The Orange Records (Edition 2) Releases


Do not reply to this Topic directly unless you’re an admin, reply to the Post itself.
In case you are an admin, I’ve specifically bolded parts in the Introduction which might not be agreeable.

Domain Inputs f(x) - - - - - - - Mapping f(x=n1,n2,…) - - - - - - - - Range Output 1, 2,…

Test I/O function: Success. We are connected – Keep transmission ON.

The Orange Records (Ed.2) Introduction:

Archive: Already provided

Repository: Already provided

The Orange Records is an independent media outlet, residing in a micro-space between traditional news media and contemporary v-blog media. It's independence is guaranteed by the fact that its' contents fall under Creative Commons; its' contents will always be free; it is guaranteed never to accept donations or advertisemenets; it is entirely owned, edited, written and produced by a single person.

T.O.R. will be releasing its’ publications every: 7th, 14th and 30th of the month. Each publication is documented in repository for some time and then archived forever. The contents of each publication are to bring critical, independent news of regional events and comment on them from the authors' perspective & to expand on the authors' views concerning metaphysics which are at one point supposed to conceptually relate to the NS game itself. The publication of the 30th day (or earlier if it's february) will also include a third article which is to condense, simplify, inform and of course indoctrinate on Real World events. These are the three permanent articles to expect with each future publication of The Orange Records. Sometimes, T.O.R. will "host" an article from another author though the standards for that are very strict (the author mustn’t be affiliated).

Any interviews which The Orange Records may conduct will be initiated solely by the interviewed subject. The author notices a lack of Hard-Talk Journalism or any Journalism in TSP/TNP. Culmination is in the warning that these interviews will be very critical, sometimes on live record and sometimes revealing information which is publicly unknown. This is a strong disclaimer saying DON'T seek positive attention here.

It begs to be noted that T.O.R. will in itself have both references which are purposefully not attributed or addressed and references which are by mistake of the author not attributed. Latter example; if the author mentions and references "Farengeto’s Cyclic Hypothesis" but doesn’t at all link to it at any point, it's an honest mistake of the author and he should be notified of it as to fix the mistake by edit. To elaborate on the former; If you find an article questioning "Is there such a curse that changes your past?", knowing where that is sourced from is an Easter Egg and a reward in itself. The purposefully unaddressed references will appear much more often in the "second" articles relating to the metaphysical. This is yet another disclaimer that sometimes the second article has a hidden essence in it; whether the entirety of all published second articles will require paying close attention to understand them upon completion is an answer I won't give out yet. However, second articles should still contain processes within them which, although not binded to the essence of their existence, may prove valuable to the reader.

Concerning feedback and customer evaluation - I was very specific in defining "media" as a key trait of The Orange Records. Media stems from Medium as in the "Third Party" between the Messenger and the Receiver. Let’s examine the concept later; for now this is the golden rule: do not make direct replies to the Topic, you make direct replies to the Posts of the Topic. Repeating; never make replies to "Topic", redirect replies to specific "Posts" within the Topic chain instead. It’s very unlikely to receive engagement as in the authors' view the public can be as corrupting to a media as those which the public are informed on. The following phrase might be hard to understand so I will repeat it a few times: The Author will not engage with the public nor the authorities, the Author being a separate entity from the User who will engage the readership; The Author will not engage with the public nor the authorities, the Author being a separate person from the User who will engage the readership; The Author will not engage with the public nor the authorities, the Author being a separate entity from the User who will engage the readership. Ad infinitum.

Remember the last paragraphs' beginning where I said "the media stems from medium as in the third party between a transmitter and a receiver"? I lied. That definition better suits a "Channel", as in a semi-conductor. The phenomena I described is "Mediumship" as a practice but the practicioner was usually called a Magician or Witch.

"The Orange Records is an independent media" - where media does come from medium but from physical "transmission medium" which is any substance with the potential to emit energy or waves. It seems that "transmissions" and-or "waves" are mentioned a lot for an introduction page; it may be indicating that they’re key to a heart… The independent attribute begs to be addressed - what does "independent" mean in this context? Simply, free of any conscious outside influence. Should I have perhaps made it simpler and called it a "sovereign media"? Tasteless and anyway not yet; Related to "between a newspaper and a blog" wherein the Author considers neither examples to be independent. An explanation? I wasn't aware of being a nanny to toddlers but; newspapers get paid a lot not TO publish but NOT to publish. Vblogs are either lucrative or a cult ring in a white dress.

By the way, I lied again in the beginning of the previous paragraph but I won’t point to where. The missing attribute given at the very beginning doesn’t indicate that it seems of holding key value to the entire ordeal. What do you think of doors? Archeological evidence suggests that the first doors found in Baghdad and Egypt to be made of glass. Obsidian stone from volcanic erruption would be processed into glass, which proved to be crucial for the Stone Age to begin as it allowed for tools to be sharpened. By the time civilizations came about…What's the origin of the word "vicious"?

Fetch:: The Orange Records, Release I  - - - - Package successfully installed!

The Orange Records: Release 1:

Articles 1: TNP Briefing || TSP Forum || TSP Chair Elections ||  Article 2 : Enter: Reality


Article I: TNP Briefing:

12th September 2022 the General elections of TNP have concluded;

Delegate-incumbnt Pallaith managed to win against 15 abstains and 23 RON’s with a total of 56 votes for Pallaith.

Vice-Delegate Hulldom managed to pull off a slim victory, going against 20 abstains and 27 RON’s. Hulldom came on top with 51 votes in favor of this candidate.

Sil Dorsett won the seat of “Speaker” but no one really cares what that even is.

Total number of voters: 07-98.


Article I-2: TSP Forums:

10th-11th September 2022 TSP officially abandoned the forum structure altogether in favor of installing a ‘community’ with Discourse and (est.) 1400 github repositories. Bravery does pay out but authentication.ada

Perhaps for security reasons-by which I mean leaking random users’ P.I? Perhaps it’s to avoid disrubtances from users like 0-Yours Truly-o? I’m not sure. Generally, this is a positive change. The UI is more navigable, it forces users to learn at least Markdown and I’ve felt as if the userbase itself had become ‘warmer’


Article I-3: TSP Chair Elections:

The juicy part. On 9th of September, the incumbent Chair of the Assembly, Cryo, won 81.48% of the vote against RON who won only 18.52%. The total number of votes were 21. Thi is mentioned as a comparison to TNP general elections. However, let’s attribute that this ¼ participatory rate in TSP over TNP elections is because they held a general one, whereas TSP only voted for the Chair of the Assembly. One could also say that it’s a larger region-let’s say that the number is because of the initial bug from 10 years ago where more player would spawn in TNP as opposed to other feeder Pacifics.

One could also consider this difference to stem from the fact that TNP’s NS:GP politics only slightly “shifts” towards a side. Alternatively, even bringing up a very controversial document titlted “The Independent Manifesto”, where a GCR chooses not to force a side. That is, a GCR chooses not to waste its’ own resources to support Defenders or Raiders. Let’s pretend this does not happen but focus instead on TSP’s own election.

The legends say that a self-proclaimed bad person once made a thread addressing certain issues they found when looking at laws concerning the position of Chair and when looking at past Chairs-who they were and where they came from. This Rehabilitator would bring up what they thought were issues, the community used rhetorics and armchair psychology to neglect these issues ever existing.

Here wer are now. Who would be better to consult why there was only one person on the ballot? Who else would answer why this didn’t cause RON to be activated? If only there really was a truthfully bad person that already provided us with answers to these questions. Oh, they have? “No one else runs for Chair unless they’ve previously had contact with the positios”? But, it’s CLEARLY undemocratic to codify that in the law! Term lengths? 6 months is too long? How about 11-12 months?

Thank you, wise old denizens. Thank you for explaining that I was wrong. I mean, I’m a noob who will likely get an administrative ban so, who really am I to judge the laws and practices of a position such as a Chair? It turns out that the only virtue you really need to foresee the future is common sense with an attribute of pattern recognition. Oh, how my gambling spirits have been awaken now.

