What location did Erin Tarn ACTUALLY visited?

[Dr. Doom III]

seriously? you're trying to argue that the opening blurb was written as the author of the "traversing our modern world" book?

so, to summarise then: you didn't read the blurb in question. let's have a look at a few quotes from it:

"Traversing Our Modern World is forbidden in all Coalition States and affiliates. It currently ranks number one on the list of outlawed books (several of her other books are among the top 20). The Coalition has just recently denounced the 63 year old historian as demonic and a criminal of the Coalition States! Her whereabouts are not known."

"It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication."

these passages BOTH clearly indicate that they are not in the book, because the book could not possibly have been published with information regarding what happens *after* the book is published contained within it.

now let's read another part: "The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo. It is also the Council at the Free State of Lazlo who have published the tome."

in other words... the part that we read IS endorsed by erin tarn. it IS written by her. she considers it complete and accurate enough to publish, and to receive payment for her work on it. this particular portion is exactly the OPPOSITE of "It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication." because she DID write it herself, and she DID endorse it after publication (by the act of authoring it). the book "traversing our modern world" as a whole does not meet her standards. the passage of the book that we have access to *does* meet her standards. if we had the *entire* volume "traversing our modern world" we might have to worry about the fact that she feels it is too incomplete, and that it wasn't endorsed by her or authored by her. but that isn't the case. the situation is that the only part we have *is* authored by her, it was written as a world overview for the council of learning at lazlo (who are also the author of the book overall, as i quoted above; the fact that you didn't know this also leads me to believe you aren't even passingly familiar with the passage you are claiming to have more accurate information about than killer cyborg), and she considered it complete enough to tender it as payment for services rendered.

Everything in the entire section is taken from the book "Traversing Our Modern World".
You quoted and I underlined and bolded the part where it says in black and white she did not write the book.
Anything said in that book is therefore suspect.

[flatline]

Perhaps it is time to let this thread die.

--flatline

[Shark_Force]

Everything in the entire section is taken from the book "Traversing Our Modern World".
You quoted and I underlined and bolded the part where it says in black and white she did not write the book.
Anything said in that book is therefore suspect.

right. so not only are you not familiar with the passage in question, you refuse to bother even looking at it to confirm basic facts other than what you want to hear. got it.

it is blatantly obvious that the section before the part where erin tarn starts is *not* the author of "traversing our modern world", and is in fact not in character for *anyone* in rifts setting.

it clearly demonstrates clear knowledge of facts that occured after the book was published. for the book to include clear knowledge of facts that occured after the book was published, the council of learning at lazlo (the ones who authored the entire book) would need to either have someone who can see the future perfectly clearly, and do nothing with that capabilitiy other than to include text in the book that would change over time, *or* they could have a time machine which they would use for nothing more than going back in time to modify all their books constantly to reflect later events.

neither scenario is plausible. in fact, they're stupid. it would be moronic to propose that either of those scenarios is what happened. the only *plausible* scenario i can come up with is that the text in question, discussing what happened after the book was published, is not in fact in the book. but hey, if you can actually come up with a plausible explanation for the author of the book absentmindedly stating future events that will occur as a result of the book being published, i'd like to hear it. i'm sure it will be interesting.

meanwhile, that is STILL beside the point. read the text. it makes it abundantly clear that the section we are reading WAS written by erin tarn specifically to be published to her employers. it isn't something she wrote in a letter to her pen pal, it was her written report of what the world was like, sent to the council of learning to be published to the council of learning. she *did* author that report, and she *did* endorse it (unlike the full book).

but then again, i'm probably just saying stuff you don't want to hear, and which you will therefore ignore. after all, if it isn't good enough when kevin siembieda says it, who am i to think it's going to matter. you won't listen anyways, because you don't like what the facts state.

[Dr. Doom III]

right. so not only are you not familiar with the passage in question, you refuse to bother even looking at it to confirm basic facts other than what you want to hear. got it.

Oh I know it. I also know it doesn't matter what it says because it's from an unreliable book.

it is blatantly obvious that the section before the part where erin tarn starts is *not* the author of "traversing our modern world", and is in fact not in character for *anyone* in rifts setting.

The part I bolded and underlined is the narrator speaking.
It clearly says she did not write or endorse the book. What follows after is from the book.
It also says that clearly.

[Shark_Force]

right. so not only are you not familiar with the passage in question, you refuse to bother even looking at it to confirm basic facts other than what you want to hear. got it.

Oh I know it. I also know it doesn't matter what it says because it's from an unreliable book.

it is blatantly obvious that the section before the part where erin tarn starts is *not* the author of "traversing our modern world", and is in fact not in character for *anyone* in rifts setting.

The part I bolded and underlined is the narrator speaking.
It clearly says she did not write or endorse the book. What follows after is from the book.
It also says that clearly.

the part you bolded is from a part of the text that is very blatantly not even trying to be even a tiny bit in-character. the fact that it discusses events that happen *after the book is published*, which is not even possible within the setting (again, i invite you to explain how the book published three years ago can have precise details regarding current events, because i certainly cannot fathom any plausible chain of events resulting in that happening) as well as the fact that it blatantly tells us that she did write and endorse that particular section of the book (and even if we assume that section is in-character, that makes it the council of learning at lazlo... who would not be likely to alter her words to ruin her reputation, given that most of them know her personally and many are even personal friends of hers), render your entire point valueless.

she did not endorse or author the whole book. she DID author and endorse the part that we get to read. the rest of the book, well, we don't get to read that part, so it doesn't matter what kind of reliability it has. that isn't the part we're reading.

if i was to decide to make a compilation of short stories that an author had written, and i got one which they had published and 24 which they had decided not to publish (disregarding the fact that this would be a huge violation of IP for a moment)... would the fact that the 24 other stories were not up to the author's standard for publishing somehow alter the one story that was up to the author's standard and which did in fact get published, to no longer be something the author felt was up to their standards and worthy of being published? apparently, in the world of dr doom, it does. out here, in the rest of the world, it does not magically change that one story from having been something the author considered worthy of publication, however. in fact, it has absolutely no effect at all on making that story any more or less something that the author considered worthy of publication.

