Credibility is essential for sustaining the highest quality in any community.

At least as of this authoring, humanity has opted for positioning within power hierarchies as the dominant basis for defining credibility within society, because of the convenience offered by that rigid structuring (basically the popular 'build it and leave it until sufficient pressure dangerously threatens it' approach).

However, as history reveals, credibility associated with a position is actually nonexistent at times, because position alone does not ensure credibility – e.g. a selfish jerk abusively leveraging credibility merely associated with their powerful position.

Moreover, people in powerful positions often extend their area of power by extending that rigid structuring (perhaps including an extension away from public scrutiny to better hide corruption).

Defending position-based power on the flip side, logic dictates that delays (perhaps disastrous ones) occur, if there are basically two (or more) leaders of equal power (e.g. two captains leading one ship) demanding conflicting reactions. Since rapid responses (sometimes needed for best adaptation) require properly rapid decision-making, power hierarchies are not taboo.

However, righteous power must be earned in achievement and sustainment. That does not only apply to the individual occupying a powerful position, but also the position itself. That earning can only righteously be determined by those who are impacted by that power.

Credibility comes in two forms – actual and perceived.

Actual credibility is preferred for righteous intent and the delivery of high-quality results, and is essential for guidance and reduces (if not minimizes) the risk of making a mistake.

Perceived credibility has a strong actual impact, because many beings gamble on the perceived credibility of other beings to avoid the burden of first validating that credibility prior to placing reliance upon that credibility.

That gamble is a risky choice, but a reasonable one when confronted with excessive unhealthy stress from exercising the constant need for that validation.

Any abusive individual relying upon perceived credibility to disguise their lack of actual credibility should reasonably understand the serious risk in that "house of cards" approach, while also understanding the common tip "cheat, cheat, never beat" that reality insists upon repeating often throughout entertainment history (i.e. "clever" antagonist always eventually losing).

Credibility (actual or perceived) is essential for survival, because our credibility is the ultimate basis for our value in society and therefore our resource acquisition and sustainment ability.

Resources include any perceived energy construct (e.g. money, emotion, and so on) and naturally the ultimate resource (i.e. whole truth itself).

Value is always subjective (scientifically speaking). Logically the value of any resource is ultimately determined in effect by the credibility of the individual using or abusing that resource, so not just the value of the resource.

Asforus (i.e. the All Sines realm), seamlessly including the All Sines Tribe (AST) and relevant rippling energy (e.g. entertainment, friendly vibes, and so on) all naturally constitutes a self-sustaining system without relying upon excessively and/or inappropriately rigid constructs.

Conflicts between Asforus and whole truth (i.e. conflict against the ultimate system of systems – a.k.a. reality) will obviously harm Asforus, so the primary goal of Asforus is to adapt to whole truth.

Asforus works, rests, and plays (i.e. whatever form of action or inaction needed) intentionally as a healthy and seamless part of reality (Asforus, like anyone within reality, paradoxically is and is not synonymous with reality – due to the energy that forms subjectivity).

For Asforus to survive (and perhaps even thrive), credibility must be properly cultivated by the AST via genuine caring combined with sufficient power.

While that may suggest a dominating centralization (i.e. a central authority enforcing rules), the potential for correspondingly dominating abuse caused by that central authority requires an actual counterbalance with decentralization.

In short, a sufficient balance of power wherever power exists is a (if not the) key towards the stability of any system (i.e. in shorter, balance is needed for stability), and that obviously includes any balance of power involving Asforus.

The power of decentralized individuals seeking to oppose abuse is the ability to organize themselves into whatever form those individuals righteously deem necessary to sufficiently expose centralized corruption for proper remedy – that includes a form sufficient to replace abusive centralization.

That competitive format helps ensure central structuring is (and remains) proper, and provides optimal effort to satisfy all beings of Asforus.

That additionally and equally Asforus-encouraged decentralized power structuring works far better than such power being firmly limited (by application of force against stronger decentralized power gain) to an election process established and maintained by the central authority.

