Dryunya wrote:Allegedly crossed a line. We've seen many times that Mr. A sucks at communication. Instead of jumping to conclusions, you could, you know, ask him?
(I told you nothing good would come out of it, Qara. -_-)
TheJester wrote:I really hate to say it but I take more of a "Watcher's" standpoint when it comes to Mr. A. I don't trust him and I honestly don't think he should exist either.
eli_gone_crazy wrote:I'd like to see if A would want to have a chat in the chatroom with us.
maybe ed and joe too.
get more info
Adell wrote:eli_gone_crazy wrote:I'd like to see if A would want to have a chat in the chatroom with us.
maybe ed and joe too.
get more info
It would be too chaotic, the only way it would work is if only a few of us participated or a few of us filtered responses, neither of which are fun or completely fair to all the metaguards. The chat is not a good idea when we have 20 members throwing all forms of questions, insults, jokes, and answers in between the people we'd invite to it.
Qara-Xuan Zenith wrote:Adell, I made a suggestion in the chatroom thread after Morgan's visit which I think would work: we all agree to not type if we see the pencil beside someone else's name already. True, that requires everyone to agree, but if we see someone's disregarding the rules, then we can just ignore that person's pencil.
I think Eli's idea is a good one, actually. The biggest problem people seem to have, at least with Joe and A, is lack of communication. This is probably the best way to solve that.
Qara-Xuan Zenith wrote:Or we could open a separate, temporary chatroom like Xana did for his lecture, and host the dialogue there. Anyone who comes in agrees to abide by those rules.
Dryunya wrote:I still don't get why he got scolded, actually. Did I miss something?
Sicon112 wrote:I would like to point out to Rota, who did not seem to understand why A didn't say anything about the wall fragments, the fact that there was no way to inform US of the fragments AND make it sensible and workable from a meta standpoint while still avoiding plot holes from an in game POV. We discussed this before. Furthermore, if A really had told us about the pieces I would think he was a total idiot. Letting a huge amount of people who cannot help you in on the existence of some objects that you have no reason to believe are in danger? That's retarded!
Sicon112 wrote:I would like to point out to Rota, who did not seem to understand why A didn't say anything about the wall fragments, the fact that there was no way to inform US of the fragments AND make it sensible and workable from a meta standpoint while still avoiding plot holes from an in game POV. We discussed this before. Furthermore, if A really had told us about the pieces I would think he was a total idiot. Letting a huge amount of people who cannot help you in on the existence of some objects that you have no reason to believe are in danger? That's retarded!
RotavatoR wrote:Sicon112 wrote:I would like to point out to Rota, who did not seem to understand why A didn't say anything about the wall fragments, the fact that there was no way to inform US of the fragments AND make it sensible and workable from a meta standpoint while still avoiding plot holes from an in game POV. We discussed this before. Furthermore, if A really had told us about the pieces I would think he was a total idiot. Letting a huge amount of people who cannot help you in on the existence of some objects that you have no reason to believe are in danger? That's retarded!
I'm sorry, I didn't know that that was discussed before. Or maybe I forgot, but I just don't check the forums that often anymore. This thing has gotten so big, it almost feels like a chore to read up on everything in order to properly partake in the ARG. I hope I didn't screw anything up.
Dryunya wrote:The new wall piece dilemma has reminded me.
Mr. A "cries lightning". The characters appear (and, apparently, disappear) with something resembling a lightning flash. Notice a pattern?
Me neither.
everyday apophenia wrote:The human brain is an amazing pattern-detecting machine. We possess a variety of mechanisms that allow us to uncover hidden relationships between objects, events, and people. Without these, the sea of data hitting our senses would surely appear random and chaotic. But when our pattern-detection systems misfire they tend to err in the direction of perceiving patterns where none actually exist.
The German neurologist Klaus Conrad coined the term "Apophenia" to describe this tendency in patients suffering from certain forms of mental illness. But it is increasingly clear from a variety of findings in the behavioral sciences that this tendency is not limited to ill or uneducated minds; healthy, intelligent people make similar errors on a regular basis: a superstitious athlete sees a connection between victory and a pair of socks, a parent refuses to vaccinate her child because of a perceived causal connection between inoculation and disease, a scientist sees hypothesis-confirming results in random noise, and thousands of people believe the random "shuffle" function on their music software is broken because they mistake spurious coincidence for meaningful connection.
In short, the pattern-detection that is responsible for so much of our species' success can just as easily betray us. This tendency to oversee patterns is likely an inevitable by-product of our adaptive pattern-detecting mechanisms. But the ability to acknowledge, track, and guard against this potentially dangerous tendency would be aided if the simple concept of "everyday Apophenia" were an easily accessible concept.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests