[2963] "...this could be exacty what she needs."

[imaginaryfriend]

So, no need to help finding Zeta to check?

Also: Second to last panel: If the Court had money, that face should be printed on it.
[edit] Proposed Motto under portrait: Dulce et decorum est [/edit]

[rafk]

Either Omega suddenly has a stutter or there's an accidental duplicated word in the last panel.

Omega does have a point (albeit a self-serving one), which was raised by a number of forumites, that Annie should probably actually check on Zimmy before making assumptions. The question then is can (and will) Omega help Annie reach Zimmy?

[worldsong]

Okay, that just sounds flat out like rationalising.

Annie has been assuming that Zeta is in torment based on past experiences, but now Omega goes all the way in the other direction based on the mere assumption that it might be good for Zeta.

Eventually they're going to have to verify Zeta's state.

[agasa]

Little Miss Utilitarian actually makes a valid point.

Shoud've seen this coming, she's older than steam and had to learn to control near-omniscience.
Plenty of time to become somewhat wise.

[arf]

No longer being in the Court's oracular state, I think Meg is about to discover she doesn't have the last word.

[wanderer]

"There's an infinitessimal chance that instead of undergoing horrific suffering, she's actually okay. So you should ABSOLUTELY operate on the assumption that she is definitely 100% ok without checking on her and let us keep doing this thing that's always harmed her before."

[Angry Robot]

Attention Tom, typo alert: in panel 5, there is a duplicate "to". #crowdsourcedproofreading

[lightshade]

I was wondering if or when Omega would bring up the opposite possibility of this being beneficial for Zimmy. Honestly, both of them are sounding a little pompous right now, acting like they're end-all, be-all of knowing exactly what's going on with Zimmy. "I know I'm right!" "No, I know I'm right!" Ladies, the only way you're going to figure this out is to actually go find Zimmy and see what's going on with her instead of standing around arguing. Maybe one of them is right. Maybe both are. Maybe neither of them is. Perhaps Zimmy is not in agony but she's not really being helped either. Just some sort of neutral state instead. Or maybe Gamma is perfectly fine and Zimmy is not but she's willing to accept that state because, as we've seen before, Zimmy will do just about anything for Gamma if it means keeping her safe and happy.

[lisanela]

Pro tip : to calm someone down with a "she's probably fine!" speech, don't precede it with the "for the greater good" speech from Hot Fuzz.

[imaginaryfriend]

It occurred to me that Omega didn't bring this possibility up when Antimony mentioned the possibility that Zeta was in torment before. Going back and rereading the last few pages, I think it's becoming increasingly clear that Omega is arguing in bad faith. No, it isn't just one person (Zeta) potentially sacrificed, other people are lost in the distortion as well; Anthony brought that up but his point was buried by Omega focusing on attacking Antimony's construction of the problem. The distortion may last indefinitely all things held equal, but Coyote isn't likely to be entertained by it for much longer and his method of ending it probably won't be constructive for Zeta. Asserting that they'd agree with her if they knew what she knew, especially when she's not currently as limited-omniscient as usual, is a fallacy. Saying that Antimony is denying Zeta an opportunity to take advantage of the distortion is an attempt at a script-flip, an effort at leveraging any uncertainty Antimony might have to make Antimony prove Zeta is in trouble instead of relying on Antimony's past experiences with Zeta.

[blahzor]

shoudl have named this "to to"

[Hatredman]

"She's just one person", she said some pages ago. We know it's more that that: between the Loup/Coyote/Ysengrin/Jerrek/Lana/Zimmy/Gamma soup and the lost people from the court, the number can be on the hundreds, even thousands.

Bad faith indeed.
Never trust a witch who can talk through any animal but chose licy crows for the task

[The Anarch]

For supposedly being all-seeing and all-knowing, Omega is putting out a lot of fallacies here.

[pyradonis]

For Coyote's sake, can someone suggest to just go and check on Zimmy already?

By the way, I love how, as usual, no one cares about how Gamma is (I don't love it.).

[stclair]

"More importantly, I should be given this opportunity."

[Gemminie]

Basically ignoring Renard's objections, Omega goes on to postulate (without evidence) that the distortion may be helping Zimmy as it has helped Omega herself. She points out that Annie has been assuming without evidence that Zimmy is in torment due to the distortion. Except Annie points out that there is evidence: every single other time she's distorted reality, Zimmy's been in distress. Why assume this time is any different?