That betterment comes from the temptation otherwise towards an ironic abuse for the sake of selfish beings within central authority (e.g. control election parameters solely to express the mere illusion of both accountability and a healthy balance of power with decentralization) – i.e. elections are not always an effective deterrant against an abusive central authority.

Elections are not necessarily wrong in all cases. If the right voting option is truly available (i.e. the option actually leading to better sustaining Asforus), and voters are sufficiently informed to vote for that option, then that election works flawlessly. Of course, ensuring that righteousness remains a challenge – if that ensuring is even possible.

There is only one righteous defense against dominating decentralization in Asforus, and that is an objectively grounded basis for implementing or sustaining an unpopular rule (i.e. a basis grounded purely in whole truth, so not a basis from the 'partial truth = whole truth' scam, or any other form of deceit).

That proper basis must be respected by anyone outside of central authority, and is an essential ingredient towards demonstrating intelligence and civility (an ingredient obviously wisely expressed throughout Asforus).

Without "iron fist" restrictions regarding claims of affiliation with All Sines (i.e. without officially assigned positions supposedly to ensure actual credibility is conveniently visible for the AST), abuse becomes grossly facilitated among the natural disorder. Anyone can unfortunately then unethically leverage All Sines to cause problems (due to poor-quality content, rights-infringing activity, and so on), so increase the risk of All Sines' demise due to questionable – if not the outright loss of – credibility.

That abuse defies actual credibility relied upon by well-behaving beings to ensure at least a suitably high-quality All Sines experience. That abuse is a part of entropy.

Healthily working and resting against abuse is no different than similarly working and resting against other forms of damaging effects (e.g. in order to maintain a building, ecosystem, and/or so on).

Civilized reasoning concludes such proper maintenance includes negating ironically abusively trashing convicted abusers.

That trashing occurs from a compulsion towards venting out pent-up stress, but logically for a positive result, that venting should naturally be limited to healthy forms (e.g. laughing, healthy sex, relevant exercise, any healthy form of expression that an audience can opt out of, venting anger purely honestly "against" reality itself to supremely diffuse that anger, crying when all else fails, and any other fitting example this author may be missing).

Central authority can make and enforce one or more rules of any strength to ensure sufficient order to maintain a healthy Asforus.

Enforcement must solely occur by optimal and completely honest expression to leverage the serious power of public awareness.

Violent punishment (or any other form of harm, but inevitably aside from the harm due to natural credibility loss) is unacceptable.

Strength of enforcement (or lack thereof) is based entirely upon the credibility (actual, or unfortunately perceived) of central authority – including the ability, or lack thereof, to express the validity of a rule. That provides supreme incentive for the central authority to increase actual credibility to righteously maintain power (or risk losing it by decentralized backlash).

Anyone always has an opportunity to express accusations or refute them (albeit anyone also has the freedom to ignore that expression).

That opportunity comes from the existence of a global (if not supremely reaching) communications system – called the internet herein, but that term herein constitutes the internet and any other similar system throughout existence (e.g. if aliens connect their communications system with humanity's internet and call it something else).

That distinction or extension is acknowledged due to the logical possibility that Asforus exists long enough to adapt accordingly. Never to be pretentious about it, but Asforus is designed to be relevant throughout posterity, although Asforus' termination obviously may occur well before that ultimate generational span (obviously when the AST cannot – e.g. from a lack of desire – properly cultivate the actual credibility necessary for sustaining Asforus).

Critically note the internet must be seriously extremely defended by the public – to protect that free expression and ignoring of that expression – against proponents constantly and passionately pressing their dominating selfish agendas.

That includes those proponents' need to silence relevant and prominent – and perhaps even righteous – dissent.

That public shield must always sufficiently remain, regardless of whether or not those selfish agendas are based upon deceitful proclamations to protect the children or supposedly provide some other societal benefit.

At least because optimal communication is needed for optimal survival, there is nothing righteously acceptable about outright terminating or otherwise limiting access to the internet, regardless of claims (obviously including euphemized ones) to the contrary.

Accessing the internet typically requires tapping into services provided by other beings, and while crippling (if not disabling) internet access is wrong, so too is insisting those services be freely provided at the expense of those providers.