[Nightmask]

Didn't they retcon Japan in the RUE? I know technically Japan came out before the RUE, but it seems like they updated the lore.

There are those on these boards that refuse to acknowledge the RUE and instead insist that everyone must use an out of print, obsolete and replaced book that was printed in the very beginings of Palladium

Well they're certainly allowed to prefer using the original book over the revised version, or would you like to go and buy them all the new book and hand it out to them so that they can play with the book you insist they make use of?

[Jedrious]

Didn't they retcon Japan in the RUE? I know technically Japan came out before the RUE, but it seems like they updated the lore.

There are those on these boards that refuse to acknowledge the RUE and instead insist that everyone must use an out of print, obsolete and replaced book that was printed in the very beginings of Palladium

Well they're certainly allowed to prefer using the original book over the revised version, or would you like to go and buy them all the new book and hand it out to them so that they can play with the book you insist they make use of?

No, now extend us the same courtesy.

[Killer Cyborg]

How about I quote the relevant passages that make it SEEM like she originally visited Japan, which is what I actually said?

Rifts, 137
Kevin Siembieda, in straight narration writes:
What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin tarn.
This tells us that the world overview was written by Erin Tarn.

Provably false.
That "Kevin Siembieda, in straight narration" is also a passage written in the book "Traversing Our Modern World" It is not straight narration.

What makes you think that it's a passage from the fictional book?
-There is nothing stating that it IS from the book
-The passage refers to the World Overview as an excerpt from Traversing Our Modern World, which seems pretty frickin' weird if it's supposed to be that book that we're reading. Books don't introduce the next section to the reader as an "excerpt." It's not an excerpt unless it's removed from the book and quoted elsewhere.
-Why would the book refer to itself as being forbidden in all CS states and affiliates? Even if the authors were clairvoyant, they should have been writing "will be forbidden."
-Why would the book announce that Tarn's whereabouts are unknown?

No, Doom. Your hypothesis makes no sense that I can see.
That's Kevin talking, introducing the excerpt from Traversing Our Modern World, not the book itself introducing an excerpt from itself in a section of the book.

The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo.
This tells us that what we are reading in the book is, although an excerpt from a book later compiled from Tarn's writings, a complete work in of itself. It is the same world overview that Tarn was paid to write. It is a professional piece by Tarn herself, one that she saw as being worthy of turning in to fulfill the requirements of her assignment.
What we read IS the world overview that she wrote, a complete work.

Still taken from the book written by someone else whose veracity is unknown and not endorsed by Tarn.

Tarn doesn't have to know Siembieda. Siembieda knows Tarn.

Also after writing she has never been much past the Rio Grande she describes South America in far more detail than Japan not using words like rumor or "it's been said".

See, THAT is a decent argument there, if you try to do something logical with it.
Maybe go with that, and see where it takes you.

Instead of pretending that Kevin is some unscrupulous corrupter of Tarn's works, or that the fact that Tarn isn't omniscient somehow means that Kevin intended her words to be false when he wrote them.

[Killer Cyborg]

Perhaps it is time to let this thread die.

--flatline

No point.
It'd just come back again.

[Dr. Doom III]

Also after writing she has never been much past the Rio Grande she describes South America in far more detail than Japan not using words like rumor or "it's been said".

See, THAT is a decent argument there, if you try to do something logical with it.
Maybe go with that, and see where it takes you.

Instead of pretending that Kevin is some unscrupulous corrupter of Tarn's works, or that the fact that Tarn isn't omniscient somehow means that Kevin intended her words to be false when he wrote them.

Kevin isn't an unscrupulous corrupter. The unknown author created by Kevin is.
I'm just saying going by the evidence we have that the world overview section looks like it was not meant to be taken as gospel.
It may well have been originally meant to be gospel but it was clearly written in such a way that with hindsight someone can look back and say, "oh that's why that was wrong" if something was later changed.

[Killer Cyborg]

Also after writing she has never been much past the Rio Grande she describes South America in far more detail than Japan not using words like rumor or "it's been said".

See, THAT is a decent argument there, if you try to do something logical with it.
Maybe go with that, and see where it takes you.

Instead of pretending that Kevin is some unscrupulous corrupter of Tarn's works, or that the fact that Tarn isn't omniscient somehow means that Kevin intended her words to be false when he wrote them.

Kevin isn't an unscrupulous corrupter. The unknown author created by Kevin is.

There is no unknown author created by Kevin.
There is Kevin, describing how Tarn's work was compiled by the Council of Learning at Lazlo, and there is Kevin, explaining that the passage that we're reading IS Tarn's completed World Overview that she wrote.
That's it.
There's Kevin, there's Tarn, and there's the Council of Learning.
Only two of those wrote any of the parts of the World Overview, and it wasn't the Council.

I'm just saying going by the evidence we have that the world overview section looks like it was not meant to be taken as gospel.
It may well have been originally meant to be gospel but it was clearly written in such a way that with hindsight someone can look back and say, "oh that's why that was wrong" if something was later changed.

As opposed to the rest of the game, where they do that anyway?

[Nightmask]

Didn't they retcon Japan in the RUE? I know technically Japan came out before the RUE, but it seems like they updated the lore.

There are those on these boards that refuse to acknowledge the RUE and instead insist that everyone must use an out of print, obsolete and replaced book that was printed in the very beginings of Palladium

Well they're certainly allowed to prefer using the original book over the revised version, or would you like to go and buy them all the new book and hand it out to them so that they can play with the book you insist they make use of?

No, now extend us the same courtesy.

What courtesy do you think you aren't being extended? Do you feel someone's been telling you that you have to go by the old book rather than the new one? I know I certainly haven't done so so you can't possibly be talking about me in that regard. Now if you're going to tell people that they have to use the book you approve of then you do need to supply it to them otherwise they get to go by the book they choose to.

