To Pokimane, pt 11

I have not bothered to look up PCOS, which you mentioned in your recent TikTok video. Maybe you won't be able to have children.

Gangnam Style.

So, this is significant because in the clip that was probably from last summer, you selected for males who wanted children. If you can't have children, then you are interested in males who would not be interested in being in a relationship with you.

The most recent book that I read, Death at the Crossroads (which I illegally downloaded, and which I first read when it came out ~28 years ago). The author says at the start,

It occurred to me that in fiction about ancient Japan, the people who lived in that farmhouse were often just stage props to some greater pageantry, such as the fight to become the Shogun. Yet they also had stories to tell, and I decided to tell at least some of them through the vehicle of a mystery trilogy.

 Excerpt, page 18:

Jiro was not handsome, and his family’s plot of land was far from the biggest, so it was astounding that Yuko’s mother had let it be known that her daughter was available. Yuko was one of the prettiest girls in the small village, although at age fifteen she was a bit past the average age when girls got married. The natural assumption was that Yuko’s mother was waiting for an exceptional match for her daughter, perhaps even hoping that the pretty girl would catch the eye of a lord or samurai so she could become a rich man’s concubine.

The other village women considered Yuko far too clever and far too pretty for Jiro, and said so. But Yuko’s mother had seen kindness and a good heart and a hard worker in the young man, and she knew it would be a match where Yuko would not be abused and, most likely, would be in charge. She wanted that, because of all of her eight children, Yuko was the favorite.

Jiro was presented with the proposition of Yuko as a wife by a small delegation of village women showing up at his hut one morning before he went to his rice paddy to work. The bewildered teen, still smarting from the death of his parents, simply accepted the collective wisdom of the elder women of the village and nodded his agreement. Within a few days, there was a small wedding feast, where the people of the village were fed sake, tofu, and some fish. Yuko served the feast and made sure each of the guests went home with a bit of food wrapped in a broad leaf. After cleaning up, Yuko moved into Jiro’s hut, and they were tentatively considered married, pending the birth of their first child.

I scarcely need to point out that even now, many religions say that 'adult activity' before getting married is bad, and yet most people in developed countries have such experience before they get married. So for most people, there is no need for a 'trial period' in a marriage, and weddings are deliberately conducted in a way that gives them significance and makes cancelling the marriage difficult.

Back in June 2012, I linked the song 嘘とダイヤモンド that I once again referenced in my previous post. I also linked the song, 正義粉砕. These songs both imply a degree of dishonesty, but in the first one the singer is a little bit 'selfish', while in the second the singer is 'good', so they sort of complement each other, I think. Anyway, in the second song (noting that many published translations of Japanese lyrics are inaccurate), the line (at 1:26),

この目は、世界を見過ぎて

僅かな希望も捉えられなくなった

These eyes have seen too much of the world

Even a tiny bit of hope no longer remains (literally: became unable to grasp even a tiny bit of hope)

So, there are a lot of people who literally don't think there's anything wrong with them just focusing all of their attention on what will make them happy in the future, like finding a spouse.

I think I referenced the US Declaration of Independence before, which includes,

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

If they were really self-evident, there would have been no need to mention them. What makes one person happy may cause harm to other people. There are some people who simply do not realize this. I was going to mention at some point, although I forget exactly what it was in relation to, that games show that many people are simply bad. That the large variation between students in test scores in school is not just from differences in motivation. Test scores often depend on studying, but two people who start a new game, spend the same amount of time playing it, and have the same goal of not dying, will vary in their ability to meet that goal.

In life, one goal that many people (but certainly not all people) have is 'to be seen as ethical, even when the specific behavior that is ethical may be hard to discern, and only a minority of people might correctly judge what it is or reward people who have that behavior'.

And so it is that there are people who might want to have children, but who do not allow whether a particular person can have children to be important to whether they would be in a relationship with that person.

One might point to same-sex relationships as the ultimate proof of this.

Going back to one of my recent posts: the one about when I tried to meet Mei at the library. Did I try to trick Mei? It's certainly true that there was information which I did not make clear. I said in an email that I would be turning off my Internet (I gave the cable modem and maybe one or two wireless routers to the Korean student who had relied on it, who got a little upset at me since it meant she had to go to the school library for Internet), which implied I was leaving my residence, but I was deliberately ambiguous and Mei's later words showed she did not understand I had already permanently left where I had been living.

But did I "trick Mei into not agreeing to meet me, in order to benefit Kate"? One thing I said to Mei, regarding her not wanting to meet, was that she just didn't want me to die. I really felt it was possible that if we met, it would lead to me dying. Mei facilitated me implying this with like her references to Drow (a female-dominated society, in which males are weak, and the deity is a spider). I'm pretty sure her display name, Lillium, was a reference to Elfen Lied (which I never saw), and not to Lilium, "a taxonomic genus within the family Liliaceae – true lilies" which is poisonous to cats — her cat being named after me.

So, if Mei and I had met, and then I had died, I think it would have helped Kate. Kate would have thought I was in a relationship, since she would not have had any expectation that I would contact her again if I was alive.

When I asked, "Am I someone who would take an action most likely to lead to someone being happy, even if I died", the person that it seemed my actions would most likely lead to being happy was therefore Kate, not Mei.

And I think this is how it is a lot of the time. Evidence, songs:

Rain Song by Girls Dead Monster,

(Translated) Running into a tree in the park,

I cried like you did.

Forgetting that you were here,

Forgetting the love that we had,

Becoming just like you were (misheard lyrics) Crying in place of you,

I don't want that.

 

Numb by Linkin Park,

And I know I may end up failing, too

But I know you were just like me

With someone disappointed in you

So anyway. Maybe it would be nice if people who wanted children did not end up with people who cannot have children. But that is not even on the list of most important problems, on which climate change apparently ranks so low that it no longer appears on the list.

(The letters) W, T, F. (And also, that video with 8.7m views doesn't appear in search, only some copies with 12k, 32k, and 235 views.)

It's Peyton Chorvat's birthday in two days. I would think that she streams every day, except that my Gmail tab which accumulates Twitch live notifications from her only has 35 new messages and the number does not seem to have been going up. Maybe five years ago, she posted on Chirp Club that she was seeing a doctor for her endometriosis, which just like PCOS can be a cause of infertility. I should note that I don't know if Peyton likes me. If she's streaming, it's probably retail aka mainline WoW, which I think I will find painful to watch.

 

@TEAM_OK 지수 - 꽃 ｜ 남의 팔💪[Someone else's arm - 이소정 sojung, igo gattan da] [SJu9tGkRS-0].webm

___

Update 09 Feb 2026, 03:12

From your TikTok video, "There's such a pressure on women. I feel like we're constantly told and conditioned to think that our greatest value is bringing life into this world."

This is what I had wanted to mention some people being bad at games, and specifically bad at PvP, in relation to. If you say, "a lot of females don't like fighting in general, as much as males do", this supports the point. Females are less often the target of physical violence in general, but are just as likely to encounter social conflict in the form of words of criticism. An attitude that fighting (including with words) should be avoided is likely to lead to less time spent fighting, which means lower proficiency at it, and more often losing fights or never trying to fight in the first place. I don't necessarily agree with the message of this video or how people in the comments interpret it, but people think it was a good video: Learned Helplessness

Point: only females can do X.

(Ok, haha, X chromosomes.) Is there a Y that only males can do? Probably not, for any Y that people admit to be important. Females tend to be physically weaker, but this doesn't really matter in the modern world. The rigorous physical fitness standards used in military special forces around the world are not really important for winning wars. I don't think I ever watched the entire movie, and it draws people towards incorrect conclusions (the whole, "the US public likes fights in the Middle East because it's open deserts with nowhere to hide, unlike the jungles of Vietnam where a technological advantage didn't mean as much"), but the film Jarhead: "At the last second before Swofford takes the shot, Major Lincoln interrupts them to call in an air strike. . . . The war ends without Swofford ever firing his rifle. During a monologue, Swofford realizes that all of his training and effort to achieve the elite status as a marine sniper is meaningless in modern warfare."

So, if X is important and only females can do X, how should this affect how people think of females?

Possibility: "females should focus on doing X, even if it means sometimes giving up on other goals."

Possibility: "people should think more highly of females and treat them better, because they can do something that males can't."

The scene in Terminator: Dark Fate (2019) where Sarah Connor sarcastically comments that Dani Ramos is only important because of her womb, as Sarah herself had only been targeted for termination because of her future son.

Basically, do females benefit when the fact that only females can conceive children is brought up in a conversation?

Quote from the BBC comedy Red Dwarf, which I have not attempted to verify as factual:

Lister: I don't know why I'm going through with this. It's just not possible.

Rimmer: Why is it not possible? Male baboons have given birth. They were doing that as far back as the 20th century. Caesarian, naturally.

To Pokimane, pt 10

Poll: "If someone had a belief that was harmful to you, and you could change that belief with a single word, would you do so?"

It ends up being a bad poll. It isn't relevant for most people; it is basically only relevant to the specific belief that someone doesn't know you exist. And, even if I wasn't restricting myself from doing anything and there was a place that I could make polls that would get sufficient engagement, I would not be able to justify creating this poll, due to lacking a motive to do so. I said that I would stop expecting you or trying to get you to share this idea, and I am trying to keep that 'promise'.

I have said that I thought you weren't aware of this idea and didn't know I exist. I have never explicitly said the opposite: that I thought you were receiving and reading my emails.

On one hand, I think this is entirely defensible: it's a little crazy to think that you read the emails from me. There was a video in which you were warning people about a scam, and people in comments (YouTube or Reddit) were saying that it was unrealistic because the story required that you were reading emails sent to you yourself, instead of someone else filtering them. Almost no one wants to be seen as crazy, including me (I don't want to be seen as crazy). And so I am reluctant to admit to having thoughts that people would think are crazy.

But for this same reason, if those 'crazy' thoughts are in fact true, then you might feel some degree of criticism of me for prioritizing what other people think of me, over truth and transparency.

Of course, this is the thinking that many 'crazy' people (people whom others evaluate to be crazy) experience, including people who might be viewed as stalkers etc. It's dangerous thinking, and this is part of why people should try to be truthful, and expect others to be truthful.

The short on your podcast channel features a snippet of you saying, "it's either like ring husband or it's like, I don't know". This, and you holding up your hand while saying it, might have reminded me that wedding rings and engagement rings serve the practical purpose of letting people know someone's relationship status. I honestly might not have remembered this since before learning about your ring, several months ago.

I think I also remembered a few days ago that I had sent an email to someone, which had mentioned you, which was possibly before you chose to buy yourself a ring.

So, basically, this post is about secrets. As with the poll, if you wanted me to think that you know I exist, you could reply with a single word, or even send a blank email. But in what case might someone answer "no" to the poll? The obvious case is when, despite the belief being harmful to you, it is helpful to someone else, such as the person holding the belief.

It's difficult to see why you might think, if you do know me, that I benefit from this being a secret. But what about other people? Specifically, what about Sherine? I had said to Sherine that I would never admit that I didn't want her to share the idea.

I could have said, instead, that I wanted her to share the idea. My actual words did not convey any information about whether this was true. It's reasonable to say that this was intentional, since I am smart and tend to point out any important mistakes of mine that I notice.

I never said that I wanted her to block me, or to not reply to most of what I said. I'm actually not sure if she ever acknowledged anything I said on Chirp Club, except for the first post on my third account in which (as I had warned her) I sent a message to her crush.

Oh, at some point I was going to mention the song, 【GUMI】嘘とダイヤモンド【オリジナル曲PV付】. Lyrics:

Scared to project my unadorned figure, I apply lies.