Balance (required for survival) in effect concludes that no "free lunch" exists within reality (basically every action is an opposite and equal reaction), so any of us must earn our way to achieve credibility.

Fair compensation for any internet service provider is obviously appropriate for as long as that service provision exists (e.g. future individuals may be born with biocomputing mechanisms negating the need for that provision).

To ensure that fairness, artificially inflated pricing structures due to unhealthy dominance, or any other form of unethically crippling compensation ability (i.e. theft), must be sufficiently publicly exposed and consequently properly addressed by adding at least one suitable competitor of sufficient credibility to bypass corruption.

To uphold the public good, internet access providers need to provide an option forming at least the most basic access possible (i.e. a static set of fundamental internet access and communication tools). Due to continuous technological improvement, that static technology set naturally becomes less expensive over time (assuming natural market forces occur), so increasingly allows access by even the financially poorest individuals trying to survive. Granted that access will still be limited compared to state-of-the-art access and networking experience, but even basic text communication is at least arguably better than no access, and even remains preferable in a 'less is more' sense (e.g. fancy "bells and whistles" can be an unhealthy distraction).

When this credibility piece was authored and last refined, and although this author thankfully had no complaints against his internet service provider (at least up to that last revision), serious technological limits concernedly existed in the means to access the internet.

Typically only one access channel was provided by one company, so an effective monopoly capable of heavy abuse was created, and was only partially offset by a nearly equally potentially abusive duopoly when only two access options existed.

The internet has effectively earned the status of being critical, so requires healthy competition to provide enough access channels to minimize the risk of corruption (including seriously, if not extremely, dangerous control of information to dishonestly manipulate the masses).

That cannot necessarily be achieved properly by judicial regulation (which has too often been corrupted by powerful influence to unethically diffuse or redirect the righteous intent of such regulation and therefore negate the intended proper power balance), but can necessarily be achieved properly by technological advancement allowing sufficient competition to naturally balance power and negate corruption.

In short, redundancy is wise in critical applications, and ensuring innovative-but-small teams are not ironically tragically hindered (e.g. by horribly excessive judicial regulations) against properly competing to ensure an abusive internet service provider cannot remain stagnantly in power is equally wise.

Speaking of that redundancy, since wrongly empowered beings may abuse power to censor or modify content – perhaps including this credibility piece (obviously only if it exceeds a certain threshold of prominence to form the incentive towards that modification or removal – such incentive including this piece being wrongly perceived as a threat) – the prudence in sufficient redundancy for continuously pure effectiveness at least suggests that anyone finding credibility in this (or any other relevant) piece logically should copy and paste it elsewhere (using a hash function to ensure unaltering) to ensure purity against that abuse. The suggested title in this case is "Echo Credibility", or "Echo All Sines Credibility" upon the existence of multiple legitimate credibility pieces.

In case of lacking clarity, the reason for extending this piece to cover proposed internet access ideas is due to the essential nature of the internet (actually communication itself) with respect to healthily sustaining Asforus. If the internet (communication) is corrupt, then Asforus likely becomes unavoidably corrupted, which obviously defies righteous intent (i.e. actual credibility).

Language is also critical. Evolving language (especially by way of increasing certainties and eliminating confusing language constructs – e.g. set a hard-line that effectively defines use as a harmless act and abuse as a harmful act) is paramount.

That critical nature is not the furthest reach of that nature. Greatness (at least arguably) cannot be truly achieved by humanity until every being with actual credibility has access to clean air, clean water, clean food, and clean shelter – all to the fullest extent possible via humanity's control.

Reality demonstrates the experience of positive dominance, negative dominance, and balance dominance (or "posdom", "negdom", and "baldom" respectively for simpler communication). Credibility naturally is directly created, destroyed, and sustained by those experiences respectively, although it is worth noting that one being's posdom can be another being's negdom (among any other similar outcome between those three fundamental extremes) in the competition for survival and "thrival" (any outcome within reality is relative).

The credibility of anyone expressing (or refuting) accusations naturally amplifies the impact of that expression, so provides another incentive for individuals to maximize their credibility.