Or just continue gatekeeping the region to people who have been around and a handful of other trustees. I’m sure that won’t lead to stagnating out of existence. Before I lose my mind, let’s go to the part I enjoy




In answering the basic questions of metaphysics during Edition 1, “what is there” and “what is it like”, I’ve provided you with a basic framework for a creation hypothesis. Ahead, I’ve made sure that this framework could apply to whichever belief system you attach it to. The summary of “There is infinite simulation” and “There is simulation of infinity” I’ve also provided you with the power of shaping your worldview in a way which disregards synthax - - guiding you to think outside of language, sentence, as such thought is possible [Wittgenstein, Tractacus].

Now let’s enter one of those simulations. Imagine a void with infinite versions of simulations simulating infinity. We choose one of them. As stated, each simulation has set axioms attached to it, which makes the simulation manifest itself as stable reality [Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation]. Our reality bases its’ existence on the spacetime fractional and how it interacts within itself. What we know from this is: space is finite, space is unknown, space can contain energy and matter, it is assumed that matter which does not emmit, transmit, reflect or receive energy is matter which makes “the void” and we call it “dark matter”, we assume that time takes supremacy over space as matter and energy of space change as time passes yet they cannot influence the behavior of time[contemporary physics]. As such, we can safely assume that here: time travel isn’t possible; henceforth timelines don’t exist. Your choices are bound and you cannot retract them[Ecclesiastes, Solomon].

Using the tree analogy, the process of the tree would be time itself; as in what defines how reality will necessarily behave is in time. The substance of the tree should be found in itself; that is, the essence of why and how our reality is can be found in the matter and energy of space[Spinoza, Ethics]. We ought to act in a way where we accept that only this is what is true as all else is agreeable upon in the social order, which is not necessarily true[Stirner, The Ego and Its’ Own]. From here, there are two schools on how an individual is to act in the imaginary social order. He is either to strive and overcome himself, including the social order which influences him[Nietzsche’s Over-man] or he is to strive and understand himself, including the social order which influences him as to face what he truly is[Dostoevsky’s All-man]. I offer you to go back a bit before deciding on the ethics of man.

If there exists a social order, the question is by whom, how and why it was formed? If you believe that without social order, all there is left is darkness and war of everything against all else, you believe the social order is a Leviathan rising above everyone and everything inn order to establish it[Hobbes, Leviathan]. However, if the true man is of clean nature and it is actually the social order which corrupts him, you wish for reaction-revolution[Rousseau, Discourse on the origins of Inequality II]. Man is just unsure without social order, which is why he creates Law as to have clear rules of how things are [Locke, First & Second Tract of Government]. Finally, if you wish to continue following the process that’s already been established, you say that we do not know why the social order exists but assume that it’s been established to benefit everyone marginally greater than if he was without it[Rawls, Theory of Justice].

Regardless, I will offer you another perspective next time. Here exists an error which I will point to then. Try to find it until then.


Update: The Orange Records, Release II ---- SAVE STATE ERROR! KEEP MACHINE RUNNING!

The Orange Records: Release 2:

Articles: TNP-TSP Briefing; The Case for Stirner & Steiner; News From The Real Beyond 1

Repository: Proton Drive

Article I: TNP-TSP Briefing

TNP: All The Author has noticed in TNP between the 14th and the 30th of September is an obsession with the N-Day Event in Nation-States.

TSP: The Author notices that the new forums have brought a fresh breeze with them, one could also describe it as a wave of warm wind if they associate warmer climates with something positive. Digressions aside; tensions between USERS seem to have been put at ease with the Great Council slowly moving into a general direction. This vague direction came following a proposal by USER: Sandaoguo concerning a legislature reform.
The Author takes this time to notify the reader that USER: ProfessorHenn has been employed in the TSP Ministry of Culture under USER: Maluhias’ term since the last Release.
The Author takes this time to notify the reader that, staying true to being an independent media outlet, they will refrain from giving out compliments and will remain vigilant and critical. This is subtly suggestive of the fact that nothing worth criticizing has occurred.

