It's not censorship, as the material is fully accessible in a rather prime location in the Forum. Nor is it "destruction of knowledge", as again, I destroyed nothing. The whole thing can be lifted right back by copy-paste from the version before the edit at will. I made an edit out of concern for newbie travelers looking for guidance, hoping to provide the most useful and beneficial information in the Lexicon.
Nobody batted an eye about the lexicon for three years, nobody seemed to care one bit, so I took the liberty to proactively go in and do some editing. I'm glad that we have discussion now, at least.
I think the NGC_2264 report is not a 'classification'. It wasn't written as such. It's a lengthy multi-trip report that's either the chronicle of a psychotic break (not "the ramblings of a raving lunatic", but rather "the extremely sad story of drug-triggered schizophrenic breakdown" ), or Christian anti-drug and anti-occultism propaganda (something I've read plenty of in my childhood in a protestant environment, and this reads hauntingly similar) dressed up as "DMT fan fiction". This was discussed at length in the thread it was originally posted in. At least one person in that forum reported extreme psychological distress potentially from having read NGC_2264's report, and 'inviting' similar experiences.
It doesn't take in account any other entity experiences other than NGC_2264's own. Most of it doesn't even deal with DMT entity encounters, but rather vague dream experiences. I am convinced that it really has no place in the hyperspace lexicon, for the reason of its extremely subjective nature, and for the reason it simply
isn't really dealing with hyperspace at all.
There are no polarities, Hyperspace Fool didn't say that 'all entities are good'. He simply said that he doesn't find it a good idea to give too much attention to evil entities. I'd be perfectly okay to have some evil entities listed if someone collected them. However, for reasons stated above, NGC_2264's report doesn't really seem fitting. His reports could be used as sources, when backed up with similar experiences of others, piecemeal, entity-by entity. I'm very much against an unedited inclusion.
It just feels wrong for around one third to a half of the material in a "lexicon" be the uncritical copy-pasting of a single-source, doubtful material. All the other materials are sourced from multiple places, someone proposed or mentioned something they met in hyperspace, and others respoded saying 'yes I've seen something similar too'. This part alone was completely different.
For the same reason, I wouldn't be entirely against merging Hyperspace Fool's classification into a flat 'entities' section based on a similar collaboration and mining of reports in this forum as all the other entries of the Lexicon were sourced. I do find his classification to be rather arbitrary too, and indicative of his own worldview. That said, at least his isn't potentially inviting of bad experiences.
I'd really like to hear more opinions though, too. Much love.