('utsusu' being the transitive form of 'utsuru')

But did her not talking to me help me? Points:

- if there is a government conspiracy, it seems very likely to be because of Sherine's actions and the dilemma she created

- I was happy that I did not have a smartphone, because if I did, then I might have felt an obligation to try to talk to her on it using Snapchat or whatever, and she might have sent me illegal images

- if she had talked to me, then I would not have been stuck on the point of "does Sherine care about the idea and has she shared it"

- if Sherine had really tried to get people to use the idea but failed, and no one else like Yoko Ono had then shared the idea, then I would probably have stopped doing anything with it and acted like it will never be used, since Sherine's actions would have created an obligation from me towards her

- I had said to Sherine that I had no intention of dying, and people not sharing the idea has had danger for me, since I remain poor without health care, at risk of getting cancer, etc. So from a survival perspective, it seems fair to say that her not talking to me didn't benefit me

So there is no proof, but I interpret it as being like that song: that Sherine pretended that she had influence because she was afraid of the possibility that she did not. One cannot even say that if this is what she thought, then her actions were for her own or my benefit: Sherine did not immediately know it, but in one of the first of the emails I sent to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation and other people at the time, I mentioned Sherine. So there was the possibility that people did not reply to me or do anything because I had mentioned Sherine, implying that she was important, even though at that time she had not replied to me or done anything except (I think) to stop talking and posting things.

Ok, I think by then she had posted photos of herself ... well, based on the 'temp comment.txt' file that I included in an image archive in 2014, I said to her "You're pretty" on 25 May 2013, which was over a month after I first sent her a message. There was the photo or two where she had her nose close to the camera or something so it looked too big, but I'm not sure if she posted that just before I said to her "You're pretty", or a month earlier.

Later in the same song, "Lies and diamond":

What I was holding wasn't a gemstone (宝石) at all, just a pebble (石ころ).

The fact that nothing important has happened in the past 13 years doesn't mean that Sherine made the wrong choice in keeping secrets. It's easy to criticize, and say that another path should have been taken. But, as I said before, I 'protected' Sherine by implying that it could be possible that I didn't want her to immediately share the idea, since that seemed to be what she was doing, even though it might just have been that she didn't see my tweet about Lebanon in time and would have acted differently if she had.

To Pokimane, pt 9

I apologize for writing to you again after Greta Thunberg posted on Instagram. Whether or not this post is to your benefit — and it might not be — it becomes a case of me saying something that was not true, and I believe it is incumbent upon everyone to treat someone differently when they say something that is not true.

I shall pretend that there is a possibility you care what I think, just as I pretend there is a possibility that you might read this. Your Instagram post about styling bangs: I honestly have no knowledge about how to make hair look good, or more generally to improve one's physical appearance. I just brush my hair and hope it doesn't look dreadful. But I suspect that many people probably do things to improve their appearance that are of little benefit or could be achieved with less effort or at a lower cost.

In 2011, probably after I discovered this idea, I remember emailing my friend an article about cheap makeup. I don't know what kind of products you use; I looked up the eye redness remover brand you recommended and it seemed it probably does deserve the recommendation (no other brands use the same active ingredient), but that is just one product.

Hairstyles for dancers: https://youtu.be/dA5O_5A8AiU?t=81 or https://youtu.be/N2WHfMpuOx8?t=398, dancer on the left. She's able to fix her hair just by turning her head quickly to the side. Some hairstyles or hair treatments might not be nearly as resilient. They might look better for someone who requires less movement, but at a cost.

I don't even know anything about water ruining a hairstyle, other than like https://youtu.be/vg6_i4qKaxY?t=208

Randomly about hair: when I watched the Cang Lan Jue (苍兰诀) drama, I tried to discern how it was possible for one actor to look female as one character, and then look male when her character was portrayed as a male during a human life. The best that I could come up with was that it was something about the angle at which hair slanted, like whether it slanted up going back along the sides of the head or slanted down. Now I understand that it was almost certainly the hiding of the sides of the forehead, and now I see it everywhere.

Ok now for the actual reason for this post: I watched most of the film Eagle Eye. It features Shia LaBeouf, who might know of this idea but I honestly can't tell. He said he wasn't famous anymore, but his name still appears on movie posters and it seems like he is still famous.