Omega asserts that this time could be different, though she admits she can't see Zimmy (and therefore has no evidence). She thinks they should wait and see whether it helps Zimmy.

[ctso74]

There's also Loup/Jerrik, Gamma, and Lana. As viewers, we know Lana may still be alive inside a "box?". Until we see the twisted ether singularity, we can only guess at everyone's physical state, let alone there emotional one.

[morrahadesigns]

While there is every possibility that Omega is speaking truth here, I still do not sense much altruism in her words. It just feels like more manipulation to me.

[morrahadesigns]

Jul 5, 2024 14:13:48 GMT Gemminie said:

Basically ignoring Renard's objections, Omega goes on to postulate (without evidence) that the distortion may be helping Zimmy as it has helped Omega herself. She points out that Annie has been assuming without evidence that Zimmy is in torment due to the distortion. Except Annie points out that there is evidence: every single other time she's distorted reality, Zimmy's been in distress. Why assume this time is any different?

Omega asserts that this time could be different, though she admits she can't see Zimmy (and therefore has no evidence). She thinks they should wait and see whether it helps Zimmy.

Yep. It's a selfish stance. 

[Igniz]

Jul 5, 2024 13:17:06 GMT pyradonis said:

For Coyote's sake, can someone suggest to just go and check on Zimmy already?

This. As I previously said:

Jun 28, 2024 11:07:56 GMT Igniz said:

That depends of her current status, as well as that of the others involved (Coyote, Loup, Gamma, Lana), which at this point we still have yet to see.

Yeah, Zimmy could be in torment and in a nightmare, but until proven otherwise, the contrary can also be true. Instead, Annie (and Renard) prefers to get fiery, assuming and jumping to conclusions, and losing the cool beans in the process. Point to Homega.

Jul 5, 2024 13:17:06 GMT pyradonis said:

By the way, I love how, as usual, no one cares about how Gamma is (I don't love it.).

+1

[jda]

Jul 5, 2024 7:36:45 GMT rafk said:

Either Omega suddenly has a stutter or there's an accidental duplicated word in the last panel.

Omega does have a point (albeit a self-serving one), which was raised by a number of forumites, that Annie should probably actually check on Zimmy before making assumptions. The question then is can (and will) Omega help Annie reach Zimmy?

Cookie bet: They will find Zimmy in an state of bliss, content of having the Distortion spend all the Ether,
un-encumbering her, so she is finally able to rest and spend a couple of days with Gamma in a meadow.

Plot twist: Renard will sense the absurdity and somehow go a layer down and see that all of that is a ruse by Omega to pacify them

[worldsong]

I'm thinking about how Omega might have been a nigh-omniscient observer for a good while but that doesn't necessarily mean she's good at people.

Reading all the books about hydraulics won't make you a skilled plumber: beyond a certain point you need actual practice to develop a certain frame of mind.

This entire argument started with Annie assuming Omega would help and Omega questioning that assumption, after which she's basically just been countering whatever argument Annie brought forth for why she should help.

So she's just digging into any potential flaws in Annie's arguments to score points, essentially, which is more likely to frustrate the person you're talking with than make them accept your position as legitimate.

[TBeholder]

While it obviously is a different approach to the same end, Meg does have a point: the situation is different and must be approached with much greater caution than “oh, here we go again”. In case one dead NP was not enough of a clue.

[Geekette]

Jul 5, 2024 21:50:59 GMT worldsong said:

I'm thinking about how Omega might have been a nigh-omniscient observer for a good while but that doesn't necessarily mean she's good at people.

The foresight probably means she's in the viewpoint of of "I know what the correct outcome of this discussion will be, so can we just hurry this up and skip through it?" too. Which is actually... super relatable.

You ever had one of those times where you realise what the correct outcome is 2 minutes into the meeting, but then you have to spend the next 3-4 hours repeating yourself over and over again until the board of directors realise it? But if you get impatient they'll make the wrong decision, and you spend 6 months before they change their mind and decide to do the thing you originally proposed at long last? Its a soft skill that Omega's never had to learn because everyone has always just listened to her.

[drmemory]

I'm so glad someone has brought up the idea of actually seeing how Zimmy is doing! Maybe they will even talk to her!

However, I'm still hung up on the torment thing. If I remember right, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't, Zimmy seemed fine while actually inside a distortion for the most part. Her issues showed when she was in the real world and her power was building up and Gamma wasn't nearby and it wasn't raining and she couldn't get to the library for some reason. Her worst facial expressions happened when someone made her freak out and she lost it and created a distortion. Once inside though, the main thing I can remember being a problem was the faceless people. There were other things in there sometimes, like the spiders, but she seemed able to cope with that sort of thing. With Gamma along things were fine - Gamma would pop the faceless ones for her.

In short, it seemed like Zimmy was actually in pain sometimes when her ether was overloading, and she hated the lack of control over what it caused her to do. Fair! It definitely messed with her mind and I'm sure it tormented her to some extent. But inside, it seemed like she generally conjured up a city not entirely unlike the one she grew up in, and sometimes populated it with her fears. Basically what we're seeing people do now, like when Annie summoned Jeanne and caused an NP to be killed.

I'd say Zimmy hates her situation and would rather not be an ether battery, mainly because she can't control it much, but that doesn't mean Annie is right about the torment thing necessarily. Also, don't forget, Zimmy doesn't totally lack control inside a distortion - look how she combined the Annies, for example! That seems like a pretty high-level thing to do, doesn't it? She also seemed to be able to see thoughts and do some other things sometimes. Her threat at the end of the Sabrina encounter also implied she can do stuff on purpose...

The biggest problem with going to see Zimmy is what she'll do to Omega. Zimmy hates being manipulated and is already rather unhappy with what the court has been doing. The inner circle of the court is really secretive - we know they've done a lot of things we don't like but we can't attach any of the decisions or actions to individuals except for the stuff Aata did. I fear Zimmy may take out her frustrations on the Miss Omega doll.

[blahzor]

come to think of it...there's no way Meg CAN'T see Zimmy. You can look via context of all the other information she can see
as well she could actually look at Zimmy, it's just zimmy doesn't like to be observed and reacts negative to it

[imaginaryfriend]

Jul 7, 2024 5:39:47 GMT Geekette said:

Jul 5, 2024 21:50:59 GMT worldsong said:

I'm thinking about how Omega might have been a nigh-omniscient observer for a good while but that doesn't necessarily mean she's good at people.

The foresight probably means she's in the viewpoint of of "I know what the correct outcome of this discussion will be, so can we just hurry this up and skip through it?" too. Which is actually... super relatable.

You ever had one of those times where you realise what the correct outcome is 2 minutes into the meeting, but then you have to spend the next 3-4 hours repeating yourself over and over again until the board of directors realise it? But if you get impatient they'll make the wrong decision, and you spend 6 months before they change their mind and decide to do the thing you originally proposed at long last? Its a soft skill that Omega's never had to learn because everyone has always just listened to her.

One axiom that I derived from going to countless meetings is that if you've got a participant who is deliberately trying to defeat a group decision-making process or cause misunderstandings they will eventually succeed if given enough time. As Omega demonstrates, starting with something that will surprise the group to shift others onto the backfoot (backfeets?) and then switching up tactics until they find something that gets traction is unfortunately an often-effective strategy. When it becomes clear that someone's arguing in bad faith they should ideally be called out for it as soon as possible, however they've usually got some sort of status or tactic prepared as a defense, or have everyone else in their workplace trained to not do that, or both. The most common defensive tactics I've seen employed include playing victim and/or projecting (accusing their critic(s) of doing the exact things they're doing), or quashing the discussion directly using alleged expertise, experience, or formal authority/time-in-grade as excuses. If confronted and cornered I've seen efforts at flat-out bullying. If someone can't be called out directly, sometimes calling for a substantial break and talking to the other participants in a one-on-one setting during it might help, though what I've often encountered is something like "Oh, So-and-so is just making noise until they get a plum; Person-in-charge will let them punch themselves out and then offer them [goodie] and [unreasonable compromise]."

...and they can't figure out why their organization is going down the tubes...

[TBeholder]

Jul 7, 2024 10:10:45 GMT imaginaryfriend said:

One axiom that I derived from going to countless meetings is that if you've got a participant who is deliberately trying to defeat a group decision-making process or cause misunderstandings they will eventually succeed if given enough time.