[Dr. Doom III]

There is no unknown author created by Kevin.
There is Kevin, describing how Tarn's work was compiled by the Council of Learning at Lazlo, and there is Kevin, explaining that the passage that we're reading IS Tarn's completed World Overview that she wrote.
That's it.
There's Kevin, there's Tarn, and there's the Council of Learning.
Only two of those wrote any of the parts of the World Overview, and it wasn't the Council.

No.
That is a section taken from the book written by the unknown author. The section in the book is from a report to the Council of Learning at Lazlo but what you are reading in the RMB is from "Traversing Our Modern World". Remember the book compiles many different sources of her writings. This is just one.

I'm just saying going by the evidence we have that the world overview section looks like it was not meant to be taken as gospel.
It may well have been originally meant to be gospel but it was clearly written in such a way that with hindsight someone can look back and say, "oh that's why that was wrong" if something was later changed.

As opposed to the rest of the game, where they do that anyway?

Yes.

[Shark_Force]

there are precisely ZERO unknown authors. kevin wrote the introduction. Erin Tarn wrote, and published, the segment that we get to read. the council of learning at lazlo compiled the notes and letters into the book "traversing our modern world".

it's all right there in the introduction, in plain english.

"It is also the Council at the Free State of Lazlo who have published the tome."

there is only one book being discussed here (unless you think the excerpt is an entire book). the people who compiled "traversing our modern world" are none other than the council of learning at lazlo. several of them are personal friends of erin tarn. all of them are at least acquaintances. we have no particular reason to believe any of them would do something to sabotage her reputation by changing her words to make her look incompetent, stupid, or untrustworthy. and in fact, that really makes a whole lot of sense, given that in order to compile a bunch of letters to erin tarn's friends and acquaintances, you kinda sorta just a little bit need to actually have access to those letters. and if someone broke into all of her friends and acquaintances houses to write the book, you can bet her response would be just a *teensy* bit more drastic than simply not endorsing the book. also, i imagine that given one of said friends is an ancient great horned dragon, who likely doesn't take too kindly to people breaking into his home in order to defame his personal friends, there would be slightly more drastic repercussions on that end, for example, the book being outlawed in lazlo as well, plus the author(s) and publisher(s) being wanted dead/captured by basically all of the major kingdoms in north america.

so then, moving on... that's still beside the point.

the excerpt, we are told, *is* the report tarn submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it is her own completed, published work, submitted to a group of scholars as a treatise on the state of the world.

"The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo."

it IS a world overview commisioned by the council of learning at lazlo. this is, as killer cyborg just demonstrated, kevin speaking in the voice of kevin, telling us the facts. it is not some unknown author (and in fact, as i have just shown above, there IS no unknown author). it is kevin. as himself. not as an NPC. telling us what this is. he's giving us some background information on what it is in the setting, which is kinda nifty. and the background for this document gives us absolutely no reason to believe it is unreliable, full of lies, innacuracies, and rumors presented as fact. it is written by erin tarn, published by her commercially for the use of the council at lazlo, and was considered complete enough and accurate enough by her to be published (otherwise, she wouldn't have published it, just like all of her other letters that she *didn't* publish herself but which made it into the book "traversing our modern world").

[Jedrious]

Didn't they retcon Japan in the RUE? I know technically Japan came out before the RUE, but it seems like they updated the lore.

There are those on these boards that refuse to acknowledge the RUE and instead insist that everyone must use an out of print, obsolete and replaced book that was printed in the very beginings of Palladium

Well they're certainly allowed to prefer using the original book over the revised version, or would you like to go and buy them all the new book and hand it out to them so that they can play with the book you insist they make use of?

No, now extend us the same courtesy.

What courtesy do you think you aren't being extended? Do you feel someone's been telling you that you have to go by the old book rather than the new one? I know I certainly haven't done so so you can't possibly be talking about me in that regard. Now if you're going to tell people that they have to use the book you approve of then you do need to supply it to them otherwise they get to go by the book they choose to.

I bolded and underlined the people that my remark was aimed at

[Shark_Force]

I bolded and underlined the people that my remark was aimed at

you didn't bold or underline any people. you bolded and underlined a description that doesn't fit anyone, so far as i can tell.

for example, KC indicated that you would have go through all the books, find all the places she's been, and then cross-check to see what information was retconned away. this would be completely unnecessary if he was refusing to acknowledge the new books.

others (such as myself) have stepped in to point out that he's absolutely correct in that there have been retcons. again, this is only relevant if we acknowledge the later canon, since otherwise there would be absolutely no point to checking the information against the most recent version.

you're complaining about something that doesn't exist. there are precisely zero people insisting that you use old material over new material, as far as i can tell. there are simply people pointing out that erin tarn visiting someplace in book X can later be overridden in any book later than X, and that you thus have to check those later books as well to confirm that she has still, canonically speaking, been to that place.

[Giant2005]

the excerpt, we are told, *is* the report tarn submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it is her own completed, published work, submitted to a group of scholars as a treatise on the state of the world.

I was hoping to quietly sneak away from this exercise in futility but I have to ask, where did you get this information from?
My book doesn't say anything at all about Tarn submitting anything, it simply states she refused to write it herself nor endorse it. The council of Lazlo just chose to do it anyway.

[TechnoGothic]

Geeze, guys.

Could Erin Tarn have mad mistakes in her original reports ? YES. We know she did end up being Wrong.

Did Erin Tarn with her Return end up trying to Correct her Past Mistakes ? YES, she did.

This explains why RMB (101 PA) Material is Different from RUE (109 PA).

When she returned she sit about trying to correct his past mistakes in was collected in "Transversing the Modern World" with updated information she has learned on her new trips. It is what a good scholar would Try to do, to repair their own creditablity. They would also let anyone reading the new Printing or new Edition know she had made mistakes in her old works, which happens. That even some of this new information may not have the complete details on any given area.