In the film, spoilers the AI lies. And I think that's how viewers are supposed to know that the AI was bad: it lied. It said that a certain character would be safe, but that character would have died if the AI's plan had worked.

The AI had coerced characters into doing things that they didn't want to do and were very dangerous. It (or "she") had also killed people, and if her plan had worked many more would have died. But she had a logic which was hard to argue against; no one even tried to argue against her, to convince her with non-violent methods to change her path.

The point is that it seemed the screenwriters felt that the audience, or at least part of the audience, would be fine with the coercion; that the ends can justify the means. After all, blackmailing people by threatening their family is no worse than actually killing people. The movie opens with a missile strike on a gathering of Arab people, and while the AI does not protest this but rather the retaliations in the form of suicide bombings that kill US citizens at embassies around the world, I think a lot of people understand that killing random people is not good, and I won't say more for the same reason the screenwriters gave the AI the motivations that they did, of saving US lives rather than foreign lives.

Honestly that opening scene made me think of the missile strike during the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which occurred 13 years after the film Eagle Strike was released. I'm sure there were people, who might have been intelligence analysts but despite having been one myself I honestly have no idea whether they have a voice in this kind of operation, who were saying, "yes this person is definitely a terrorist who is supporting the group that attacked US forces, we are very confident of this".

And yet, sadly, "I never lie" is still not a good way to convince people to help you.

To Pokimane, pt 8

Your Instagram video, "a letter to my younger self". Posted 8 hours ago, but I think Picuki did not show it until now; it still says 126 posts, when your Instagram profile says 127.

"Love isn't something you're supposed to work hard for and earn. Those who will love you the best will do so without needing you to convince them."

I think the effort comes from convincing yourself to love someone else. When people talk about a marriage that has lasted 60 years, this is what they are complimenting. Chinese dramas sometimes refer to "sharing weal and woe", and I had to look up 'weal' to be sure what it meant even though it is a set phrase. Marriage vows in English refer to "in sickness and in health", and it seems they sometimes refer to "in good times and in bad" or "for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer", but it does not quite convey the same meaning, assuming I am remembering Chinese dramas correctly and the translations were accurate.

Sharing woe: making someone else unhappy, because you are unhappy. That takes effort, to convince yourself that another person would want this. Maybe there will be a happy period later on, or maybe death will come first.

I don't think what I say about the rest of your message is important, but I might as well. I have never been someone who has given compliments, or liked it when people compliment me. I am, rather, the type of person who avoids giving compliments, or even gives criticism, and then worries about the effect that this will have. When Mei showed a screenshot of her Aion character to me, I suggested that the asymmetry of her hair, with one side ponytail thing, might be ugly. Since she never sent me a photo of herself, I could never say anything about Mei's physical appearance, but I might never have said anything nice about any other characteristic she had, other than implying that she was smart.

It's sort of a stereotype that female friends compliment each other, while male friends put each other down, though. "Believe in yourself," is your message.

I am just extemporizing here, but the whole, "people can't accurately measure their own ability": unskilled people overestimate their ability, while skilled people underestimate their ability. So, the message that "you are better than you think" is a message that should be targeted towards skilled people.

But among skilled people, I do think that very skilled people often don't benefit from having an accurate estimate of their own capabilities. If I had not been the smartest person in my school, I would not have, years later, take this course of action that has wasted 15 years of my life.

Your final advice, to your younger self and your audience: "Criticism can be shared in a respectful and constructive manner. If it's not respectful, it's not important." The ultimate lack of respect for someone is to kill them (although opinions may differ). Not to imply that fighting is the most important thing, but people encounter outcomes that they don't like. The Armero tragedy in 1985, which honestly I confused with the Vargas tragedy in 1999 as the first event that I found from searching just now. Over 23k people dead due to lahars from a volcano that was (cannot immediately find in article) km away. The Wikipedia article has a section, "Preparation and attempted evacuation". It says,

Henry Villegas of INGEOMINAS (Colombian Institute of Mining and Geology) stated that the hazard maps clearly demonstrated that Armero would be affected by lahars, but that the map "met with strong opposition from economic interests".

