Recruitment Profile: Sharon Moon
TANKTHINK LEAKS_004
The following set of documents comprises the fourth set from the TankThink data leak. It is the fourth of five detailing the candidates.
TANKTHINK RECRUITMENT DEBRIEF
CANDIDATE: Sharon Moon
DATE: December 15, 2024
INTERVIEWER: [REDACTED]
CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL
INTERVIEWER: Describe your academic status at Northwestern prior to your recruitment for this operation.
SHARON MOON: I'm in my fourth year of a psychology PhD program that I should have finished in three. My adviser, Dr. Shapiro, thinks I'm still running Moonshot on the side. The department is ready to pull my funding. They've scheduled a review for January.
The irony is that I've actually been doing the most important psychological research of my career—just not for Northwestern. My work on applying Kagan's Constructive Developmental Framework to operational psychology has revolutionized our understanding of cognitive evolution under stress. But they don't know that.
I submitted my last paper ten minutes before the deadline. It was good enough—just barely. That's been my approach since, well, since the BloodShark disaster. Do the minimum necessary to maintain cover.
INTERVIEWER: Let's discuss your BloodShark appearance in 2022. How did that experience impact you?
SHARON MOON: [Long pause] That was... transformative. I'd raised almost $4 million for Moonshot—my neural enhancement startup. We'd developed a protocol for what I called "cognitive superhumans." Initial results were promising.
Then I went on BloodShark. It was supposed to be our big moment. Instead, the judges tore me apart on national television. Viktor Krauss called our metrics "fraudulent." Athena Blackwood said I was "creating monsters." Reza Kadhim somehow had access to our internal data showing a 43% failure rate. By the time the segment aired, our investors were already pulling out.
BLOODSHARK - TRANSCRIPT
[OPENING SEQUENCE: Rapid-fire montage of crumbling cities, holographic advertisements, and drone footage of luxury compounds rising above smog. The BLOODSHARK logo appears, rendered in orange carbyne with knife-like teeth.]
ANNOUNCER (V.O.): The world is burning. But for those with vision, chaos is just another word for opportunity. Welcome to BLOODSHARK, where tomorrow's most disruptive innovations face the coldest judgment. Streaming exclusively on CruzzBunch+.
[Fade in to sleek studio. Four JUDGES sit on elevated platforms, their chairs made of transparent materials that pulse with subtle light. The stage below is stark white with holographic data visualizations swirling on the floor. The panel consists of VIKTOR KRAUSS, DELILAH ZHAO, REZA KADHIM, and ATHENA BLACKWOOD.]
VIKTOR KRAUSS: [Leaning forward, face partially obscured by shadow] Welcome back to BLOODSHARK where the cost of failure is only slightly worse than the price of success. [Thin smile] Tonight's entrepreneurs are all fighting for a piece of our discretionary fund and, more importantly, our network.
DELILAH ZHAO: [Adjusting her glowing Jing-enhanced face] Let's not forget what they're really here for, Viktor. The validation. [Camera lingers on her unnaturally luminescent skin]
REZA KADHIM: [Grinning] Though our term sheets might make them wish they'd stayed in the garage.
ATHENA BLACKWOOD: [Coolly] Desperation is the mother of innovation. I'm looking forward to seeing who's truly desperate enough to change the world.
VIKTOR: [Nodding] Let's meet our first entrepreneur.
[Dramatic lighting shift. A woman in a severe magenta suit walks onto the stage. SHARON MOON, 30s, moves with practiced confidence. Behind her, holographic projections display brain scans and homeless encampments.]
SHARON MOON: [Addressing the panel] Good evening, Bloodsharks. My name is Sharon Moon, and I'm here to present Moonshot. [Pauses] What if I told you the single most wasted resource in our broken economy wasn't rare earth metals or fresh water, but human potential?
DELILAH: [Already looking bored] You wouldn't be the first.
SHARON: But I might be the first with the technology to actually harvest it. At Moonshot, we've developed a comprehensive system to transform America's homeless population into humanity's greatest asset: cognitive superhumans.
[Holographic display shifts to show brain transformation sequences and genetic modification visualizations]
SHARON: The homeless represent our greatest market inefficiency. Latent talent wasted on survival. At Moonshot, we provide a complete renovation: genetic therapies that enhance neural plasticity, pharmaceutical interventions that dramatically increase cognitive function, and educational protocols designed specifically for the post-human mind.