I offer an even simpler model.
The “group decision-making process” itself is self-defeating. There’s even an old sabotage technique that consists mainly of encouraging the committees to handle everything, until nothing is ever done.
Thus, it “works” as long as it’s not actually used. That is, if one participant usually pushes whatever, occasionally asks someone specialized when it’s relevant, and the rest just nod and let things move along.
When someone else makes the whole group actually participate (flip-flopping and doubts encourage others to weigh in on both sides of an issue), the sleepy process tend to collapse into a stupid babble or a squabble.

Jul 7, 2024 10:10:45 GMT imaginaryfriend said:

...and they can't figure out why their organization is going down the tubes...

[imaginaryfriend]

Jul 7, 2024 21:57:59 GMT TBeholder said:

Jul 7, 2024 10:10:45 GMT imaginaryfriend said:

One axiom that I derived from going to countless meetings is that if you've got a participant who is deliberately trying to defeat a group decision-making process or cause misunderstandings they will eventually succeed if given enough time.

I offer an even simpler model.
The “group decision-making process” itself is self-defeating. There’s even an old sabotage technique that consists mainly of encouraging the committees to handle everything, until nothing is ever done.
Thus, it “works” as long as it’s not actually used. That is, if one participant usually pushes whatever, occasionally asks someone specialized when it’s relevant, and the rest just nod and let things move along.
When someone else makes the whole group actually participate (flip-flopping and doubts encourage others to weigh in on both sides of an issue), the sleepy process tend to collapse into a stupid babble or a squabble.

Hadn't seen that particular publication before but am familiar with all the tactics.

I have seen group decision-making work, but it's very easy to do it wrong and organizational problems can prevent it from ever having a chance. Whoever could make the decision by fiat has to cede the decision-making process while overseeing it adequately and bear responsibility for the decision the group reaches. People involved also have to be accustomed to the process, and the only way to do that is to do it. I'm not advocating forcing people to participate orally. Some people just don't want to speak at meetings; in some cases it's useful to have people submit something on paper beforehand and/or have them send in someone else who's better at it to argue for them.

What you're describing sounds like either the process sort-of working or possibly rubber-stamping a decision that was made in the informal power structure. I've seen it dysfunction a lot myself. Mostly people remain silent rather than squabble, then go off somewhere to sharpen their knives. What I'm saying is that if someone is clearly arguing in bad faith, read the room. Are other people visibly frustrated or mentally checked out? If so, shut them down and return focus to the decision at hand. If not, especially if their tactic(s) appear to be working, call a break. If it's really working, call for a long break (a day or more). Use the break to chat up other participants to try to identify why they're doing what they're doing and to coach the people getting snowed and/or steamrolled on the tactic(s) that're being used, and come to a consensus on what's going on. Sometimes you'll gain insights into how things are working behind the scenes and they'll enable you to come to terms with the person trying to defeat the process if they have reasonable concerns, or shut them down indefinitely if they don't. An even more fundamental axiom is, "If bad behavior is rewarded, you'll get more and more of it." If these tactics are allowed to work the problem will get worse over time.

Now, people do have different opinions, honest insecurities, and what-have-you. Some people are disagreeable and have trouble presenting their points of view without getting emotional or personal. I'm not saying all of those people should be shut down. It's the responsibility of the person in charge to manage. If they're droning on pointlessly, reopening past decisions (throwing past "failure" in someone's face in particular), obfuscating the situation, or wandering off into the weeds it's a failure on management's part. I'm always for someone who suggests doing things through proper channels, because (as long as you can keep that channel open) that locks them into the decision once it's made.

imho Managers like to evade potential responsibility but they tend to value their egos more, and they are very jealous of their power. If you've got a sh1thead clearly usurping decision-making it's generally pretty easy to spin that into disrespect of or infringement on the manager's authority, because it is, and draw a big bulls-eye target on the back of said sh1thead.

Just sayin.

[Angry Individual]

There's only three real ways this could end:

1.) Zimmy is in absolute agony and Omega is proven to be incredibly selfish

2.) Zimmy has found some sort of eternal peace and now Omega is even harder to deal with because even after losing her omnipotence it means she's still rationally correct in the worst ways possible (smugly)

3.) Neither and Tom throws us another curve-ball like it's not even Zimmy who's the distortion its actually Gamma and Zimmy is freaking out trying to save her