[ SECRET POST #6498 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6498 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[The Pillars of Reality]



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 33 secrets from Secret Submission Post #929.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Crime question

[(Anonymous)]

If you remove theft for example, does that mean that a starving child can no longer steal a loaf of bread to eat to survive?

Re: Crime question

[thewakokid]

I guess, but really how often does that happen?

Re: Crime question

[(Anonymous)]

Increasingly often, yay end stage capitalism.

Re: Crime question

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Just wanted to clarify because this was about "crime" AKA things defined by law systems as non-allowed vs "acts that may harm others" which is a much broader idea. A lot of "crime" is mostly harmless like recreational drug use for example.

So banning theft would stop that child from being able to eat, but banning "hate speech as defined by law" doesn't stop an entitled customer from being an asshole, and so on.

Re: Crime question

[thewakokid]

Ah I see. Ok. So maybe... I dunno. I mean it's a made up hypothetical so you can pick your specific rules. I suppose I was thinking something like "You can get rid of harm, but first you have commit that harm against another".