Article II: The Case for Stirner and Steiner:

Yes the title is parodizing a certain copyrighted work. More importantly, let’s take just one step back from Existentialism and see what even lead to the Postmodern being dealt a Losing Gambit by choosing between Dostoevsky or Nietzsche... Like a wise nurse once told me, you need to start from the very beginning and build up slowly lest you risk dangerous outcomes. As in medicine so in metaphysics.
Why are we then starting with Stirner and Steiner? Let’s see them as „first signs of a symptom“ and see their common root.
So on one hand we have the Egoism (wrongfully translated, the most correct term would be „Own-ness“ as in owning oneself) and Anthroposophy (Yes Steiner was very influenced by the Theosophists but he’s a hidden gem among them).
The purpose here isn’t to combine nor defend these ideas, though that can be done as well if readers request for such a thing. The Author is trying to convey a message how in one simulation we have two seemingly opposing positions (though they’d also argue that there is no such thing as opposites but let’s start slow for now), written in a completely different style. How and why does this happen?
Well what do these two authors try to convey to the reader – what is the essence of their work? Sadly for both of the authors’ aspirations (Stirner in his trial to overcome Hegelism through pure dominance of the self over the self; Steiner through his trial to overcome Theosophists through pure dominance of the world over the self in order for the self to understand anything), they pretty much arrive at the same conclusions – humans and the world can be understood, when understood, they can be utilized. Is this true? In a way yes. However, not in the first-draft Stirnerite expression where he questions his own beliefs within his own single published whole work (notice how he changes his mind on Christ mid-work) but neither in the overly complex occult practicrs with Steiner promoted.

Why is this possible? For two completely different approaches to come to such close conclusions? Ping back to T.O.R. Record 1 where this simulation we all live in allows for this to happen – it does not „break“ any of its’ axioms regarding space and time.
Which methodology is used in these two approaches in reaching „A Higher State of Being“ (you don’t and it’s impossible but we’ll get to that when we do). It appears they both follow Ecclasiastes which makes this entire entry a tragic irony.
We’ll dive deep into „Ketuvim“ in the next entry but for now – yes, reading only Ecclasiastes without the rest of Ketuvim makes the Holy Scripture seem like peak nihilism (which The Author does argue monasticism actually is except The Author will use more than one book from one religion to prove this point, eventually). Keep it close to your heart that half of „Ketuvim“ was written by Solomon, including Ecclasiastes which is his last book. Naturally, The Author asks the audience – at what age and at what state of life would Solomon write his last book? Retirement. Old age. It’s importannt to know how much work Solomon put into his Kingdom to know why Ecclasiastes is written this way.
„Vanity, vanity, all is vanity“ is a bad translation, for now I want you to imagine a very successful but very old man who is nearing his death (which he fears) whispering to himself „Nothing, nothing, all is for nothing“. Of course, reading only Ecclasiastes from Solomon takes him out of any and all context.
As to why we must examine „Ketuvim“ to continue, because we’re going back a few thousand years from Dostoevsky and Nietzsche to understand the roots of Existentialism, after which we will dive into Postmodernism. There are alchemical works which ponder similar questions, though once the base is covered well, it all seems like repetition with minor addition.

Article III: News From The Real Beyond (1)

We will go over currently ongoing world events by continent. The Author is, of course, absolutely unbiased.

North America: It’s there.

Latin America:

1) On the 25th, a referendum was held in the Republic of Cuba regarding same-sex marriage amendments to its’ Constitution. With 66% of the turn-out being in favour, the Republic of Cuba has recognized same-sex marriage and adoption of children by same-sex couples.
2) On the 26th, „protests“ errupted in Colombia. Author wishes to remind the Reader that Colombia has been in constant „protests“ since 2018, supposedly motivated by completely unrelated reasons.
3) Yet another referendum was held, in Chile, regarding adopting the new Constitution. The currently active Constitution in Chile is from 1980 and heavily influenced by the regime of the CIA plant (Pinochet). However, the outcome of this referendum was 61% of the turn-out vote beinng against the new Constitution being adopted. The author has anecdotal evidence (though it would not surprise me if they resurfaced as actual evidence in another independent media after fact-checking it more thoroughly) that the voting on this referendum was very „unfair“ to put it lightly. Namely, politicians would roam around the entire state warning of McCarthy-esque doomsday Communism is the new Constitution was to be adopted. Of course, they did not do this out of any actual ideology but for offshore untaxed money being transferred to their accounts. This referendum was originally supposed to be held in 2020.


1) Elections in Sweden and Czechia with marginal seat changes. Good job.
2) The Rus’ continue to wage war against each other as if the past 1200 years never happened. Except this time the world cares as the Varangians make up around 30% of world crop fertilizer production. As the Author warned back in a March (though you’re forgiven for not knowing this) column on local newspaper, the main effect of these needless brother wars will be world famine.