Geeze guys. Try to Think of ways to explain the mistakes she made. Instead of assuming she must be 100% correct in all things she says.

[TechnoGothic]

(THIS PART OF THE BOOK IS NOT BY ERIN TARN, It is directed at US the reader of the RPG)

A World Overview, Through the eyes of Erin Tarn.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World. The book is an unauthorized collection of letters and notes from Erin Tarn to various colleagues, and several recountings from people who spoke to her at length on world subjects. The correspondences span the last two decades and include several dozen missives that are as recent as three years old.

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo. It is also the Council at the Free State of Lazlo who have published the tome.

Traversing Our Modern World is forbidden in all Coalition States and affiliates. It currently ranks number one on the list of outlawed books (several of her other books are among the top 20). The Coalition
has just recently denounced the 63 year old historian as demonic and a criminal of the Coalition States! Her whereabouts are not known.

Note the :

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

She knows she has gasps in her knowledge and could be wrong. Right there.

[Nightmask]

(THIS PART OF THE BOOK IS NOT BY ERIN TARN, It is directed at US the reader of the RPG)

A World Overview, Through the eyes of Erin Tarn.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World. The book is an unauthorized collection of letters and notes from Erin Tarn to various colleagues, and several recountings from people who spoke to her at length on world subjects. The correspondences span the last two decades and include several dozen missives that are as recent as three years old.

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo. It is also the Council at the Free State of Lazlo who have published the tome.

Traversing Our Modern World is forbidden in all Coalition States and affiliates. It currently ranks number one on the list of outlawed books (several of her other books are among the top 20). The Coalition
has just recently denounced the 63 year old historian as demonic and a criminal of the Coalition States! Her whereabouts are not known.

Note the :

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

She knows she has gasps in her knowledge and could be wrong. Right there.

If only that would successfully settle things. Care to wager on whether or not we see another page of debate open up? No bet if the mods lock it just to end the endless back and forth.

[TechnoGothic]

Her Books Known :

Humankind's Rise from Chaos = 63 PA
Born in Darkness = 84 PA
Transversing the Modern World = 100 PA (RMB)
Our Changing World = 109 PA (RUE)

Her New book is actually written by Erin Tarn.
She has found out people do not mind her holes in her knowledge.
Our Changing World ... is Erin's attempt to to correct the mistakes in the unathorized Transversing the Modern World's mistakes she made in her due to lack of knowledge...

[Killer Cyborg]

There is no unknown author created by Kevin.
There is Kevin, describing how Tarn's work was compiled by the Council of Learning at Lazlo, and there is Kevin, explaining that the passage that we're reading IS Tarn's completed World Overview that she wrote.
That's it.
There's Kevin, there's Tarn, and there's the Council of Learning.
Only two of those wrote any of the parts of the World Overview, and it wasn't the Council.

No.
That is a section taken from the book written by the unknown author.

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I'm just saying going by the evidence we have that the world overview section looks like it was not meant to be taken as gospel.
It may well have been originally meant to be gospel but it was clearly written in such a way that with hindsight someone can look back and say, "oh that's why that was wrong" if something was later changed.

As opposed to the rest of the game, where they do that anyway?

Yes.

Why and how?

[Killer Cyborg]

Geeze, guys.

Could Erin Tarn have mad mistakes in her original reports ? YES. We know she did end up being Wrong.

No. All we know is that she was later written to have been wrong.
This does not mean that she was originally written to have been wrong.

Just like the Boom Gun stats.
Was the original Mach 2 speed and the 100-round ammo capacity WRONG?
No.
Kevin later changed his mind.
So he retconned things.

Did Erin Tarn with her Return end up trying to Correct her Past Mistakes ? YES, she did.

This explains why RMB (101 PA) Material is Different from RUE (109 PA).

Right, but we don't really know how much, if any, of the original World Overview (or any of her other works) is still canon as of RUE, and how much has been retconned away.
Her RUE description of Japan, for example, makes no mention of her original description to the place.
All we know is that in the current continuity, she's never been there.
We have no indication of whether she would have written that original passage if she'd never been there in the first place.
Same with other descriptions of other places. The new descriptions are obviously canon, but the old descriptions are in limbo- they may or may not exist in canon.

Geeze guys. Try to Think of ways to explain the mistakes she made. Instead of assuming she must be 100% correct in all things she says.

Nobody is making that assumption.

[Killer Cyborg]

Note the:

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

She knows she has gasps in her knowledge and could be wrong. Right there.

Once again.
Yes, she has gaps in her knowledge. Everybody agrees.
But no part of that states that she could be wrong about something that she presents as fact.
Claiming that Chi-Town exists, only to have Chi-Town later retconned to have never existed, is NOT a gap in her knowledge. It is a retcon, pure and simple.
Agreed?

So why would it be different for any other retcon?

[Shark_Force]

the excerpt, we are told, *is* the report tarn submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it is her own completed, published work, submitted to a group of scholars as a treatise on the state of the world.

I was hoping to quietly sneak away from this exercise in futility but I have to ask, where did you get this information from?
My book doesn't say anything at all about Tarn submitting anything, it simply states she refused to write it herself nor endorse it. The council of Lazlo just chose to do it anyway.

right in the same paragraph that everything else came from.

"The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo."

the part we get to read, the excerpt, is a piece of work that erin tarn wrote for and submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it was later included in the book "traversing our modern world", but before that it already existed as a professional published work which she submitted to the council of learning at lazlo, for payment. the fact that it was later included in a book which erin tarn did not publish or endorse does not alter the fact that this particular portion of the book is something that she wrote, published, and submitted for payment to a group of scholars before that book was published.

[Mech-Viper Prime]

Erin Tarn is one of Loki's pen names

[Killer Cyborg]

the excerpt, we are told, *is* the report tarn submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it is her own completed, published work, submitted to a group of scholars as a treatise on the state of the world.

