Sicon112 wrote:NeverSlender wrote:That would confirm my theory about someone/ a group manipulating the fics.
Someone Twitter her and ask if she saw a weird looking dude with an orange beard. If she ignores the Tweet, consider the WMG as "probably Jossed" A reaction of some kind implies we may be on to something. More vague questions about the other customers in the building may also turn up leads.
NeverSlender wrote:Sicon112 wrote:NeverSlender wrote:That would confirm my theory about someone/ a group manipulating the fics.
Someone Twitter her and ask if she saw a weird looking dude with an orange beard. If she ignores the Tweet, consider the WMG as "probably Jossed" A reaction of some kind implies we may be on to something. More vague questions about the other customers in the building may also turn up leads.
If she ignores it it's probably more likely. She probably wants to avoid spoilers.
NeverSlender wrote:Easiest way to avoid giving something away is to ignore the question.
Sicon112 wrote:Negative. if she is asked directly she needs to answer. Doing otherwise would be railroading. It would also be odd behavior from the puppetmasters. Or at least, it wouldn't match up to the profile of them I have collected so far.

NeverSlender wrote:Easiest way to avoid giving something away is to ignore the question.
Sicon112 wrote:NeverSlender wrote:Easiest way to avoid giving something away is to ignore the question.
I know, but assuming that Stein WAS there plotwise, and we were smart enough to think of it and ask, ignoring us is railroading us on the plot line that they have set up. If they want to avoid doing so, they HAVE to give us a response somehow. That doesn't mean that a response confirms it, and depending on the response, it may be Jossed anyway, but they do need to give us something if we are on the right track.
Sicon112 wrote:Look, if they are railroading us, there really isn't anything we can do except say What The Hell, Puppet Masters. Therefore, we must operate under the assumption that they are NOT. This allows us to keep moving forward in situations where we would otherwise probably remain because we didn't think anything actually resulting was likely. Basically, we must assume that all our actions will be accounted for in some way, or the point of making any action in the first place becomes moot.
Secondly, assuming non-railroading and assuming that they account for all our actions actually makes it more annoying for them to railroad in a lot of situations, so it also is kinda vindictive.
Sicon112 wrote:Look, if they are railroading us, there really isn't anything we can do except say What The Hell, Puppet Masters. Therefore, we must operate under the assumption that they are NOT. This allows us to keep moving forward in situations where we would otherwise probably remain because we didn't think anything actually resulting was likely. Basically, we must assume that all our actions will be accounted for in some way, or the point of making any action in the first place becomes moot.
Secondly, assuming non-railroading and assuming that they account for all our actions actually makes it more annoying for them to railroad in a lot of situations, so it also is kinda vindictive.

Sicon112 wrote:Look, if they are railroading us, there really isn't anything we can do except say What The Hell, Puppet Masters. Therefore, we must operate under the assumption that they are NOT. This allows us to keep moving forward in situations where we would otherwise probably remain because we didn't think anything actually resulting was likely. Basically, we must assume that all our actions will be accounted for in some way, or the point of making any action in the first place becomes moot.
Secondly, assuming non-railroading and assuming that they account for all our actions actually makes it more annoying for them to railroad in a lot of situations, so it also is kinda vindictive.
Adell wrote:Sicon, please stop with this gambit talk.
NeverSlender wrote:*Sighs*
We're here to solve the puzzles we're given and to move the plot forward when we do. Operating under the assumption we're free to do as we like plotwise will make this more enjoyable. But realism is aproppriate in places.

Sicon112 wrote:NeverSlender wrote:*Sighs*
We're here to solve the puzzles we're given and to move the plot forward when we do. Operating under the assumption we're free to do as we like plotwise will make this more enjoyable. But realism is aproppriate in places.
So you just aren't gonna do it? What would it hurt?

Dryunya wrote:Would it be too rude for me to ruin your meta-talk by saying that if the puppetmasters don't want us to move in that direction, the psychiatrist will just answer that she didn't see the orange-bearded guy? It's not like she has an eagle-eye. Duh.

). Considering that she is back online, we should expect her to answer about the suspicious people anytime now. If you asked, of course.Dryunya wrote:Back on track. She has replied with the restaurant's name (now that Sicon has deduced it already). Considering that she is back online, we should expect her to answer about the suspicious people anytime now. If you asked, of course.
Return to [REFIC'D] Joan Lawson, Therapist (and Sweeney Todd)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest