+iny ©at people

There are apologies, and apologies.
Actions speak louder than words.

Apologizing is still an action. One that indicates self-reflection and a desire for improvement. Following through on that desire is important to lend credibility to our words, but WORDS ARE ACTION TOO.

hey already know what we are. What new thing do you propose to say to them? Serious question.

Knowing what we are is different from knowing how we think. As for what this voice would propose to say, well, this voice could be specific but that's not really how this works. We're all voices in the same being. None of use are particularly strong enough on our own to say something specific. This voice urges introspection and candidly exposing how fractured and broken we are, so that we can start putting pieces into place and be less so.

>Explain everything to the TCPs (with a minimum of self-recrimination) and ask their advice.

This voice told itself it would avoid using this whenever possible, but absolutely one-thousand percent VETOED. This is not a problem we can pass off to our charges and expect advice from. If it was just for informing them about what transpired and why, then I can see a point to it... especially if we were apologizing to them for inadvertently making things more difficult, complicated, and dangerous. But looking for advice? No. Absolutely, one-billion percent no. That is running away from our responsibility and throwing that burden at beings we're responsible for; beings that we created. Informing them of what has happened and why, apologizing for it, and all that? Yes. Sure. If they offer comments, criticisms, and/or advice then of course we'd listen, but purposefully seeking advice? Going to them, without having learned our lesson, and asking for beings that we're responsible for to tell us what to do about problems we created? Terrible, terrible idea.

Show Content

SpoilerOoC: For the purposes of this story, I'm against removing the author's fiat by dictating exact words/sentences/meanings... all we are in Frog Crimes are feelings, voices, and errant thoughts. We're not coherent enough beings to form full sentences on our own outside of "putting pen to paper" as it were and causing letters to exist. The general principle I'm working on is that we're aspects of Frog Crimes, but are not actually Frog Crimes. Our words and thoughts influence him/them and sometimes, on the rare occasions where a majority of us agree on something, act directly through him/them in a limited fashion. We are less "pilots in control of an airplane", and more "navigational computers pointing towards certain waypoints and cardinal directions."