REZA: [Leaning forward, interested] And what do you get in return?
SHARON: [Smiling] A fair exchange. In return for this comprehensive transformation, participants sign a contract granting Moonshot 80% equity in any venture they subsequently create, plus rights to any income they generate above cost-of-living plus 20%.
ATHENA: [Raising an eyebrow] You're turning human beings into portfolio companies.
SHARON: I'm turning wasted potential into a startup superincubator. We literally rearchitect these individuals at a fundamental level, transforming them into usable human capital. It's only fair we capture a proportion of the value they create—value that would never exist without our substantial technical investment.
VIKTOR: [Clinically] What success metrics can you share?
SHARON: [Gesturing, causing the hologram to shift to data visualizations] We've run three small-batch pilot programs. Average IQ increase of 87 points. Cognitive processing speeds increased by 340%. Two patentable innovations per subject per month. And a 200% ROI on our initial investment in just the first cohort.
REZA: [Quiet intensity] And the failure rate?
[Sharon hesitates for just a moment]
SHARON: Nothing revolutionary comes without risk. We've observed a 22% integration failure rate in subjects. Some minds simply can't adapt to their enhanced capabilities. But the successes more than compensate for the losses.
ATHENA: [Frowning] When you say "failure," you mean...?
SHARON: [Matter-of-factly] Psychotic breaks. Personality disintegration. Some cases of total cognitive collapse. But that's why we work with the homeless. The downside risk for them is minimal.
[Uncomfortable silence]
DELILAH: [Shaking her head] You're describing indentured servitude with a side of non-consensual human experimentation.
SHARON: [Defensively] Every participant signs comprehensive consent forms. They understand the risks and rewards.
VIKTOR: [Coldly] Understanding requires capacity. Your subjects begin the process with diminished capacity by definition.
REZA: [Interrupting] Tell me, Sharon. Have you ever experienced consciousness transfer yourself?
[Camera zooms in on Sharon's face, catching a flicker of something—recognition, fear?]
SHARON: [Recovering quickly] I don't see how that's relevant to—
REZA: [Cutting her off] It's entirely relevant. Because you're proposing something far more invasive than mere consciousness transfer. You're proposing fundamental identity reformation.
SHARON: [Tensing] Our technologies are proprietary and—
REZA: [Leaning forward into the light, revealing his full face for the first time] Sharon, we both know the integration failure rate isn't 22%. The real number from your internal data is closer to 43%. And the nature of those failures isn't just cognitive collapse. It's much worse.
[Holographic display behind Sharon suddenly shifts to show different data—horrifying images of subjects in various states of distress, brain scans showing severe abnormalities]
SHARON: [Visibly shaken] How did you—Those are confidential—
REZA: [Calmly] You're not the first to propose using the vulnerable as raw material. You're just the first to be so nakedly honest about it.
ATHENA: [Disgusted] You're creating monsters. Those failure cases show severe aggression, paranoia, and sociopathy.
DELILAH: [Analyzing the new data] And your success metrics are hugely inflated. When adjusted for survivor bias, your ROI is actually negative.
VIKTOR: [Clinically] The psychic distress patterns in your subjects match exactly with TankThink's forbidden protocols from 2021. Protocols we abandoned for ethical reasons.
[Sharon looks startled at this revelation]
DELILAH: [Dismissively] We've seen this before. Cutesy tried similar approaches with animals before focusing on consciousness preservation rather than enhancement. The risk/reward simply doesn't work.
SHARON: [Desperately] But imagine the potential! What if we could create a generation of supergenius innovators? People with 200 IQs, perfect recall, enhanced pattern recognition—all focused on solving humanity's greatest challenges!
VIKTOR: [Interrupts sharply] Enough! I'm going to send you to the bloodshark unless you give me one good reason why MOONSHOT is going to make SchmucksCap one billion dollars.
SHARON: [Desperate but composed, eyes blazing with conviction] Because we're not just creating enhanced minds—we're creating the next evolution of humanity at scale. Our pilot data shows that successful transformations create individuals with unprecedented capacity for innovation. Third-cohort subjects have already developed quantum computing shortcuts that outperform Google's best systems. They've created novel protein folding algorithms that could revolutionize medicine. The failures are messy, yes, but the successes are transcendent! One fully integrated subject generated 19 patentable technologies in a single month. Imagine hundreds—thousands—all networked together, all generating IP that SchmucksCap would own. We're not creating employees; we're creating living innovation engines with SchmucksCap holding the keys to everything they produce. Forever.