I was hoping to quietly sneak away from this exercise in futility but I have to ask, where did you get this information from?
My book doesn't say anything at all about Tarn submitting anything, it simply states she refused to write it herself nor endorse it. The council of Lazlo just chose to do it anyway.

right in the same paragraph that everything else came from.

"The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo."

the part we get to read, the excerpt, is a piece of work that erin tarn wrote for and submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it was later included in the book "traversing our modern world", but before that it already existed as a professional published work which she submitted to the council of learning at lazlo, for payment. the fact that it was later included in a book which erin tarn did not publish or endorse does not alter the fact that this particular portion of the book is something that she wrote, published, and submitted for payment to a group of scholars before that book was published.

Right- which I've only quoted a dozen times or so at this point, each time pointing out that IS means IS.
This excerpt IS the report that was commissioned.
They are the same thing.
If they were at all different, then they would not be the same.
Therefore, they are not at all different.
What with being the same thing and all.

[Dr. Doom III]

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I don't have to. It's written in the book. TechnoGothic just quoted the whole thing.

Here it is again

A World Overview, Through the eyes of Erin Tarn.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World. The book is an unauthorized collection of letters and notes from Erin Tarn to various colleagues, and several recountings from people who spoke to her at length on world subjects. The correspondences span the last two decades and include several dozen missives that are as recent as three years old.

Without a doubt, it is the most accurate and inclusive journal/atlas of the Rifts world available on the black market. Unfortunately, that is not saying much, as even the intrepid historian Tarn has vast gaps in her knowledge of the world. It is this lack of complete knowledge that made her refuse to write the volume herself, or personally endorse the much sought after publication.

The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo. It is also the Council at the Free State of Lazlo who have published the tome.

Traversing Our Modern World is forbidden in all Coalition States and affiliates. It currently ranks number one on the list of outlawed books (several of her other books are among the top 20). The Coalition
has just recently denounced the 63 year old historian as demonic and a criminal of the Coalition States! Her whereabouts are not known.

Follow this logic.
If she didn't write it then someone else must have wrote it.
This book is a book and not a trapper keeper of notes and letters. It's written like a book.
A book that the unknown author must have edited since it states in the book that Tarn has never been much beyond the Rio Grande but has her describing South America like she's been there. It's internally inconsistent not just inconsistent after the fact.
Now that either mean's Tarn's senile and can't remember where she's gone or the unknown author made edits and changes for the book and screwed it up. If one part can be wrong other parts can be wrong.

[Dr. Doom III]

the excerpt, we are told, *is* the report tarn submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it is her own completed, published work, submitted to a group of scholars as a treatise on the state of the world.

I was hoping to quietly sneak away from this exercise in futility but I have to ask, where did you get this information from?
My book doesn't say anything at all about Tarn submitting anything, it simply states she refused to write it herself nor endorse it. The council of Lazlo just chose to do it anyway.

right in the same paragraph that everything else came from.

"The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo."

the part we get to read, the excerpt, is a piece of work that erin tarn wrote for and submitted to the council of learning at lazlo. it was later included in the book "traversing our modern world", but before that it already existed as a professional published work which she submitted to the council of learning at lazlo, for payment. the fact that it was later included in a book which erin tarn did not publish or endorse does not alter the fact that this particular portion of the book is something that she wrote, published, and submitted for payment to a group of scholars before that book was published.

But you're not reading the report. You're reading a version of the report from the book. A version that it appears to be edited at least poorly if not purposely made to look like she'd been to places she has not been to. Like South America for instance.
We have no Idea how faithfully that section appears but we do know it's wrong.

[Killer Cyborg]

Follow this logic.
If she didn't write it then someone else must have wrote it.

Follow THIS logic:
She didn't write THE BOOK.
She DID write The World Overview- Kevin flat-out tells us so.

Whether or not the World Overview is included in that book does not change in the slightest that Tarn wrote that piece of the book.

This book is a book and not a trapper keeper of notes and letters. It's written like a book.
A book that the unknown author must have edited since it states in the book that Tarn has never been much beyond the Rio Grande but has her describing South America like she's been there.

Except that we already know that the World Overview was NOT edited.
We know this because Kevin tells us that the excerpt we are about to read IS the World Overview that Tarn wrote for Lazlo.
"IS" means "IS.
They are the same thing.
If what we were reading was an edited version, that would be a difference.
They would not be the same thing.

But since Kevin clearly states that what we are reading IS the World Overview, and NOT:
-a rewritten version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-an edited version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-an altered version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-a ham sandwich
-anything other than the world overview written by Tarn

That necessarily means that what we are reading is not rewritten, is not edited, is not altered, and is not a ham sandwich or anything else other than the exact world overview written by Tarn.

Any implications of the passage that you cite regarding the Rio Grande must be taken in the rightful context: it is what Tarn wrote and handed in to the Council.
Nothing more, nothing less.

[Killer Cyborg]

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I don't have to. It's written in the book. TechnoGothic just quoted the whole thing.

What part of the passage that I'm completely familiar with makes you think that what we're reading is an un-introduced passage from Traversing the Modern World that is showing us an excerpt from itself?
And feel free to explain how and why that would be possible.

[Dr. Doom III]

Except that we already know that the World Overview was NOT edited.
We know this because Kevin tells us that the excerpt we are about to read IS the World Overview that Tarn wrote for Lazlo.
"IS" means "IS.
They are the same thing.
If what we were reading was an edited version, that would be a difference.
They would not be the same thing.

But since Kevin clearly states that what we are reading IS the World Overview, and NOT:
-a rewritten version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-an edited version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-an altered version of the world overview that Tarn wrote.
-a ham sandwich
-anything other than the world overview written by Tarn

That necessarily means that what we are reading is not rewritten, is not edited, is not altered, and is not a ham sandwich or anything else other than the exact world overview written by Tarn.

Any implications of the passage that you cite regarding the Rio Grande must be taken in the rightful context: it is what Tarn wrote and handed in to the Council.
Nothing more, nothing less.