The true highest court is the one of public opinion, and that remains the only court in Asforus to help naturally shape individual (a.k.a. group, because an individual is a group of cells or such) credibility.

A formal legal system can be (and is too often) abused – even to widespread and deeply devastating degrees.

That formality does not negate abuse (that negation obviously the intended purpose of a legal system in any honorable sense), but instead provides very powerful opportunities for the dominant to maintain their dominance ironically by the exercise of abuse within that abuse-prevention system (negdom obeys no law – with the only exception being reality's need for balance).

Asforus relies upon the supreme law of reality itself (a.k.a. Rule of Reality). In other words, whole truth itself is the ultimate leader of Asforus (not anyone within reality).

Critically note that no one within reality can ever (or should ever try to) claim to properly speak on behalf of reality (e.g. for the unethical sake of leveraging mass control by pretending to supremely represent – so honorably convey – reality's demands), because reality "speaks" for itself (via experience itself).

The literally unbreakable Rule of Reality logically concludes that any abusive behavior (including victimization from that abuse) is fully compensated for in strictest accordance with reality's need for balance. To understand the scientific basis for the Rule of Reality, understand Reality Waveform Theory (or relevant equivalent with respect to that Rule).

Instead of drawing a hard-line between being convicted or not, guilt is naturally measured in degrees and scope (i.e. resonance).

The stronger the case against the accused, the higher the natural guilt factor and naturally accompanying loss of credibility.

Without a formal judicial system within Asforus, there is no prison system sheltering and separating the convicted there, while operating likely at heavy expense against the AST.

When the Asforus system works properly, the only acceptable form of punishment is naturally applied within Asforus. That punishing effect must equal accurately (including, without any negative emotion, carefully) taking away only the power (naturally including the credibility) that was abused by the convicted individual, so requiring the punished to righteously meet the serious natural challenge(s) necessary to regain that power (if possible).

As the AST is a seamless part of nature, part of that punishment naturally includes actively ensuring everyone within Asforus understands such power loss to avoid further victimization by that abuse (competent entertainment suffices).

Any abuse prevention system can (if not will) ironically be abused (e.g. unethical accusations, leveraging the Big Lie technique, and so on). The only opposition against that abuse – other than the natural disincentive due to the Rule of Reality – is increasing the ability for all individuals to properly scrutinize and communicate in a manner to the serious disadvantage of abusers (e.g. a practice exercised in the blogosphere/journasphere to relatively quickly and broadly expose reason abuse and naturally corresponding credibility loss against that abuser).

The Rule of Reality is logically a sufficiently powerful deterrant against intentional abuse, but evidence at least suggests that abuse is inevitable (due to the necessary imperfection within reality) and can trump sound reasoning (or apparently there are equally valid alternative reasons only understood by the abuser – i.e. conflict of interest).

Based at least upon common sense, whole truth (reality) is the only actual foundation. Without that foundation, any form of reason abuse (lies, spin, and so on) proliferates, and when that absence of truth is combined with convincingly righteous and honest presentation styling (including that backed by powerful individuals with a lot of resources to dominate mental impressions), the disaster can be enormous (even destabilizing our species possibly to the point of extinction).

The more individuals understand the need to be rationally grounded in (i.e. optimally tuned in with) whole truth (instead of leveraging partial truth as whole truth by being grounded solely within subjectivity), the more they can identify and properly deal with the 'partial truth = whole truth' scam (or other deceit).

Factoring in the Rule of Reality (i.e. knowing the logically most powerful being is always aware of, and must compensate for, any abusive result), there is a natural incentive for anyone to minimize their abuse (knowing they face antagonizing consequences otherwise), instead of recklessly letting their abuse fly via stupidity or pure denial.

Similar to a healthy individual (e.g. professional athlete) remaining properly flexible for injury risk reduction and optimal performance, Asforus relies upon similar flexibility (i.e. responsible flexibility) for best adaptation (adaptability is critical towards survivability).

Healthy flexibility is needed to avoid critical stress against Asforus (e.g. selfish dominating view in the guise of benefiting Asforus that becomes wrongfully embraced and consequently entrenched by the AST).