[Silence hangs in the air as the judges exchange glances]
VIKTOR: [Face impassive] Not good enough.
[Close-up on VIKTOR's hand as it descends onto a glowing red button emblazoned with the BLOODSHARK logo]
[The floor beneath SHARON suddenly disappears with a hydraulic hiss. Her scream echoes as she plummets down a transparent tube filled with viscous red liquid]
[Multiple camera angles show SHARON sliding through the twisting "blood tube," her magenta suit now stained crimson]
[SHARON splashes into a shallow pool of fake blood. A mechanical shark, its metallic fins slicing through the red liquid, begins circling her]
[SHARON, panicked but determined, wades through the crimson pool toward an illuminated exit sign, ducking as the mechanical shark lunges at her]
[Cut back to studio, where the judges watch the scene on monitors]
REZA: [Shaking his head] That might have been one of the worst pitches we've seen this season.
ATHENA: [Coolly] The ethics were abhorrent, but the real failure was the economics. Even if her technology worked perfectly, the liability and oversight costs would be astronomical.
DELILAH: [Sipping from a transparent glass] The fundamental concept is flawed. You can't process humans like raw materials and expect consistent outputs. Cutesy learned that years ago with their early consciousness transfer experiments.
VIKTOR: [Nodding] Enhanced intelligence without enhanced morality is a recipe for disaster. Her subjects would turn on her—and us—the moment they realized their true potential.
[Cut to "exit interview" chamber. SHARON sits dripping with fake blood, her magenta suit ruined, but her eyes still burning with intensity]
SHARON: [To camera, breathing hard] They don't see it yet. Nobody does. But I'm not giving up on Moonshot. This is just a setback. [Wipes blood from her face] The next evolution of humanity isn't going to wait for ethical consensus or perfect ROI models. I'll refine the process, find other funding sources. This is bigger than SchmucksCap, bigger than BLOODSHARK. [Leans closer to camera, voice dropping to an intense whisper] And when my enhanced subjects create the technologies that make today's innovations look like stone tools, they'll regret not getting in on the ground floor.
[Camera pulls back as SHARON walks away, leaving bloody footprints on the floor]
[BLOODSHARK logo appears, its teeth now dripping with the same viscous red liquid]
[END TRANSCRIPT]
TANKTHINK RECRUITMENT DEBRIEF (CONTINUED)
INTERVIEWER: How did you respond to that public humiliation?
SHARON MOON: [smiling slightly] I maintained perfect composure during the interview. Never let them see you bleed. Afterwards was a different story. As you know, I locked myself in the green room bathroom for almost an hour.
After that experience, I realized something about the human mind. You see, I'd been approaching cognitive development all wrong. What the BloodShark experience taught me was that controlled psychological pressure is far more effective at producing cognitive evolution than chemical compounds.
After I got back to Chicago, I completely revamped my research. Focused on Kagan's Constructive Developmental Framework—particularly the transition from Stage 3 to Stage 4, and eventually to Stage 5 cognition. That's when I began to understand how to induce these transitions without drugs or genetic manipulation.
INTERVIEWER: And Northwestern didn't appreciate this shift?
SHARON MOON: [laughing] God, no. They thought I'd gone off the deep end. The department wanted evidence-based research with control groups and IRB approval. I wanted to explore how targeted psychological pressure could trigger developmental leaps. My advisor called it "scientifically dubious and ethically problematic."
But I knew I was onto something. The way people process information—how they construct meaning—changes fundamentally under certain types of pressure. Understanding that mechanism is the key to everything.
PERSONAL JOURNAL ENTRY: SHARON MOON
DATE: April 10, 2022
The academic world is so painfully limited. Today Dr. Shapiro rejected my revised research proposal for the third time. "Ethically untenable," he called it. As if inducing temporary cognitive dissonance to trigger developmental stage advancement is somehow more harmful than letting people remain trapped in their limited meaning-making systems forever.
What Shapiro doesn't understand—what none of them understand—is that I've moved beyond merely theorizing. Since BloodShark, I've been conducting small-scale experiments on myself and willing participants. The results are undeniable: targeted destabilization of existing meaning-making structures, followed by guided reconstruction, can advance someone from Stage 3 (socialized mind) to early Stage 4 (self-authoring mind) in weeks instead of years.