No we do not.
What we do know is tarn didn't write the book and did not endorse it.
We have no idea the changes that may have been made to the stuff in the book.
You might think you know but that's little more than wishful thinking.

[Shark_Force]

No we do not.
What we do know is tarn didn't write the book and did not endorse it.
We have no idea the changes that may have been made to the stuff in the book.
You might think you know but that's little more than wishful thinking.

there is nothing even implying that her writings were changed. it's a compilation. not a revision.

[Dr. Doom III]

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I don't have to. It's written in the book. TechnoGothic just quoted the whole thing.

What part of the passage that I'm completely familiar with makes you think that what we're reading is an un-introduced passage from Traversing the Modern World that is showing us an excerpt from itself?
And feel free to explain how and why that would be possible.

This part.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World.

[Dr. Doom III]

No we do not.
What we do know is tarn didn't write the book and did not endorse it.
We have no idea the changes that may have been made to the stuff in the book.
You might think you know but that's little more than wishful thinking.

there is nothing even implying that her writings were changed. it's a compilation. not a revision.

Except for internal inconsistency.
What there is nothing of is proof that's it's exactly as it was from the original source.

[Shark_Force]

No we do not.
What we do know is tarn didn't write the book and did not endorse it.
We have no idea the changes that may have been made to the stuff in the book.
You might think you know but that's little more than wishful thinking.

there is nothing even implying that her writings were changed. it's a compilation. not a revision.

Except for internal inconsistency.
What there is nothing of is proof that's it's exactly as it was from the original source.

there's the fact that her response to its publication was to not endorse it because she felt it was incomplete, rather than denouncing it as lies and defamation. there's the fact that it was published by people who are colleagues, acquaintances, and personal friends, who plainly don't have the goal of ruining her scholastic reputation because the book is in high demand and is widely considered to be the best source of information about the world available. there's the fact that kevin tells us that this excerpt *is* the report which erin tarn submitted. there's the fact that it's a compilation of stuff written by her, not a revision of stuff written by her.

there's lots of facts that, while they may not come out and explicitly say nothing was changed, strongly point towards that being the overwhelming probability. there are no facts that point to the book having been modified, or having been innacurate. incomplete, yes. it doesn't talk at all about large portions of the world, and for many parts of the world it makes it clear that these are just rumors, or things she's heard about.

all of this points to the stuff that is there being exactly as it was from the original source

and your example of her not having been much beyond the rio grande is in the context of talking about mexico, not about having never been to south america. for all we know, she went to south america from japan. she wouldn't have gone past the rio grande that way. or by any number of other possible routes she could have taken. yet she could still have gone to south america.

[Dr. Doom III]

No we do not.
What we do know is tarn didn't write the book and did not endorse it.
We have no idea the changes that may have been made to the stuff in the book.
You might think you know but that's little more than wishful thinking.

there is nothing even implying that her writings were changed. it's a compilation. not a revision.

Except for internal inconsistency.
What there is nothing of is proof that's it's exactly as it was from the original source.

there's the fact that her response to its publication was to not endorse it because she felt it was incomplete, rather than denouncing it as lies and defamation. there's the fact that it was published by people who are colleagues, acquaintances, and personal friends, who plainly don't have the goal of ruining her scholastic reputation because the book is in high demand and is widely considered to be the best source of information about the world available. there's the fact that kevin tells us that this excerpt *is* the report which erin tarn submitted. there's the fact that it's a compilation of stuff written by her, not a revision of stuff written by her.

there's lots of facts that, while they may not come out and explicitly say nothing was changed, strongly point towards that being the overwhelming probability. there are no facts that point to the book having been modified, or having been innacurate. incomplete, yes. it doesn't talk at all about large portions of the world, and for many parts of the world it makes it clear that these are just rumors, or things she's heard about.

all of this points to the stuff that is there being exactly as it was from the original source

and your example of her not having been much beyond the rio grande is in the context of talking about mexico, not about having never been to south america. for all we know, she went to south america from japan. she wouldn't have gone past the rio grande that way. or by any number of other possible routes she could have taken. yet she could still have gone to south america.

The passage says she has never been further South and a few miles beyond the Rio Grande.
South America is South of the Rio Grande. A lot more than a few miles.
Internal Inconsistency.

You can ignore it or hand wave it away but you can’t explain it with your version of the facts. I can with mine.

[Killer Cyborg]

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I don't have to. It's written in the book. TechnoGothic just quoted the whole thing.

What part of the passage that I'm completely familiar with makes you think that what we're reading is an un-introduced passage from Traversing the Modern World that is showing us an excerpt from itself?
And feel free to explain how and why that would be possible.

This part.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World.

THAT part is the part that I have cited as disproving your idea that the intro to the World Overview is part of "Traversing Our Modern World".
I have explained my reasoning as well.
What is yours?

[Giant2005]

there's the fact that her response to its publication was to not endorse it because she felt it was incomplete, rather than denouncing it as lies and defamation. there's the fact that it was published by people who are colleagues, acquaintances, and personal friends, who plainly don't have the goal of ruining her scholastic reputation because the book is in high demand and is widely considered to be the best source of information about the world available. there's the fact that kevin tells us that this excerpt *is* the report which erin tarn submitted. there's the fact that it's a compilation of stuff written by her, not a revision of stuff written by her.

Kevin never says that Tarn submitted anything. He specifically states that she won't even endorse the writing.
Erin wrote the letters.
Lazlo commissioned the Book that compiled the letters (considering that the paragraph explains Tarn "refused to write the volume herself, we can be 100% sure that they commissioned someone else to do it).
Lazlo published the tome.
Kevin took an excerpt from the fictional tome to present to us.


That is the order of operations and as you can see, beyond writing the letters, Tarn had nothing at all to do with it - she actively refused to be a participant.
Stop saying otherwise - blatant misinformation only serves to weaken your argument.

