Chronotransponder test interface

Re: Was it molpish?
author: b • sent: 01.04.2015 19:45 • received: 05.10.2014
Sustainabilizer, at 5.10.2014 15:07 wrote:
Dear Balthasar in the future,
Hi, good to see this chronotransponder prototype thing still working. But I was kind of surprized by seeing the interference when sending to the future (I had to ENHANCE! a little). This usually happens when sending to the past. but not as often as in 2013. the temporal amplifiers are much better these days.

Sustainabilizer wrote:
it might seem funny that I am asking this question to you, but I am writing this before I have even announced the event. As of today, only two OTTers (## and myself) know about it.
And only 2 OTTerr know about this Chronotransponder test interface.
I assume you're talking about the project that is in phase 3 in your time. I cannot tell you as much as I'd like to. Accorting to my currently favourite time travel theory I should not interact with this part of te past too much. You see, I could accidentally create aa temporal paradox and these are very expensive to clean up after. Also, I believe we're now in the most molpish timeline and I don't want to risk chaanging this.

Did it take place as planned? On what date?
Sorry, no answer to this. It's easier to work on these kind of things without knowing your temporal deadline.
Did you take part?
depends on what definition of "taking part" you use.
What about BlitzGirl?
She's still the BlitzGirl in 2015.
And GLR?
We're all GLR.
And, most important: Was it molpish?
Out of 3 randomly chosen definitions of molpishness all 3 indicate that it was.

Sustainabilizer wrote:
I am asking because there is stillll Time to change some details in the planning. If there is anything which went (or, from my past, will go) completely wrong, please let me know.
That would definitely create a temporal paradox. That's exactly this kind of thing that the CFRT posters warn about.

Sustainabilizer wrote:
Greetings from 2014,
back to the chronotrasponder test interface