タルパ思念体 総合掲示板

　　But are translation errors really the problem? I don't think so.
　　Two valuable examples need to be cited to draw attention to the old taxonomy and to re-examine it.
　　The tulpa war in the Japanese community and the "tulpa war" in the Chinese community.
　　
　　The tulpa war is so old that few people know about it now. So let's talk about what happened.
　　
　　First, Mr 浮草氏 was active in the Japanese community and seemed to have some influence. He invented the tulpa classification before the English community was established. Given the cultural climate in Japan, the "邂逅型" explanation seems to be well received. The foreshadowing was there.
　　
　　In addition to taxonomies, there are such behaviors as 共享潜水. I don't know if that was Mr. 浮草氏's idea, but the historical archive of old wikis shows how popular it was. But this seemingly metaphysical content has also caught the attention of some members of the Japanese community.
　　
　　They began to question some of Mr. 浮草氏's statements and actions. One of them, let's call it L for now.
　　
　　Mr.L designed a trap against Mr. 浮草氏, the Tulpa war. He claimed he was trapped by Tulpa and needed help, which caught Mr 浮草氏's attention. In order to help L, Mr AB calls on everyone on the Internet to dive and defeat the evil Tulpa.
　　
　　You can use Google to find out what happened.
　　
　　In short, it turned out to be a hoax. Mr L claims his Tulpa does not exist. All this was planned to test Mr. 浮草氏.
　　
　　That is to say, all the people involved in the rescue operation are diving to save a non-existent object.
　　
　　What that means, I'm sure all of you have the answer. So all of Mr 浮草氏's theories are worth reassessing: Is this a lie?
　　
　　As far as I know, Mr. 浮草氏's tulpa is also an 邂逅型.
　　
　　Similar cases in the Chinese community have nothing to do with the old classification. However, the similarity between the behavior of the parties concerned and that of Mr. 浮草氏 is enough to arouse our alarm, I believe.