Ethiopia is still at a civil war with the Tigrey now somehow pushed back from the capital all the way to the Eritrean border. Egypt is arming itself (as it has been since 1947) threatening to attack the Nile River Dam, which Ethiopia is somehow simultaneously constructing despite controlling half of its’ territory. The Author notes that Egyptian military leadership is very special and needs an explanation that destroying the dam will cause floods throughout the Nile River basin, eventually reaching Cairo as well.


The SCO somehow did hold a meeting, with the Heavenly Mandate showing faint concern over how long the Varangians have been waging war over at Crimea. The Author notes that this meeting is a complete failure as the Kyrgisztan and Tajikistan border crisis (also ongoing, by the way) remain unresolved. India is left playing hot potato by meeting with everyone. Iran and Turkey have both notified the SCO that they have aspirations of joining the organization... Yeah, sure, just throw them in there as well. Who cares about Kurds anyway?


Apparently some western „realists“ think Australia will somehow pose a threat to the Heavenly Mandate in South-East Asia... While having Japan and South Korea at their disposal, who are both ranked at #5 and #6 global military powers by the global firepower index this year. 

Update: The Orange Records, Release III ---- Apparently you’ve been running your CONSOLE for 9459 days straight. How many days do you think your CONSOLE can run for continuously?

The Orange Records: Release 3:

Articles: TNP-TSP Questioning Democracy; Ketuvim & Abrahams’ Anomaly


Article I: TNP-TSP Questioning Democracy

Nothing in particular has happened to warrant this specific Article appearing now, rather it’s a collection of events noticed by The Author throughout the time spent in this political simulator to bring up the topic now. This phenomena of holding democracy as the current most valuable standard for a socio-political system is observant in most (even every-day) mediums but we will first showcase an example before viewing the abstract.

In NS, two particular, influential regions hold the socio-political system of democracy to be a way of describing themselves rather pridefully. The North Pacific calls itself, on what would be a “front page” (WFE) “The Oldest Democracy in NS” while The South Pacific prefers to specify, though not on WFE, its’ identity as a direct democracy. Not only is this choice for a socio-political system a sense of pride and identity for the regions themselves, the users who are attached to these regions hold democracy in a very high regard as well. This very much does simulate the global standard in 1989-2010s rather well, every state would declare themselves either as pursuing democracy or already functioning as a democracy even within the Constitution itself. The trend changes, especially in the social sphere, during the 2010s but we will not examine that now.

Formally at least, mankind holds this blanket term of ‘democracy’ as virtous at least somewhat globally and at least somewhat contemporarily. Let’s examine why, what democracy is, how it’s misunderstood and how a plane of illusion exists between what is criticized about democracy rather than what should be criticized about democracy.

Democracy, in contemporary terms, is more of a sociological phenomena than a political system. A democratic political system is merely an umbrella term of an already existing societal structure where institutions exist independent of (traditional means) direct control, citizenry is vigilant to changes (or lack of) in the political legislature and has numerous avenues of channeling a possible dissatisfaction which would produce a change, it takes in account that although vigilant it is not paranoid of it own self but open to different prisms which are to be either rejected or accepted (…) So, democracy is a schematic of independent institutions stemming from citizenry and creating a political system. The underlying framework one can notice when listing what democracies ought to posses is collective consent.

There are numerous ways to answer why democracy is seen as desireable. One could point to the overall living standards of democracies (we will get to those), compare them to non-democracies and determine that, although anomalies do exist, the latter is overall a better choice. Another would be saying that this is the best compromise we have where the ones who form the system (the citizens) also guide the system (the government) without it falling into non-institutional chaos (corruption) or into over-institutionalized control (surveillance).

Democracy, during its’ oversimplification into a single definition, is often misunderstood or is too broad to include all which it encompasses. It is a logical paradox but logic is not a needed axiom in the simulation of our reality, as mentioned in almost every release. From this misunderstanding stems criticism of democracy which are low-quality but apparently convincing enough that they are widespread. This means that the citizenry isn’t as vigilant as it wishes to be so the entire system collapses within itself but I will not be using that as that as the main criticism of democracy since it’s cheap. However, yes, you can use it very convincingly.