Would the criticism of the lack of proper measures taken have been better received if this criticism was worded more respectfully?

Those deaths weren't caused by human fighting; it was, as they say, mother nature, who is indifferent to human suffering.

To Pokimane: Weird Sex Post

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

To Pokimane, pt 6

I realized a few days ago that even though I will not check Greta Thunberg's Chirp Club account, I can check her Instagram account. I didn't want to do this in case I was wrong, and you do know me, since I felt me checking Greta Thunberg's Instagram account would make you less happy.

I will watch your Twitch stream "kinda moody td but i have an hour before my meeting!! hello!!" but I don't think I will learn anything from it. And so I felt justified in procrastinating. Based on the title and the timing of this stream, I felt that if you do know me, it wouldn't make you less happy if I started checking Greta's Instagram account, so I am now doing that as well as checking Malala's Instagram account.

The reasoning is that if I check Greta's Instagram account, or do anything else (like I had been thinking of checking climate trends, and decided against it for the same reason), then it's like I'm trying to get Greta to share the idea. Even if I'm not trying to get you to share the idea, I didn't want to imply that I was just trying to 'use' you by convincing you to share the idea, even if that might in fact be the case.

Now I feel like, if I am wrong and you do know me, then you are convinced that you will not share the idea and that it's only a matter of time before I stop paying attention to you, and that it would be better for that to happen sooner rather than later.

By checking Greta's Instagram account, I am removing any suggestion that it might be better for the world if I stopped paying attention to you.

It seems that Greta might only, like, repost things from other people. I did not even know this was possible with Instagram, but when I clicked on her most recent three posts, they all redirected to posts by other people. It appeared the only way to know this for a particular post was to click on it, since the URL when mousing over each post still included her username @gretathunberg, and it only changed to a different username when loading the post in a new tab.

Instagram frequently redirects to a login page so I am forced to use Picuki to check a profile more than once per day, and there doesn't appear to be any way in Picuki to check who the author of a post was. So I am just assuming Greta only reposts things, based on incomplete information.

So, her second-most-recent post is about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Alex_Pretti#Shooting.

Law enforcement in the US shooting unarmed people is a topic that I am familiar with. Most people didn't care that the police shot Dzhokhar Tsarnaev many times when he was getting out of the boat, which led to uncertainty about whether he would die and then uncertainty about whether he would be able to speak again as he had been shot in the throat. And most people also didn't care when an acquaintance of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother was fatally shot by law enforcement while wielding a plastic broom as a weapon.

So I just thought of a poll that could be interesting: "Would you rather that ICE reduce its anti-immigration raids by 50%, or that the Border Patrol agents who shot a nurse 10 times in 5 seconds while he lay on the ground go to prison?"

It seems doubtful that the agents who made poor decisions that led to someone's death will be punished. But do people really care whether the agents are punished?

Unplanned confession

To Imane, aka Pokimane, again. A normal person makes conclusions based on evidence. One piece of evidence that I use to conclude that you don't know me is the video, "get to know me pt 2" that you posted on TikTok and Instagram. It let me know how to pronounce your name (silent 'e'), but you also stated, "i plan for my next partner to be my husband".

I try to act in a way that discourages the possibility from occurring, but if I had to get married to get people to use the idea, I would do it. It just makes sense.

I feel that I am, at this moment, someone who still cares about certain people. Like the person Kate mentioned on this site, who seems to have lost her first Chirp Club account and made a second account on which her only activity was to message a male adult content creator, and whom I haven't tried to email in 13 years. She only emailed me once, in Dec 2010, after the events I mentioned before and was going to say more about later in this post. She might not have thought of me in years; despite the excuse of not being a native English speaker, the language mistakes on her second post on her first account suggest she might not have understood this idea, if she read my emails about it; and yet I would like to be able to say, like a character in the film Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon as translated for the original DVD, "I would rather be a ghost, drifting by your side as a condemned soul, than enter heaven without you."