Emily volunteered as a subject last week. Her baseline assessment showed classic Stage 3 markers—deriving identity from external validation, inability to manage competing loyalties without distress. After just three sessions of structured cognitive challenge, she's showing early Stage 4 indicators. She called today to say she's questioning her career path for the first time without feeling paralyzed by others' expectations.
The implications are staggering. If developmental stages determine how people process reality, and if those stages can be deliberately advanced... well, power doesn't get more fundamental than that.
Shapiro thinks I'm a pariah because of Moonshot's implosion. He has no idea I'm doing the most important work of my life right now. BloodShark was the best thing that ever happened to me. It forced me to see the true pathway to cognitive transformation.
Imagine what could be done with proper resources, with subjects in positions of influence. The possibilities are limitless.
EMAIL EXCHANGE, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
FROM: dr.shapiro@northwestern.edu
TO: psychology.faculty@lists.northwestern.edu
SUBJECT: Sharon Moon - Academic Progress Concerns
DATE: November 12, 2024
Colleagues,
I'm writing regarding one of our PhD candidates, Sharon Moon, who has become something of a departmental enigma. Having just reviewed her academic record for the past three years, I find myself genuinely puzzled and seeking your insights.
Ms. Moon entered our program in fall 2021 with exceptional credentials despite the controversy surrounding her startup, Moonshot. Her first-year performance was lackluster—minimal participation, frequently absent, and generally disinterested. Yet somehow, she passed her qualifying exams with scores in the 92nd percentile.
Since then, this pattern has intensified. She rarely appears for departmental events or scheduled meetings. Her research assistantship supervisor reports she sometimes disappears for weeks. Yet, when deadlines arrive, she invariably submits work that is—while not groundbreaking—certainly adequate. Sometimes even impressive.
Her dissertation proposal on "Cognitive Developmental Frameworks in High-Stress Environments" arrived precisely at the submission deadline, displayed sophisticated understanding of Kagan's work, yet contained virtually no original research. Her committee approved it largely on potential rather than substance.
I'm beginning to wonder if we're dealing with some form of academic dishonesty. Several possibilities come to mind:
She has someone else taking exams and writing papers
She's repurposing work from elsewhere
She's created a highly efficient system for minimal effort outcomes
Has anyone else noticed this pattern? The department is considering pulling her funding, but I'm hesitant to take action without understanding what's actually happening here.
Thoughts welcome,
Daniel Shapiro, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
Northwestern University
FROM: dr.johnson@northwestern.edu
TO: dr.shapiro@northwestern.edu, psychology.faculty@lists.northwestern.edu
SUBJECT: Re: Sharon Moon - Academic Progress Concerns
DATE: November 12, 2024
Dan,
I've had similar concerns. Last spring, Moon was registered for my Advanced Cognitive Theory seminar. She attended exactly three sessions out of fifteen. Yet her final paper on hierarchical predictive processing was among the most technically sophisticated I've received in years. When I questioned her about specific elements during her oral defense, she displayed perfect recall and understanding of material we covered when she wasn't present.
When pressed about her absences, she mentioned "consulting work" and "research opportunities" outside the university. I suspect she's still trying to rebuild some version of her failed startup while doing the minimum necessary to maintain her academic standing.
The most troubling incident occurred during midterms. I could have sworn I saw her entering the examination room, but two hours later, when collecting papers, I found myself uncertain if it was actually her or someone who looked very similar. The handwriting on the exam matched her previous work, but something felt off.
I suggest a one-on-one meeting with her dissertation committee before the January funding review. If she's outsourcing her academic work, we need to address it immediately.
Katherine Johnson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Northwestern University
RESEARCH PROPOSAL REJECTION
FROM: irb-chair@northwestern.edu
TO: sharon.moon@northwestern.edu
CC: dr.shapiro@northwestern.edu
SUBJECT: REJECTION: Protocol #23-704 "Induced Developmental Advancement Through Structured Cognitive Dissonance"
DATE: January 28, 2023
Dear Ms. Moon,
The Institutional Review Board has reviewed your proposal (#23-704) entitled "Induced Developmental Advancement Through Structured Cognitive Dissonance" and has determined that it cannot be approved in its current form.
The committee has significant concerns about:
Methodology and Risk Assessment: Your proposal involves deliberately inducing psychological distress in subjects through what you term "targeted identity destabilization." The committee believes this poses unacceptable risks to participants' psychological wellbeing.