Rules governing Asforus must respect that flexibility without sacrificing Asforus to chaos (a.k.a. irresponsible flexibility), and that honorable goal is a very complex and challenging one that cannot be achieved solely by any dominantly powerful central authority.

For maximum flexibility, only the parts of Asforus needed for its existence must be solidly identified and consequently sustained as the sole rigidity of the Asforus system. In other words, in terms of rigidity, optional rigid parts are negated in favor of an actual hard core solely containing necessary fundamental parts for Asforus' existence.

As any extreme rigidity within reality is eventually doomed to fail, Asforus' core structuring may occasionally evolve as undeniably needed by the AST due to relevant experimentally proven conclusions via the strictest (e.g. conclusive, so never suggestive) application of the scientific method.

Everything else (including whatever may become traditional) is subject to possible healthy change in accordance with the ultimate discipline of adaptation (i.e. adaptation itself is the dominant tradition in Asforus – so time-honored wrongness is always instantly condemned).

To roughly understand how simple that core rigidity must be, anyone understanding core language constructs (e.g. English) and properly working to understand that core rigidity must be able to (with solely the application of healthy stress – e.g. not cramming the information 24/7, or such) within one month (if not within one week).

Complex systems beyond full understanding (e.g. economy, society, and so on) are obviously sometimes confusing, unwieldy, and "breeding grounds" for corruption as such, so supposed control (actually the rules empowering that control) should never exist, obviously because no individual (including a group of self-proclaimed experts) can defy that lack of understanding.

Unwieldy complexity must be left in the metaphorical hands of whole truth (reality) itself with perfect confidence in the pros and cons (e.g. winners and losers) of that natural assignment – understanding that reality's need for balance always dominates.

There is ultimately no hard-line between centralization and decentralization. Each is a subjective resonance smoothly blending with each other and the rest of reality.

Complexity in reality often shows many individuals with self-serving agendas emerging within the centralized and decentralized segments of society. That outcome likely exists within Asforus too. There is nothing wrong with that, except for when an agenda objectively conflicts with the fundamental needs of Asforus. Having unknowns (including those that typically come from self-interests) compels established powers to avoid settling into an unhealthy dominance to stagnate Asforus.

As reality is subjectively purely in motion – i.e. reality is a boundless ocean of modulating energy currents from humanity's perspective – stagnation always creates at least one bubble (i.e. some form of energy dam) continuing to build up potential energy during the sufficient strength of that stagnation.

Winners and losers (always only possibly subjectively determined) typically emerge from any given bubble, and bubbles are everywhere (what we typically call this universe is apparently one of them), so bubbles are not necessarily evil.

By allowing healthy competition against unhealthy stagnation (such health determined objectively to the fullest extent possible for fairness, which is definitively necessary for justice), dangerous bubbles (e.g. bubbles threatening destruction against maximally objectively determined righteousness) can be better managed to avoid those dangerously destructive spikes (i.e. dangerously large bubble bursting).

Gaining and sustaining popular AST support is an important goal for anyone within Asforus.

The suffering factor provided by that individual (a.k.a. group) provides whatever basis fitting for that support. The less suffering imposed upon others, the more support earned. While no suffering is obviously preferable, reality at least suggests (by the imperfection mandated by the laws of physics) that such "no exhaust" outcome is impossible.

Any suffering caused is the primary focal point for public exposure in Asforus to protect the well-behaving (i.e. those individuals not directly infringing upon the rights of others) from victimization.

To ensure centralized rules are just, flawless incentive must exist for the central authority to only form just rules. That necessitates a requirement (i.e. fundamental rule) that all rules equally apply to all individuals (including those making and enforcing the rules), regardless of any risk to the contrary.

Central authority cannot be reponsible for settling all conflicts within Asforus. That responsibility would grow central authority to an unwieldy degree, so grossly increase the risk of corruption. Central authority is roughly the equivalent of a referee (not coach, team owner, league owner, and so on) in a sporting event. Central authority only addresses conflicts that are understood to directly, irrefutably objectively, and negatively affect Asforus to the degree of Asforus' termination (not merely degradation).

