effects on the nation were. He raised the deficit, supported unwinnable wars, and helped place the economy in a state of recession. However, his public relations were very effective. He came across as an everyday guy, an Average Joe. This worked well, especially with blue collar workers and a large portion of the plutocratic elite. He was also able to obtain the support of right-wing ideologues through his dogmatic approach to problems.
What a democracy often fails to do is support a truly democratic state. Instead, it supports the forces of disunity that have plagued human existence since the inception of the species. Democracy is a practice in hypocrisy, a practice in promoting disunity in the name of equality. It allows the weak and greedy to prevail at the cost of the impoverishment of the average; mentally, physically, and frequently financially.
Democracy furthermore, does not allow the average to become inherently greater. Instead, democracy ensures that the average population of humankind remains at a level of mediocrity intellectually, physically, and socially. Democracy accomplishes this by making the weak will of the norm the consensus. As Nietzsche stated, democracy is the political system of sheep. It turns even the master into a slave.
Economically, too, democracies often fail. Democracies are often mixed capitalist economies. But democracies, being states of entitlement, ultimately will rely little on their own free labor. The United States was not built by free workers, it was largely built by slaves. Then, after slavery, the enslaved Africans were forced into serfdom. After the serfs were exhausted, the United States exploited the work of immigrants. These individuals weren’t truly part of the democratic state. Their work was greedily used and it took many generations for immigrants to gain any rights.
Unfortunately, the truth about democracy is that once it exploits one authoritarian collective, it turns its attention to another. After the population of the United States became too decadent, the economic institutions of the American economy turned their attention to exploitable authoritarian countries. It built itself up with the work of the Asian authoritarian collectives.
Democracies become plutocracies on the global scale. They take everything for themselves and rely on the work of the gifted people they import. Every other country is left poor by the will of democracies. The authoritarian collectives, though in some cases building themselves up by this work, would have dominated the plutocratic democracies if they had utilized the fruits of their own labor.
Democracy is a great lie, an exercise in the time-honored practice of impermanence. It was never, and never will be, the dominant political system of Earth or the multiverse. It is time that humanity broke the chains of decadence and subservience that these false rights offer. All men are not created equal. Liberty and justice are privileges, not rights. Individuals can pursue happiness, but happiness will never and can never be guaranteed. If humanity is to evolve, it must completely abandon the ways of the hedonistic plutocracies.More Coming Soon (hopefully).
3
« on: July 26, 2011, 06:39:21 PM »
In my honest opinion, I believe CAs should have the ability to command units and the units should be more expendable then the CAs. Units are just citizens who chose to be a part of the combine primarily for material gain, and then secondly to gratify their will to power. Its rare that a unit would join the combine out of a feeling of ideological self-identification. In the combine social hiearchy, the CA should be the one everyone in the city knows, and loyal citizens should build a cult of personality around him or her that is second only to Dr. Wallace Breen.
The in-game duty of the CA should be to promote propaganda or "combine ideological views" , manage the city's resources, manage the city's combine affliated organizations (CWU, etc.), and commiserate with the CCA command. Again, they should have the ability to command units, but not be expected to interfere much with the daily menial tasks of units, like detaining an anti-citizen. They should ICly be too important and too busy to deal with those "trivial" tasks. Instead the CA turns his attention to the greater concerns of the city, like ensuring the CCA is dealing with high anti-civil threats, rewarding loyal behavior and punishing disloyal behavior in the city (e.g. reducing the amount of ration distributions for a given time, rewarding extra rations or furniture to loyal districts). Another area of focus for the CA should be the great mission of the combine, converting humanity into transhuman synths. To do this, he might employ loyalist scientists and conduct experiments to try and create the next combine super soldier.
In total their should be one "CA" and then "Civil Executives". The CA commands the highest power in the social hierarchy whereas the civil executives are his subordinates. There might be a civil executive of labor for example, who is responsible for conducting labor events throughout the city and ensuring the city remains productive, or a civil executive of public relations (propaganda) who makes sure the CA's image is well respected, and even a Civil Executive of law who is the direct representative of the CA to CCA commanding officers.
The Hierarchy would be like this:
Civil Administrator (equivalent to the governor of a region or mayor of a city)/ SeC
Civil Executive(s)/ OfC
This of course means the bar must be raised on who is CA. They should have a lot of previous roleplaying experience as a CA, and also probably as a unit or high commander. They should be familiar with CP standard procedures as to not annoy units. They should both Icly and oocly have an interest in subjects like political science, history, psychology, biology, and military strategy. They must also have high verbal intelligence.
The backstory of the CA or CE should not be vague or unimpressive. They must be paragons of the former society. Former politicians, intellectuals, and generals are good candidates. Think of the type of people Dr. Breen would admire and choice to manage regions of his puppet government. It would especially make sense if the character has a history of holding fascist beliefs, or was involved in an authoritarian government (e.g. prime minister of China, Minster of Propaganda in NK, former Soviet Union politician). Scientists would also make sense, since Dr. Breen was himself selected as the instrument of combine oppression and Dr. Breen himself admires science.
The selected CA would have to go through a vigorous background check and neurological examination. Any part of him or her that is potentially a threat to the combine must be expunged. Subsequently, unless hes a really fucked up and compulsively submissive individual, he should be brainwashed.
The idea of a CA is really great for HL2 rp, it really has the potential to make the 1984 themes of HL2 come to life. It is too bad it is often abandoned or regarded as unimportant by communities.
From the former Head CA of TnB, Will~
Pages: [1]
|
Garry's Mod
Show Posts
