Watch the Footage archive

It certainly isn't an opening maneuver, there's no way a knight can move their on it's first move.

Adell wrote:It certainly isn't an opening maneuver, there's no way a knight can move their on it's first move.

Already know that. Like I said, that is the only move that matches for any famous plays. I'm stumped.

*bites lip* That's just twisted. I don't know chess very well, unfortunately, but this is obviously a reference to Moriarty being a chessmaster and a damned good one at that.

Options: We really are dealing with Moriarty here, or we aren't, and we aren't the only ones to see the parallels to Holmes made by that post. So basically, that was either Moriarty, or just a drug dealer making a joke.

EDIT: Nice post on the blog Adell.

Mm-mm. Too many dots connecting. Hefner is too much like Holmes, the username fits too well, and Arthur Moore matches too many description. It's too likely that it's Moriarty for it not to be. Thing is, only a Holmes can outwit Moriarty. And he was just forced to run.

Or, that commenter is Moriority's Knight. And by giving him Les's info he was moving that guy (the commenter) to E4.

I've decided to challenge the man himself to a game of chess. Let's see if he's willing to put his pride on the line.

Adell wrote:Or, that commenter is Moriority's Knight. And by giving him Les's info he was moving that guy (the commenter) to E4.

I've decided to challenge the man himself to a game of chess. Let's see if he's willing to put his pride on the line.

But that doesn't make sense, since the commenter himself isn't going anywhere. It seems to be more a metaphorical chess move to put Holmes into danger.

Just be careful, Dell. Sharks don't need you to be in the water, just in range.

Sicon112 wrote:

Adell wrote:Or, that commenter is Moriority's Knight. And by giving him Les's info he was moving that guy (the commenter) to E4.

I've decided to challenge the man himself to a game of chess. Let's see if he's willing to put his pride on the line.

But that doesn't make sense, since the commenter himself isn't going anywhere. It seems to be more a metaphorical chess move to put Holmes into danger.

Yeah this makes way more sense

Does it bother anyone else that Holmes tended to follow leads to their source and now he is here on our side? did the wall maybe break from our end?

IslaKariese wrote:The comments are moderated - if we did anything we weren't supposed to, they would've been deleted in order to keep within the bounds of the game, I bet. It's likely this would've happened on its own even if we didn't plan on mediating between them.

This!

I replied to that. Re-posted:

Actually, they likely wouldn't have deleted them even if we did move too fast. It's like an RPG. If you have a bad GM, he railroads you, or in this case, deletes the comments that aren't exactly what they want. However, a good GM works with the players, changing their plans as the players react. So far, the puppetmasters have done a really good job, which is why I have been pressuring them as much as possible. 'Cause I know they can handle it.

Guyshane wrote:Does it bother anyone else that Holmes tended to follow leads to their source and now he is here on our side? did the wall maybe break from our end?

Do you think maybe Zack's leaving Echo Chamber had to do with it? He 'suspended disbelief' according to Mr. A, and that in and off itself has to do with the validity of the Wall.

Sicon112 wrote:I replied to that. Re-posted:

Actually, they likely wouldn't have deleted them even if we did move too fast. It's like an RPG. If you have a bad GM, he railroads you, or in this case, deletes the comments that aren't exactly what they want. However, a good GM works with the players, changing their plans as the players react. So far, the puppetmasters have done a really good job, which is why I have been pressuring them as much as possible. 'Cause I know they can handle it.

I read your reply no need to re-post it. Events would have unfolded similarly whether we took an active or passive stance. The story had to move forward, it would have happened either way. I can't speak for the timing of events though. Things MIGHT have happened sooner than the PMs planned. Original "This" still stands.

YankeeWhite wrote:I read your reply no need to re-post it. Events would have unfolded similarly whether we took an active or passive stance. The story had to move forward, it would have happened either way. I can't speak for the timing of events though. Things MIGHT have happened sooner than the PMs planned. Original "This" still stands.

K. I know some people are not reading everything, so I thought you might have missed it. My bad.

Great, I'm all antsy now. We moved too fast and now the excitement's been put on hold until other parts of the game are caught up. This must be how Sherlock feels when he's bored.