Rule enforcement can obviously be abused (e.g. unethical favoritism, and so on), so the enforced (capable of ending that abuse, when they are sufficiently organized) must be informed enough to ensure the enforcers are putting their best effort against their own imperfections. That is at least arguably the most serious problem for many (if not all) communities, because enforcing good enforcement is too often ignored by the decentralized. In other words, the enforced have too often overwhelmingly dominantly demonstrated insufficient power individually or desire to promptly deal with central authority corruption.

Keeping individuals sufficiently informed is critical (and a serious challenge), so there must be prominent, conveniently accessible, and entertaining news reporting in Asforus.

That reporting must be external to Real Wave – i.e. the private and small business providing All Sines, and the (at least initial) central authority – to avoid any potential conflict of interest.

While (at least up to the time of this authoring) the mainstream media dominantly reports superficially impressive tragedy, and therefore needs conflict-of-interest-generating relationships with government (i.e. the people consistently on the frontlines of those tragic events), and that conflict too often opposes the peoples' right to know – effectively basically forming state-run media – Asforus news outlets cannot righteously also embrace that (nor any other) conflict of interest (even if needed for professional survival). Creative minds must insist upon finding entertaining ways to properly inform without infringing upon any individual's rights, and never rely upon similar tragedy reporting (and/or such) for its pathetically cheap entertainment value (and/or such).

Conflict of interest (or selfishly competing interest) is what corruption is basically (if not completely) about, so any such interest objectively proven to endanger Asforus must be sufficiently publicly exposed to prevent any beneficiary from abusively pursuing that Asforus-abusing interest.

Credibility is never to be definitively tied to any individual (a.k.a. group) within reality for the sake of laziness, and so on.

Credibility is an effect, so naturally resonates with certain individuals (typically in the form of popular accomplishment) at certain times. When you are one of those individuals, be thankful and also understand that resonance can (and eventually will) end. If you want to be around for the possible revisit of that effect in your life, at least exercise discipline necessary to properly secure and invest resources that you earned from that effect.

Net jockeys (NJs), possibly with other volunteers, are responsible for consistently scanning Asforus for credibility shifts, though critically noting the obvious risk in having those NJs (intentionally or otherwise) defy the aforementioned tying of credibility to themselves.

Credibility is subjective, so the possibility exists that garbage content from one perspective (i.e. no credibility) exists alongside glorious praise of that same content (i.e. highest credibility) from another perspective.

Credibility conflicts are natural, and since Asforus is sufficiently sized, there is plenty of room for peaceful coexistence among conflicting views regarding credibility, and room for those within conflicting parties to optionally try to rationally work out differences for mutual understanding (the best – and at least arguably the only – form of conflict resolution).

There are no laws allowing someone to negate the possibility of securing a certain trademark, so Real Wave had to defensively officially secure the All SinesTM and AsforusTM trademarks to prevent the possibility of someone else securing them against our ability to use them.

Since "Flexible Credibility Recognition" relied upon to sustain All Sines is apparently a new (or not thoroughly tested) concept, having the legal protection of such trademarks allows for All Sines to experiment without totally losing control during the early stages of building and sustaining Asforus.

If those trademarks ever expire, and if the AST determines there is value in those trademarks, there is to be a lawful, non-violent, and maturely effective backlash against anyone securing one or both of those trademarks. That backlash includes publishing entertainment righteously condemning that unethical securing, while using a new trademark determined by the AST – i.e. leveraging the power of righteous public opinion to discourage that unwelcome securing. If law provides for perpetual public domain trademarks, then the All Sines and Asforus trademarks should be immediately permanently placed in the public domain.

Due to the obvious potential conflict of interest at least between shareholders and fans, Real Wave must remain a private business (obviously requiring reasonably strict discipline in resource management and sufficient financial support by fans to ensure that private status). Profit incentive (and/or any other) must never trump the best All Sines experience possible for the AST. Opposition against maintaining private business status must be met with a similar backlash to the aforementioned one regarding unwelcome trademark securing.