Deception Elements: The proposed "controlled betrayal exercises" and "engineered social collapse scenarios" involve substantial deception without adequate provisions for debriefing.
Participant Selection: Your focus on "individuals in transition periods" or "experiencing professional/personal crisis" targets vulnerable populations without sufficient protection mechanisms.
Theoretical Framework: While Kagan's Constructive Developmental Framework is recognized, your application of it to "accelerate developmental stage advancement through controlled psychological pressure" represents a radical departure from established research protocols.
Outcome Measures: Your claim that subjects will advance "from Stage 3 to Stage 4 cognition within 2-3 weeks" lacks adequate scientific foundation and appears speculative.
Most concerning is your statement that "temporary psychological destabilization is a necessary component of developmental advancement." This fundamentally conflicts with the principle of non-maleficence that guides all human subjects research.
The committee strongly suggests you consult with Dr. Shapiro about redirecting your research toward more established methodologies within developmental psychology.
Sincerely,
Dr. Martin Cahill
Chair, Institutional Review Board
Northwestern University
INITIAL CONTACT TRANSCRIPT
LOCATION: Marriott Marquis, New York City
DATE: March 17, 2022
TIME: 19:42-20:03 EST
PARTICIPANTS: Sharon Moon, Lev Nakamura
CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED
[Recording begins with sound of bathroom door opening]
NAKAMURA: Ms. Moon.
MOON: [startled] How did you get in here? This is the women's restroom.
NAKAMURA: Yes. I'm here to offer you an opportunity.
MOON: [incredulous laugh] I just got humiliated on national television. My company is effectively dead. What opportunity could you possibly be offering?
NAKAMURA: [neutral tone] I represent an organization that values you highly. The BloodShark judges misunderstood the implications of your work.
MOON: Who are you?
NAKAMURA: I work for TankThink. We're a private strategic intelligence firm, currently in stealth mode.
MOON: [skeptical] Never heard of you.
NAKAMURA: I know.
MOON: [sound of movement, water running] I need to clean this fake blood off. You can wait outside if you have a legitimate business proposition.
NAKAMURA: [completely neutral] The blood is designed to be humiliating. They want to break you psychologically.
MOON: [pausing] You're studying my reactions.
NAKAMURA: [slight pause] Yes.
MOON: [sound of paper towels being pulled] What exactly does TankThink do?
NAKAMURA: We solve complex strategic problems, decisively.
MOON: [short laugh] That's deliberately vague. But threatening.
NAKAMURA: [unchanged tone] Yes. If you're interested, I can offer you an assessment opportunity tomorrow morning in Chicago.
MOON: That's oddly specific. How do you know I'm going back to Chicago?
NAKAMURA: Your plane lands at 8:15. A car will pick you up at the exit gate. Optional. I can meet you at our office in Hyde Park at 10:00 AM tomorrow.
MOON: [long pause] You've been following me.
NAKAMURA: [no change in tone] I found you in the bathroom.
MOON: Why should I trust you?
NAKAMURA: You may have to.
MOON: [sound of more paper towels] What's the assessment?
NAKAMURA: A simple evaluation. It will take less than thirty minutes.
MOON: And if I pass?
NAKAMURA: [slight pause] Salary starts at $2.2 million annually.
MOON: [sound of movement stopping] That's… substantial.
NAKAMURA: [handing something] My card. The address is on the back. 10:00 AM tomorrow if you're interested.
MOON: [examining card] Just a sockpuppet logo?
NAKAMURA: [already moving away] Until tomorrow, Ms. Moon.
[Sound of door closing]
MOON: [to herself] What the hell was that?
[Recording ends]
ASSESSMENT TRANSCRIPT
LOCATION: [REDACTED]
DATE: March 18, 2022
TIME: 10:00-10:27 CST
PARTICIPANTS: Sharon Moon, Lev Nakamura
CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED
[Audio recording begins]
NAKAMURA: Thank you for coming, Ms. Moon.
MOON: I researched you after our meeting. Found nothing.
NAKAMURA: I know.
MOON: No digital footprint, no corporate registration I could find. Who leases the building?
NAKAMURA: [slight pause] You've been thorough.
MOON: When a stranger approaches me after the worst moment of my life, I do my homework. What do you want from me?
NAKAMURA: We're interested in your understanding of human cognition. Particularly your work applying Kagan's developmental framework to behavioral prediction.