The (hopefully unique) criticism The Author presents when it comes to democracy is that, in all contemporary and successful forms, it relies on a shame-based culture of its’ community or society. The vigilance ascribed prior becomes mere virtue-signalling of an individual cell towards institutions and others. This reliance on shame is why democracy during the 2010s experiences an identity crisis of its’ individual members. Going further into this will be done later. This entire paragraph is bolded as we are now beginning to enter a point of convergence between Article I and Article II Releases.

Article II: Ketuvim & Abrahams’ Anomaly

Readers of Article II will be in an advantage when the convergence eventually does take form as its’ releases are the answer to the questions which will arise during the ‘residence cascade’ when NS, metaphysics and identity do eventually meet. For now, let’s follow Article II’s continuous experimentation and go back to Ketuvim.

I’ve criticized the Modern period for having its’ roots specifically and only in Ecclesiastes. When mentioning “Ketuvim” here I specifically mean the Five Megillot Books and in the order of which they appear in the Tanakh, as Ecclesiastes has little to do with Psalms or Proverbs in the original Hebrew and even less to do in the latter revised Quran.

The criticism and answer is that if one is going to separate a specific section of Tanakh/Bible/Quran and focus merely on it, this is the recommended section and the recommended order lest context be lost; Song of Songs to Book of Ruth to Lamentations to Ecclesiastes to Book of Esther.

Solomon is canonically viewed in (one of if not the) highest regard as a mortal human in all three Abrahamic religions, most of (disputably all) which he wrote are the Books which I’ve mentioned. The five books, when taken in that order and wholly, are enough to understand the essence of Abrahamic religions. The fact that the Song of Songs (listed first) and the Book of Esther (listed last) are the only sections of Holy Books which do not mention God at all is important as well because of the following “notification”.

Let’s all cool our tensions first, approach this with a wide perspective and constitute that the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and their related faiths (Gnosticism or whichever) are the most successful human religions to this day. Evidently, the have existed since approximately 1300 C.E. (Babylonian Talmud being the oldest and most far-stretching archeological evidence). That’s a total of about 3 millennias to this day but let’s argue to 2 millennias because by 1300s B.C. most of the entire world was following an Abrahamic religion or similar. This is an anomaly. Uniting them all, they constitute about +55% of all humanity’s faith, the only other two major religions being Hindu (~20% when constituting specific versions) and Buddhism (~7% though the number is probably inflated). But why are they so successful at gaining followers and assimilating entire cultures?

If we are to leave out discussions on the esoteric, spiritual or non-material topics in our reality as their nature makes them unseen by the physical human body and thus undetectable by the scientific method (major exceptions being epigentics and hereditary psychiatry); The reason for Abrahamic success is twofold: monotheism and adaptation.

Monotheistic-based civilizations nearly always triumph over polytheistic-based civilizations for the simple reason that urban centers of the civilization will not a priori be at conflict with one another due to which specific God is preferred in each settlement of a civilization. This is partially the reason why (disputably all Macedons but undisputably) Philip II and Alexander the Great both worshipped the primordial God Khaos, who is the first origin-entity in the Greek creation mythology. This allowed the formation of a large enough force to conquer the southern city-states and continue the conquer-and-assimilate nature until the Hindu valley. India is often mentioned by texts of monotheistic-based civilizations as “cursed land” until the conversion of Turkics/Altaics to Islam and th subsequent creation of the Mughal Empire, managing to finally conquer the Hindu valley. Hinduism is an anomaly but only among polytheistic religions as it created a harmony between their entities.

Adaptation in this sense means that Abrahamic religions are adaptable to preexisting cultural notions. Abrahamic religions themselves are roughly divided between fear-based cultures (Judaism), guilt-based cultures (Christianity) (formerly), shame-based cultures (Islam). The practices and specific doctrines of Abrahamic religions become a dividing factor but they are merely adaptations of an easily constructed common canon to cultures they’ve encountered. A common canon between all Abrahamic faiths is relatively (comparatively) easy to re-construct, as proven best by the Scottish Rite (recognized) Freemasonic lodges.

1 Like

I do love the orange records :melting_face:

1 Like