[Killer Cyborg]

and your example of her not having been much beyond the rio grande is in the context of talking about mexico, not about having never been to south america. for all we know, she went to south america from japan. she wouldn't have gone past the rio grande that way. or by any number of other possible routes she could have taken. yet she could still have gone to south america.

The passage says she has never been further South and a few miles beyond the Rio Grande.
South America is South of the Rio Grande. A lot more than a few miles.
Internal Inconsistency.

You can ignore it or hand wave it away but you can’t explain it with your version of the facts. I can with mine.

He's not ignoring it, nor handwaving it away. He's addressing it directly, by pointing out the context, which is Mexico.
Yes, the entire continent of South America is south of the Rio Grande, but that doesn't matter in the context of the subject of how much of Mexico Tarn has explored- South America isn't in Mexico.

It's like how somebody might say in reference to their travels in the US, "I've never been west of the Mississippi."
When in the course of their life, they did at one point travel to Japan, which is west of the Mississippi.
Since the context of the conversation is purely the US, whether or not they have at some point in their lifetime been to a location that technically meets the definition of terms they're using to describe their travels doesn't really matter- it's outside the context.

Similarly, a person from New York could regularly visit Florida for years, and get into a conversation about how well they know the state of Florida. The person could, honestly and in good conscience say, "I know the southern half of the state like the back of my hand, but I've never been north of Orlando."
Because, in the context of the state of Florida, he has not been.

[Dr. Doom III]

Come up with ANY support for this notion, because so far, you might as well be claiming that section was written by Prosek- it makes just as much sense.
Actually, it makes a bit more, because Prosek might quote an excerpt from the book, but the book would never quote an excerpt from itself.

I don't have to. It's written in the book. TechnoGothic just quoted the whole thing.

What part of the passage that I'm completely familiar with makes you think that what we're reading is an un-introduced passage from Traversing the Modern World that is showing us an excerpt from itself?
And feel free to explain how and why that would be possible.

This part.

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World.

THAT part is the part that I have cited as disproving your idea that the intro to the World Overview is part of "Traversing Our Modern World".
I have explained my reasoning as well.
What is yours?

The part TechnoGothic quoted is the intro. What follows it is no longer the intro.

[Dr. Doom III]

He's not ignoring it, nor handwaving it away. He's addressing it directly, by pointing out the context, which is Mexico.
Yes, the entire continent of South America is south of the Rio Grande, but that doesn't matter in the context of the subject of how much of Mexico Tarn has explored- South America isn't in Mexico.

It's like how somebody might say in reference to their travels in the US, "I've never been west of the Mississippi."
When in the course of their life, they did at one point travel to Japan, which is west of the Mississippi.
Since the context of the conversation is purely the US, whether or not they have at some point in their lifetime been to a location that technically meets the definition of terms they're using to describe their travels doesn't really matter- it's outside the context.

Similarly, a person from New York could regularly visit Florida for years, and get into a conversation about how well they know the state of Florida. The person could, honestly and in good conscience say, "I know the southern half of the state like the back of my hand, but I've never been north of Orlando."
Because, in the context of the state of Florida, he has not been.

Are you trying to define handwavium because that's all you're doing.

[Killer Cyborg]

He's not ignoring it, nor handwaving it away. He's addressing it directly, by pointing out the context, which is Mexico.
Yes, the entire continent of South America is south of the Rio Grande, but that doesn't matter in the context of the subject of how much of Mexico Tarn has explored- South America isn't in Mexico.

It's like how somebody might say in reference to their travels in the US, "I've never been west of the Mississippi."
When in the course of their life, they did at one point travel to Japan, which is west of the Mississippi.
Since the context of the conversation is purely the US, whether or not they have at some point in their lifetime been to a location that technically meets the definition of terms they're using to describe their travels doesn't really matter- it's outside the context.

Similarly, a person from New York could regularly visit Florida for years, and get into a conversation about how well they know the state of Florida. The person could, honestly and in good conscience say, "I know the southern half of the state like the back of my hand, but I've never been north of Orlando."
Because, in the context of the state of Florida, he has not been.

Are you trying to define handwavium because that's all you're doing.

I'm explaining how the English language works.
You might not like it, but that's not really my concern.
Feel free to ask around if you don't believe us on this, but context affects meaning.

[Killer Cyborg]

What follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn. It is an excerpt from the most recent book that bears her name, Traversing Our Modern World.

THAT part is the part that I have cited as disproving your idea that the intro to the World Overview is part of "Traversing Our Modern World".
I have explained my reasoning as well.
What is yours?

The part TechnoGothic quoted is the intro. What follows it is no longer the intro.[/quote]

I have no idea how you think that relates to anything that I've been saying.
You've been claiming that that intro was written by the person who wrote Traversing Our Modern World.
I'm pointing out once again, that that notion makes no sense.

[Dr. Doom III]

I have no idea how you think that relates to anything that I've been saying.
You've been claiming that that intro was written by the person who wrote Traversing Our Modern World.
I'm pointing out once again, that that notion makes no sense.

No I haven't.
You've been saying that the introduction that says everything that follows it is from "Traversing Our Modern World" somehow says the world overview is from something else. It isn't. The world overview talked about in the introduction is the original source used in the book an excerpt of which follows.

[TechnoGothic]

The book is an unauthorized collection of letters and notes from Erin Tarn to various colleagues, and several recountings from people who spoke to her at length on world subjects. The correspondences span the last two decades and include several dozen missives that are as recent as three years old.

This Here is the Problem with the Book.
We do not know which Information she received from people who spoke to her in length on World subjects.

This could be How or Why she thought Japan was a cluster of Islands, and just wilderness. That she honestly belived the person she spoke to at the time, which could have been around 80 PA or so. This is also why she could be wrong about things in her writtings. She would not nessarry say all the information she received was rumors either. If she trusted them, for whatever reason, she may honestly believe what she was told as fact at the time of her conversations with them. While people she briefly meets (does not know if she can trust them yet) say their information is strictly rumors, specially if she get conflicting information from them or other people on the same subject.