MOON: [sharply] That research was never published. It wasn't even in my company materials.
NAKAMURA: Yes.
MOON: So you won’t tell me how you know.
NAKAMURA: Your startup focused on using pharmaceutical and genetic interventions to create enhanced cognition. Interesting approach. We're interested in similar outcomes through different methods.
MOON: Cognitive developmental acceleration without chemical intervention. That's significantly more difficult.
NAKAMURA: Difficulty is… [sound of object being placed on table] relative. When properly resourced. Take a look. This is your assessment.
MOON: A gas mask?
NAKAMURA: Yes.
MOON: [long pause] What am I supposed to do with it?
NAKAMURA: That's the assessment.
MOON: You want me to... put it on?
NAKAMURA: If you choose to. Alternatively, I can provide restraints if you prefer to be transported that way.
MOON: Transported where?
NAKAMURA: To the next location.
MOON: [short laugh] This is absurd. The mask could contain anything—a poison, a sedative, nothing at all. It's a blind decision with potentially serious consequences.
NAKAMURA: [no response]
MOON: [pause] This is a strategic assessment, not a psychological one. You're testing my decision-making with incomplete information.
NAKAMURA: [no response]
MOON: [sounds of mask being handled] The seal appears intact. No obvious tampering. Military grade, I’m assuming. It’s not commercial. [pause] If you wanted to harm me, you've had multiple opportunities. It wouldn’t be hard.
NAKAMURA: [no response]
MOON: You're telling me nothing about yourself. Your face is completely neutral. No microexpressions I can detect. That level of control suggests extensive training.
NAKAMURA: [no response]
MOON: [sounds of continued examination] If I put this on, I'm unconscious and at your mercy. If I refuse, I miss whatever opportunity you're offering. A binary choice with incomplete information.
NAKAMURA: [silence]
MOON: The sockpuppet logo. The same one on your card. It's on the filter cartridge.
NAKAMURA: [silence]
MOON: [long pause, sound of breathing] Your pulse hasn't changed since I arrived. Your pupils haven't dilated. Your breathing pattern is consistent. Either you're telling the truth, or you're exceptionally well-trained.
NAKAMURA: [silence]
[Sound of mask being picked up]
MOON: ThinkTank.
NAKAMURA: TankThink.
MOON: Right. Strategic intelligence. $2.2 million. And a gas mask.
[Sound of mask being put on]
MOON: [voice muffled by mask] If this is how you recruit all your personnel, you must have an interesting corporate culture. Why not just have an app?
[Sound of deep breathing through mask, followed by a thud]
NAKAMURA: [to recording device] Pulse is good, airway is clear. All right, let’s proceed with transport.
[Recording ends]
ARRIVAL OF CANDIDATE FOUR: SHARON MOON
OBSERVATION NOTES
OBSERVER: L. Nakamura
DATE: December 12, 2024
TIME: 13:58-14:05 CST
LOCATION: Pick Hall, Room 218
Sharon Moon was dropped off from transport in front of the Ferrari statue outside of Pick Hall precisely four minutes before the scheduled start time. Unlike the other candidates who displayed varying degrees of anxiety or confusion, Moon appeared completely composed. She wore dark slacks and a simple black turtleneck—professional but unremarkable, designed not to draw attention.
Her entrance to Room 218 was carefully modulated. She initially scanned the room from the doorway, assessing the other candidates before fully entering. This brief hesitation was subtle enough that only Jacky Stein-Garde appeared to notice it.
Upon entering, she chose the seat farthest from the door but with clear sightlines to all entrances and exits. Her laptop remained closed initially as she observed the group dynamics already unfolding.
When Storch attempted to engage her in conversation, she responded with polite interest while revealing minimal personal information. Her affect was warm but controlled. Most interesting was her brief interaction with Kone. The two seemed to recognize something in each other, though neither acknowledged any previous connection. Kone's body language suggested wariness while Moon's indicated casual assessment.
End observation notes.
TANKTHINK RECRUITMENT DEBRIEF
CANDIDATE: Sharon Moon
DATE: December 15, 2024
INTERVIEWER: [REDACTED]
CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL
INTERVIEWER: During the challenge phase, you proposed monitoring the cognitive developmental stages of key German political figures to identify intervention points. Explain that approach.
SHARON: Kagan's framework isn't just academic theory—it's a practical tool for predicting behavioral responses to stress. Most people, including political leaders, operate at Stage 3 or early Stage 4 cognition. They're either conforming to group expectations or dogmatically following their own internal rulebook.