About the post titled "Entropy": https://daughterofankh.blogspot.com/2010/12

I checked the date, for science, via chat logs. The night that I stayed outside the public library was Dec 8 to 9, so 12:47 on Dec 10 was well into the next day, when I was at a hotel.

I would, of course, post the chat logs if it was relevant. These ones would not contain anything particularly embarrassing. I feel like Mei is someone who values the truth, and benefit to the world, over any potential embarrassment to herself.

According to (a) Wikipedia (editor), Napoleon III's last words when he died in 1873 were, ' "Isn't it true that we weren't cowards at Sedan?", directed at Henri Conneau, his attendant who fought in the battle alongside him.'

In what in fact turns out to be a footnote in the Book of Five Rings, which reveals that this version which I happened to have bookmarked must have been the same edition that I read years ago, someone who was less famous than the author of that book is quoted as having wrote,

The Way of the warrior is death. This means choosing death whenever there is a choice between life and death. It means nothing more than this. It means to see things through, being resolved. Sayings like "To die with your intention unrealized is to die uselessly", and so on, are from the weak Kyoto, Osaka Bushido. They are unresolved as to whether to keep to their original plan when faced with the choice of life and death.

For science, I checked my chat logs from the day when I was at the library, and am pasting basically the last page of the logs here:

(03:32:35 PM) Lillium: i'd get annoyed, probably be intolerable and we'd never talk again?  How many times do I have to say I'm not interested in a relationship? At all.
(03:32:55 PM) Misaki: mm that'd be fine, i still want to
(03:33:38 PM) Lillium: If you already know the result, then there isn't much point.
(03:34:02 PM) Misaki: maybe i just want sex!
(03:34:54 PM) Lillium: Then why ask me. Not like there arn't plenty of people who don't require travel time. And are probably far more willing.
(03:35:31 PM) Misaki: but they aren't you, so~
(03:42:41 PM) Lillium: ... Fake blizzard emails about cata beta invite. Hmm
(03:42:46 PM) Lillium: China missed the memo I guess.
(03:43:58 PM) Lillium: anyways~ off for now.
(03:44:07 PM) Misaki: address~
(03:44:39 PM) Lillium: No -_-;
(07:34:44 PM) Misaki: library is closing, need address~
(07:34:44 PM) Message could not be sent because the user is offline:
(07:34:44 PM) library is closing, need address~
(07:34:55 PM) Misaki: test
(07:34:55 PM) Message could not be sent because the user is offline:
(07:34:55 PM) test
(07:35:04 PM) Misaki: test
(07:35:04 PM) Message could not be sent because the user is offline:
(07:35:04 PM) test
(07:35:13 PM) lyciena@hotmail.com is now known as a.

System log for account r[redacted]@yahoo.com (msn) connected at Thu 09 Dec 2010 10:13:58 AM PST
---- +++ r[redacted]@yahoo.com signed on @ 12/09/2010 10:13:58 AM ----
---- Misaki (r[redacted]@yahoo.com) changed status from Offline to Available @ 12/09/2010 10:13:58 AM ----
---- Lillium (l[redacted]@hotmail.com) changed status from Offline to Available @ 12/09/2010 01:15:52 PM ----
---- Misaki (r[redacted]@yahoo.com) changed status from Available to Away @ 12/09/2010 07:34:58 PM ----
---- Misaki (r[redacted]@yahoo.com) changed status from Away to Available @ 12/09/2010 07:35:02 PM ----
---- +++ r[redacted]@yahoo.com signed off @ 12/09/2010 07:35:06 PM ----

So what would have happened if I had sent a message earlier in those four hours, before the library closed? Would I have sent an email like, "I am staying outside the library again", and then died? After I did send a message, four hours later, when it was already cold and dark, did not doing this make me a coward? Am I someone who would take an action most likely to lead to someone being happy, even if I died, or am I only willing to appear to risk death as a future possibility that can still be averted?

One could make a joke about how this is a question I don't know the answer to.

Also, of course, one could speculate that I tricked Mei into not agreeing to meet me, in order to benefit Kate. But what if that isn't true?