IslaKariese wrote:Great, I'm all antsy now. We moved too fast and now the excitement's been put on hold until other parts of the game are caught up. This must be how Sherlock feels when he's bored.

Totally.

Yeah it's typical ARG pacing. But the excitement comes right back when things finally hit. #downtimesucks

Slowpoke is so slow.
I still have something on topic. It may have been posted, but I wasn't following the Holmes' threads properly. I'm pretty sure, though, that I didn't see the conclusions I'm about to post.
Basically, I've totally missed Raikes' first 4 posts, as they were "hidden" on the next page. They do confirm, though:
1. Holmes wanted to go back, which probably means he accidentally fell through the cracks.
2. Hugh Hefner is the name Raikes came up with on the spot, and Holmes ran with it.
3. Raikes is not directly connected to Poirot - he just stayed logged on to his WordPress account on the computer at Widdecombe's that Poirot happened to use.

The rest establishes Holmes as Fish Out Of Temporal Water, and everything. We've covered that.
At least we have absolutely no more grounds to call him Hefner. You might want to point Ed here.

Dryunya wrote:Slowpoke is so slow.
I still have something on topic. It may have been posted, but I wasn't following the Holmes' threads properly. I'm pretty sure, though, that I didn't see the conclusions I'm about to post.
Basically, I've totally missed Raikes' first 4 posts, as they were "hidden" on the next page. They do confirm, though:
1. Holmes wanted to go back, which probably means he accidentally fell through the cracks.
2. Hugh Hefner is the name Raikes came up with on the spot, and Holmes ran with it.
3. Raikes is not directly connected to Poirot - he just stayed logged on to his WordPress account on the computer at Widdecombe's that Poirot happened to use.

The rest establishes Holmes as Fish Out Of Temporal Water, and everything. We've covered that.
At least we have absolutely no more grounds to call him Hefner. You might want to point Ed here.

About your number 1 just wanted to say maybe he didn't fall through but chased his archenemy. Can't remember how to spell his name.

Actually, they likely wouldn't have deleted them even if we did move too fast. It's like an RPG. If you have a bad GM, he railroads you, or in this case, deletes the comments that aren't exactly what they want. However, a good GM works with the players, changing their plans as the players react. So far, the puppetmasters have done a really good job, which is why I have been pressuring them as much as possible. 'Cause I know they can handle it.

Less "I". A few people did a good job talking to the characters.

Adell wrote:Well I assume J. Marty is the commentators name or something.

"J. Marty?"

As in JAMES MORIARTY.

Take away the ORI, and what do you get? James Marty!

James Marty= James Moriarty!

If this is old news, then I am sorry.

If this is new, then IT'S GROUNDBREAKING

The Finch wrote:

Adell wrote:Well I assume J. Marty is the commentators name or something.

"J. Marty?"

As in JAMES MORIARTY.

Take away the ORI, and what do you get? James Marty!

James Marty= James Moriarty!

If this is old news, then I am sorry.

If this is new, then IT'S GROUNDBREAKING

Old news but if you got it independently, still good work.

NeverSlender wrote:

The Finch wrote:

Adell wrote:Well I assume J. Marty is the commentators name or something.

"J. Marty?"

As in JAMES MORIARTY.

Take away the ORI, and what do you get? James Marty!

James Marty= James Moriarty!

If this is old news, then I am sorry.

If this is new, then IT'S GROUNDBREAKING

Old news but if you got it independently, still good work.

Yeah, it was independent, but it at least clears up that the email is either Moriarty or somebody relatively close to Moriarty.

Yeah, it was independent, but it at least clears up that the email is either Moriarty or somebody relatively close to Moriarty.

...What about possibly just soembody who WANTS to be Moriarty, character or otherwise? Someone who really knows their Holmes canon and was invested in the character and knew about the wall breaking down?

Whatever the case, I'm still willing to consider it may be a different continuity's Moriarty. He doesn't seem as technologically and socially unfamiliar as Holmes is...