Should Erin have trusted all the information given to her ? No, but apparently she trusted some of it as facts when she should not have, or the information may have been very old from the time the person learned it themselves. Say Plato, the Dragon, say he gave her the information on Japan. Well, that could have been well before the PA calendar era, when Japan was different. The number of humans was much less, heck the Empire may not have formed yet even.

So, when he passed than information of his own First Hand knowledge to Erin to help her, he may not have know, his information is very out of date now ... wrong now, but right at one time.

[TechnoGothic]

and your example of her not having been much beyond the rio grande is in the context of talking about mexico, not about having never been to south america. for all we know, she went to south america from japan. she wouldn't have gone past the rio grande that way. or by any number of other possible routes she could have taken. yet she could still have gone to south america.

The passage says she has never been further South and a few miles beyond the Rio Grande.
South America is South of the Rio Grande. A lot more than a few miles.
Internal Inconsistency.

You can ignore it or hand wave it away but you can’t explain it with your version of the facts. I can with mine.

He's not ignoring it, nor handwaving it away. He's addressing it directly, by pointing out the context, which is Mexico.
Yes, the entire continent of South America is south of the Rio Grande, but that doesn't matter in the context of the subject of how much of Mexico Tarn has explored- South America isn't in Mexico.

It's like how somebody might say in reference to their travels in the US, "I've never been west of the Mississippi."
When in the course of their life, they did at one point travel to Japan, which is west of the Mississippi.
Since the context of the conversation is purely the US, whether or not they have at some point in their lifetime been to a location that technically meets the definition of terms they're using to describe their travels doesn't really matter- it's outside the context.

Similarly, a person from New York could regularly visit Florida for years, and get into a conversation about how well they know the state of Florida. The person could, honestly and in good conscience say, "I know the southern half of the state like the back of my hand, but I've never been north of Orlando."
Because, in the context of the state of Florida, he has not been.

JAPAN is EAST, the FAR Far EAST Land of the Rising Sun
Silly Cyborg.

[Mech-Viper Prime]

My question is where is santa's workshop? And has she visited there?

[llywelyn]

It's like how somebody might say in reference to their travels in the US, "I've never been west of the Mississippi."
When in the course of their life, they did at one point travel to Japan, which is west of the Mississippi.

JAPAN is EAST, the FAR Far EAST Land of the Rising Sun
Silly Cyborg.

He's using the Japanese maps where it's in the center.

Then the Mississippi is the far east and east of the Mississippi is almost falling off the edge of the world.

My question is where is santa's workshop? And has she visited there?

Finland, and no.

Although, if she did, she would find a way to use the elves to criticize the Coalition States.

I am coming around to the point of view that the backstory where she was jilted by Prosek should be canon. It just explains so much.

[Killer Cyborg]

I have no idea how you think that relates to anything that I've been saying.
You've been claiming that that intro was written by the person who wrote Traversing Our Modern World.
I'm pointing out once again, that that notion makes no sense.

No I haven't.

viewtopic.php?p=2493077#p2493077

There is no unknown author created by Kevin.
There is Kevin, describing how Tarn's work was compiled by the Council of Learning at Lazlo, and there is Kevin, explaining that the passage that we're reading IS Tarn's completed World Overview that she wrote.
That's it.
There's Kevin, there's Tarn, and there's the Council of Learning.
Only two of those wrote any of the parts of the World Overview, and it wasn't the Council.

No.
That is a section taken from the book written by the unknown author. The section in the book is from a report to the Council of Learning at Lazlo but what you are reading in the RMB is from "Traversing Our Modern World". Remember the book compiles many different sources of her writings. This is just one.

If you're saying anything other than "The introduction we read to the World Overview is a section from "Traversing Our Modern World," written by the unknown author of that book," then you're doing it really, really, really wrong.
Feel free to rephrase and restate your claim at this point, if that's not what you're trying to say.

You've been saying that the introduction that says everything that follows it is from "Traversing Our Modern World" somehow says the world overview is from something else. It isn't. The world overview talked about in the introduction is the original source used in the book an excerpt of which follows.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here, but I'll restate my positions (yet again).
1. On p. 137, The first four paragraphs, starting with "what follows is a brief world overview written by Tarn..." and ending with "Her whereabouts are not known." is written by Kevin, in the same way and with the same authority that he narrates the majority of the book, as when giving game stats or describing the xiticix, or otherwise telling us what the game world is like.
2. Kevin starts off by telling us that "what follows is a brief world overview written by historian and explorer, Erin Tarn."
This means exactly what it says. No hidden messages, no layers of ambiguity, no secret decoder ring needed.
What follows IS a world overview written by Tarn.
NOT written by anybody else.
NOT written by Tarn but altered by anybody else.
It simply IS a world overview written by Tarn.
Which means that it was written by Tarn, not by any unknown author.
3. Kevin also tells us "The excerpt which follows is a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning at Lazlo."
Again, no hidden messages here. The words speak for themselves: The excerpt we are reading IS a world overview commissioned by the Council of Learning.
4. Put these together, and we have a crystal clear picture of what happened:
-Tarn was commissioned by the Council to write a world overview.
-Tarn wrote a world overview, one that she was confident enough to put her name on and to turn in for pay.
-Tarn turned in this world overview, the same one that is printed in Rifts for our reading pleasure.
-The Council later published this same world overview, the same one that is printed in Rifts for our reading pleasure, without Tarn's permission.

The World Overview that Tarn wrote IS the same World Overview that was published without her permission, and both ARE the same world overview that we are reading in the Rifts book.
Nothing was changed.
IF something was changed, then one of the above quotes by Kevin would be incorrect, because either what we are reading would NOT be "written by Tarn," or it would NOT be "an excerpt from the book," or it would NOT be "the world overview commissioned by the Council."
But Kevin very clearly and very plainly states that it IS all three of these things.
They are all the same.
There were never any changes or edits.