artistinexile

You have reached the inbox of the former Grand Admiral Thrawn of the Imperial Star Destroyer Chimaera and the Seventh Fleet, also formerly known as Senior Commander Mitth'raw'nuruodo of the Springhawk.

I will return your message promptly.

[The message repeats in six different languages]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

forensicks

[Walter has been diligently stalking the comments on that bill of rights post but this is what finally made him snap and use his communicator in relation to it.]

I'm sure you're going to get Arthur sputtering at you about how enforcing a document that hasn't yet been ratified is clearly, nay, *self-evidently* impossible. But he will likely remain conveniently silent about how it will be enforced if and when it is ratified. I take it then you have also not been privy to the discussions with inmates that led to the production of this inmate-authored bill of rights?

From:

artistinexile

I have not.

From:

forensicks

You have, however, been involved in discussions about topics that this bill of rights pointedly does not address, such as autonomy within inmate jobs. Do you consider the topics that are addressed, mostly just abusive behavior by wardens (which Arthur himself claims is vanishingly rare), to be of particular importance?

From:

artistinexile

I began those conversations in earnest to address waste of resource management, not of abuses of power.

The pushback I received on all fronts, especially with regard to safety measures makes for an inherently stagnant creative space.

I believe you had some disagreement yourself.

From:

forensicks

You remember correctly! 🕺 I believe "this is the way things always have been" is the truest of dangers on the Barge.

[THIS IS HOW WALTER REMEMBERS IT.]

Do you know any inmate who considers wardens intentionally, directly abusing their power to be their biggest concern?

From:

artistinexile

I agree.

I also recall you taking offense to the way I dated the ship but did not produce a viable alternative.

No. But this was not something I had taken into consideration. I find that a broad range of powers is best when dealing with matters and if the concerns are too egregious, demotion will occur.

That being said, I cannot make guesses into the minds of my fellow prisoners. Perhaps someone should make a poll.

[such dry sarcasm on behalf of so much politicizing. Thrawn is in hell]

From:

forensicks

That's because although I think something like what would now be Year 17 *would* be more appropriate for recording the history of the community of the barge, a year like Year 7 referring to the maintenance calendar of the current barge unit is something I can wash my hands of, as it's not my area of activity. Also, basically no one else cared either, so I figured there were not going to be cases of a Barge community history actually getting mucked up by the description year 7 of the barge unit. I digress. I think you have a valid perspective that wardens have their powers for a reason, and that's frankly a more dignifying approach than presenting extremely common imprisonment practices as either the height of cruelty *or* the height of mercy. Notice for instance how wardens reading their own inmates' files is taken for granted. Why? I know some wardens actually think they shouldn't without permission. Why is one common practice condoned, the other condemned? I respect your answer that you haven't heard anything in particular from other inmates, so I don't have too much more to ask. To be perfectly frank, I wouldn't believe that an inmate wrote this if that weren't too bold a lie in such a closed community. My investigation shall continue elsewhere...

From:

artistinexile

I was not interested in the history of the community. As an inmate in charge of maintaining the ship, I was interested in an all-use maintenance calendar and placed it in public so that when I have left this ship, it may be used by others after me.

But you are correct: let us move on.

There is a difficulty in a catch-all system when everyone is from vastly different experiences. I trust the Admiral to pair me with the best possible warden: very rarely have I seen unpairings occur. There is a system already: one that the Admiral has created, where each pairing will have its own rules and standards based on a mutual warden-inmate understanding. I believe other wardens stepping in to tell my warden what to do with me is grossly improper and a waste of time: if I decide to do something egregious that warrants punishment, my warden is clever enough to redirect.

We were, after all, paired for a reason.

Do you wish to discover who is the author of this declaration?

From:

forensicks

Setting aside whether I trust the admiral (I don't and I'm happy to elaborate but that's way outside our scope), I agree that you describe the system quite accurately. Regardless of whether one should trust the admiral and the warden, the fact of the matter is that power *is* vested in the warden. It would be a waste of time for Arthur or whoever if the warden asked the admiral to make you stop using your communicator, for the simple reason that the Admiral will only listen to the warden in question! I would happy to know the author, but I don't intend to uncover the author. I would be happy to have an in depth conversation with any inmate who sincerely believes the bill of rights will be helpful! I'd go to whoever said any such thing first. Would the possibility of this "improper" meddling be bothersome enough for you to oppose the bill that would make it more commonplace?

From:

artistinexile

I would, but perhaps at another time. I would like to know who could think they know what my warden and I require better than we know ourselves. Are you asking for my support?

From:

forensicks

Do you want it? I'll admit you and I may have incompatible long-term goals. But in the short-term, seeing this bill rebuked would be quite satisfying.

From:

artistinexile

I have often been accused of preemptively taking advantage of an opportunity when it presents itself without waiting for opinion. Here, I am witnessing the opposite: a slow, ponderous democracy, saddled with arguments and voting and signatures. It is as unsatisfying as watching it play out in my home galaxy.

From:

forensicks

Can't say you're wrong about that either.

What would satisfy you?

Actually, more interesting question. Have you blown up a planet?

From:

artistinexile

[ohhh boy. That IS an interesting question, for a variety of reasons.

Thrawn hesitates. He has a strong feeling Walter may know his galaxy, but Thrawn is reluctant to voice his thoughts on the matter. The Death Star is a secret during his time; he has come very close to being executed for discovering it, and has been working to stop it from ever coming into play.

He does not wish to make Walter a target, should they ever share an enemy]

From:

forensicks

Obviously such a question would be the definition of sensitive in nature. But I was just curious. It seems that magnitude of crime is inversely correlated with time until graduation. I was surprised to hear how high up that scale could go, and when you talked of governments, it occurred to me that you might fall into the reference class. Haven't really gotten to pick anyone's brain about it yet.

Apologies if that was a stereotype.

Edited (Definition OF sensitive in nature) Date: 2025-04-04 04:36 am (UTC)