UnMasking The Cabal

"If you leave us in peace, we will do you no harm. If you wish to join us, we will set a chair at our table and work to our mutual benefit. If you work against us, we will have no choice but to retaliate."

[RIP Morgan, Erik, and Juan 26 Dec 2012]
[Moriarty refictionalized 16 Dec 2012]

Re: UnMasking The Cabal

Postby Qara-Xuan Zenith on Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:46 pm

Seriously, we keep on doing this. Does it really make sense to hint at something but not say it, or say it but ninja-edit it out?

...in other news, we should re-rail this thread by now.
Why are we even arguing about a dead fictional dude and hypothetical ninjas?

AS DICTATED TO INSTANTIATION 17-01-18-01.
User avatar
Qara-Xuan Zenith
 
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 8:34 pm

Re: UnMasking The Cabal

Postby Dryunya on Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:49 am

You know, getting a private chat room and only giving passwords to those who joined before the Cabal could have found the forum would be far more secure and productive than what we're doing now. :|
However, the game is set on this forum, and I don't think the GMs would appreciate leaving it and all the new Metaguards who may or may not be Cabal members in disguise behind. ;)
I have attempted to suppress my inner hyperspace future gardener crying out against all the injustice I am committing.
User avatar
Dryunya
 
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:23 am

Re: UnMasking The Cabal

Postby JackAlsworth on Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:06 am

You're not being paranoid enough. jmartysknight2e4 posted on September 26th on Holmes' blog. He's clearly been here for slightly longer than that (it took Holmes long enough to figure out how to work the internet). Ergo, any user who doesn't have a history before the ARG could be a Cabal member in disguise. Hell, they've already hacked us once; any or all of our accounts could be compromised.

I feel like we should operate under the assumption that the Cabal is reading everything we say (especially in their section), but not take any more security measures than that, because it's possible to form a logic chain that would implicate pretty much everyone.

I think this topic should be locked (since we have their identities confirmed, albeit slightly suspiciously), and a new, all-purpose discussion thread should be opened. Any objections?
User avatar
JackAlsworth
 
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:40 pm
Location: Western Washington State

Re: UnMasking The Cabal

Postby Sicon112 on Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:07 am

JackAlsworth wrote:You're not being paranoid enough. jmartysknight2e4 posted on September 26th on Holmes' blog. He's clearly been here for slightly longer than that (it took Holmes long enough to figure out how to work the internet). Ergo, any user who doesn't have a history before the ARG could be a Cabal member in disguise. Hell, they've already hacked us once; any or all of our accounts could be compromised.

I feel like we should operate under the assumption that the Cabal is reading everything we say (especially in their section), but not take any more security measures than that, because it's possible to form a logic chain that would implicate pretty much everyone.

I think this topic should be locked (since we have their identities confirmed, albeit slightly suspiciously), and a new, all-purpose discussion thread should be opened. Any objections?


Not particularly. Go for it.
Normal people are the easiest to manipulate. Too smart and they have an annoying tendency to catch wind of your plans, too dumb and, in the words of a certain pirate, "You can never tell when they are about to do something incredibly...stupid."
User avatar
Sicon112
Meta-Witch Hunter
 
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:07 pm

Re: UnMasking The Cabal

Postby JackAlsworth on Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:09 am

All right, locking up.
User avatar
JackAlsworth
 
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:40 pm
Location: Western Washington State

Previous

Return to The Cabal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron