Analysis uses second person

[Reevak05]

Second person is often avoided in close modification analysis (CMA), but the analysis present in README.md uses the second person "you". The analysis moved me to tears with its poetic beauty and wonderful craft, but the presence of "you" created a dichotomy within my interpretation (à la The Great Gatsby, To Kill a Mockingbird, and The Very Hungry Caterpillar). The very nature of our linear temporal interpretation is but a box with which we are both enamored and restricted. We cannot allow an existential question to be dynamically anthropomorphized through our mental roller coaster building. There is no house humans have not conquered but that of our own minds and that of the mysterious and enigmatic manual of style. A God above us and a pegasus among us, but a dog in hell and an imposter. The manual of style is a monument to the insignificance of our internationalized, institutionalized, and desynchronizing existence. "You" has no place in this story. "You" comes from nothing and is nothing by the decree of the monumental Book of Ages and inverse imposter lying on our necks with a hot glue gun in hand. Fathom not our decrees of grandeur and delusions of faith; all we have is an inevitable and undying fundamental oath and obligation to the force, to the sky, to the dog. The dog. There can be no dog. There can never be a dog because the dog cannot be. The dog is. We are. The manual of style requires the instructions be followed. The manual is all-knowing. The manual, a charismatic locomotive of truth and chaos and love and action, will not be that what we can interpret in a coherent manner of understanding. I am but a vessel, a teapot, a muse. I canot allioow a monstrsod pdf sos the re ya re eysyutieng to sysoket0p mem. ehemellpp. hHElepp pelase. thehe is enos oen ,elftef they ar eocmigng fore me and fofroyou., runm

[Maddest-Lad]

are y'all in Humanitas or something???