When subjected to fear or uncertainty, Stage 3 thinkers retreat to authoritarian positions—seeking stronger group identity and clearer rules. Stage 4 thinkers double down on their existing framework, becoming increasingly rigid. Both reactions make them predictable.
INTERVIEWER: And you saw this pattern in the AfD leadership?
SHARON: [leaning forward] Absolutely. Klepp operates firmly in Stage 3—her identity entirely wrapped up in party approval. When we created the impression that public sentiment was shifting dramatically toward security concerns, her rhetoric immediately hardened. She didn't choose that response; her cognitive structure essentially forced it.
What made this approach so effective is that we didn't need to modify her values—just the context in which she expressed them. It's like aikido—using an opponent's own force against them.
INTERVIEWER: Yet you argued against directly targeting her.
SHARON: [nodding] Direct manipulation is inefficient. Far better to shape the environment around Stage 3 thinkers and let their psychological structure do the work for you. The power station operation wasn't just about creating fear—it was about triggering predictable cognitive responses in key decision-makers.
The elegance is that it appears entirely natural. She believes she's responding rationally to changing circumstances, when in fact her developmental limitations make her response entirely predictable—and manipulable.
INTERVIEWER: How did Jacky's approach differ from yours?
SHARON: [thoughtful pause] Jacky sees power as something to seize directly. I see it as something to shape indirectly. Her strategy was comprehensive but blunt—create enough chaos to force a specific outcome. My approach would have been more targeted—creating precise psychological conditions that make only one outcome psychologically possible for the key actors.
INTERVIEWER: And the others?
SHARON: [smiling slightly] Mariam… likes details and rules and incentives, she likes to imagine people attached on strings to a lot of elaborate mechanisms. Lorenz understands systems, he sees the forest for the trees, but is too attached to aesthetic perfection, and I think he is too attached mostly to really shallow affective politics. He’s an edgelord, you know. And Devin sees technical solutions to human problems. But he’s consumed by fantasy, by isolation, he’s importing all of these warped socialized value hierarchies, and he has no grasp on his own mind–everything he builds on is sand. And he’s fucking annoying, like all crazy people. So their approaches were less mature.
INTERVIEWER: Who do you think won?
SHARON: I hope me.
INTERVIEWER: [laughing]
SHARON: [laughing]
EMAIL FROM DR. SHAPIRO TO SHARON MOON
FROM: dr.shapiro@northwestern.edu
TO: sharon.moon@northwestern.edu
SUBJECT: January Funding Review - URGENT
DATE: December 10, 2024
Sharon,
This is my third attempt to reach you regarding your upcoming funding review. Your continued silence is only reinforcing the department's concerns about your commitment to this program.
The committee will meet on January 15th to determine whether your funding will continue for the remainder of the academic year. As it stands, I have very little positive evidence to present on your behalf. You have missed every departmental colloquium this quarter. Your research assistantship supervisor reports you haven't been in the lab since October. Your dissertation progress report is now two months overdue.
While your qualifying exam performance was impressive, and your occasional submissions demonstrate clear intelligence, the pattern of absence and minimal engagement cannot continue. The department has invested significant resources in your education, and the general feeling is that you are not holding up your end of the bargain.
If you wish to continue in this program, I need the following by December 20th:
A complete draft of at least one dissertation chapter
A revised timeline for completion
A formal explanation of your absences and plan for improved engagement
Failure to provide these will result in my recommending termination of your funding, which would effectively end your candidacy in our program.
Please take this seriously, Sharon. Your intellectual potential is extraordinary, but potential alone is insufficient at this stage.
Regards,
Daniel Shapiro, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Northwestern University
EMAIL RESPONSE FROM SHARON MOON
FROM: sharon.moon@northwestern.edu
TO: dr.shapiro@northwestern.edu
SUBJECT: Re: January Funding Review - URGENT
DATE: December 19, 2024, 11:57 PM
Dear Dr. Shapiro,
Please find attached the requested materials for my funding review:
Chapter_Three_Developmental_Transitions.pdf
Dissertation_Timeline_Revised.pdf
Absence_Explanation.pdf
I apologize for the delayed response. My research has taken me in directions that required extensive field work, which I've detailed in the explanation document. I remain committed to completing my dissertation on schedule.
Thank you for your patience and continued support.
Regards,
Sharon Moon