Due to the experimental nature of All Sines that likely produces unintended consequences, Real Wave necessarily reserves the right to lawfully oppose any All Sines (in)activity for the sake of public safety. That obviously includes overriding or removing any expression (e.g. rule) established in Asforus with supreme preference to avoid that horrible necessity (one that inevitably detestably forms hypocrisy).

While posdom and baldom are easy to ally with for community health, to avoid a dishonest (so ironically unethical) misalignment, All Sines must respect the equal role of negdom.

Negdom is a permanently modulating part of reality from any perspective within reality (e.g. there is no creation without destruction, no solution without a problem, and so on).

In a purely energetic sense, negdom is the part of the stress signature that opposes the subjectively defined being experiencing that signature within reality, but necessarily has a balancing opposite signature (i.e. negdom is posdom from the opposite perspective).

Urgently critical is understanding that TrashWalk is the negdom limit of All Sines formality and accountability (that we preferably humorously call All Sins), because TrashWalk is all about exploring negdom without harming anyone (i.e. TrashWalk can be avoided or turned off when desired – and intentionally remains perfectly legal).

Beyond the purely voluntary TrashWalk negdom limit is the automatic suffering (if not deadly) depth of negdom.

To necessarily most strictly uphold All Sines' equal respect for each posdom and baldom, All Sines does not (and can never honestly) support negdom activity beyond that TrashWalk limit, even despite the legitimate role of negdom (e.g. reality's demonstrated need for past horrific outcomes).

"Negdemons" (or such) can leverage All Sines towards imposing suffering (especially if the All Sines trademark is formally placed in the public domain), so urgently critical is understanding the need for anyone embracing the posdom and baldom areas of the All Sines mindset to help keep potential victims on the healthy path (effective education is critical).

Enter the guaranteed destructive area of negdom at your own risk.

As anyone must agree to the unfortunately necessary legal disclaimer with any respect to participating via All Sines, any harmful application of All Sines is a violation of that inevitable contract with fitting consequences. That obviously will not always deter negdemons (or such), so the harmful aspect of All Sin(e)s needs to remain obvious like publicly revealing the mines in a minefield to prevent tragedy.

Even the credibility of this credibility piece is essential, so this literary work can be dynamic and adapt to improvements in the understanding of credibility as righteously determined by the AST via completely conclusive objectivity. You are all forewarned that any other form of adaptation provides an opportunity for corruption to become entrenched at times (hopefully then removed by completely conclusively objective adaptation – noting nothing in reality is eternal, so any example of corruption does end eventually).

The Spirit of Credibility, or SoC – yes, that's intended to make you laugh a bit ("There are some things so serious that you have to laugh at them." - Niels Bohr) – is actually a dynamic (minimal through maximal) energy signature (with subjective boundaries) constituting actual credibility capable of resonating via anyone. SoC is the focal effect within Asforus. Any being (obviously including you) can find constant opportunity to ensure SoC is optimally available (those opportunists coincidentally gaining credibility in the process), including identifying 'credibility abuse' (e.g. solely perceived credibility, and so on).

In short, the abuse of power can only be offset by a balance of power rendering the potential abuser guaranteed self-destruction upon wielding abuse (though the Rule of Reality already provides that guarantee – albeit not necessarily instantly at least upon factoring in the illusory passage of time). Corruption can only be intentionally removed from any area by the leverage of sufficient exposure. The goal is not to eliminate all abuse, because that goal is logically impossible. The goal is to properly manage abuse without ironically being abusive. Demonstrated (not just claimed) suffering offers a clue towards the existence of abusive dominance, so prompting righteousness from the AST.

Credibility is inexact, yet critical. The naturally serious challenge arising from the continuous need to work and rest towards identifying and properly expressing credibility must be met. Survival of the fittest is continuously at work and rest. There is no doubt that dominance (at least essentially) is equal to credibility (i.e. dominance demands credibility be assigned to the dominant, at times public safety sadly be – perhaps euphemistically – condemned).

Ensuring dominance is civilized is righteously priority one.

Last updated: April 17, 2017