Talk:Ever Lonely/@comment-24890120-20160909233903/@comment-24996913-20160910121051

I agreed with some of what you said until you got to one part in particular pertaining to me dropping enough hints that the child was AI. How much more in depth must I get? I think I gave too much of a hint actually. "Toaster",the throwing of water, "short circuiting" being used countless of times. That nitpick was one I don't feel was deserving of a mention. Others such as the ending, I agree with. This is a very old and outdated pasta, one that I'm surprised is even getting any recent attention. It's actually perplexing to be quite honest. Nonetheless, I also agree with some of the other points such as the kill list. Looking back, being that the dead boy was in his late teens, I can see how that is a bit off. The other point with about the child teaming up with the dead boy is something I find rather subjective. Being that I'm a rather logical person in real life, I can see why a child would look at their parents strange recent behavior and question it. And with the presence of evidence to support the claims the dead boy was making, a logical being such as a robot would analyze things differently than, shall I say, a human would. The boy had gone missing, and then out of the blue he's hacking into the robotic child's system. He can't do it if he's alive... What's there to gain from lying if he's already dead? The parents recent behavior, the absence of the boy, and cops dropping by to account for it, is surely enough to make someone think," hmmm, somethings not right about mom and dad..." Let's not forget they were cold hearted towards the robotic child immediately after the disappearance of the boy.

But thank you for reading, even though this is one story I would like to stay dead. Truly, I have no intentions on expanding on this story or revising it.