unforum

[Dorkmaster]

[Meta] Gunsmith: Don't worry you're not sounding mad! I just wanted to let you know I wasn't either. I just know you and I have been butting heads on various theories for a couple of days now, and wanted to let you know I seriously value these discussions! [/Meta]

Ok, Here's where I think we differ, and it's kinda splitting hairs, so forgive me. I see the Occam's razor supporting me in terms of PM action. I see us given a framework to live by, and I don't think it makes sense to complicate that framework. (I know it's somewhat complicated already by the flea's intentional imitation of SPDR, but we also have to take into mind that SPDR, a dimwitted repair program recognized the flea as a phony, and therefore I think we would too.)

You see Occam's razor supporting your in-game theory. I'm not bashing that, since you have a valid point. I'm just saying why go through all the trouble of having months of information pointing to "this character contacts us this way" and then contradicting that. If the flea could completely mimic SPDR, I would think we would get more than one reference to it, so we could be a bit more certain. I mean it's not getting too near the curtain or anything, especially if it's supposed to be deeply plot-rooted, right? I'm just asking you to question it, for the sake of determining the motivation behind the coordinates puzzle.

If the flea wrote the coordinates, then why is it there? What should be on our radar when researching the places the coordinates represent?

If SPDR wrote the coordinates, then why is it there, too?

So, I'm trying to reverse-engineer the GPS puzzle, ya see? We know how to arrange certain text fragments from other puzzles, because we know who's saying it...it gives us some context to work with. I think we're struggling so much with the GPS stuff because we have no context. We have no point of origin. That's what I'm trying to determine, and also why we cannot be so flippant about who's speaking what text. And I just don't believe that the PMs would take away our only point of reference by mixing up the characters voices, is all... It just doesn't fit, in my mind.

(BTW, I've spent too much of my work time today responding to other topics... I'm only listening to Gunsmith for the remainder of my ILB time today. You've earned my direct attention. )

[Shad0]

Re: SPDR

[cedmond]

look at thread #6 here http://bees.netninja.com/wiki/index.php?title=Phase_3_Computer_Code

the flea uses attempts to mimic spider commands but gets denied at first, then it uses a higher version number, he gets denied but he then calls melissa who in turn tells him to delete the older version and therefore wiping out the older version, due to these events, with SPDR being out of the way i would say it's possible for the flea to display however he would want, maybe armed with this info we're supposed to look at these locations as coming from the flea rather than taking them at face value and say they're from SPDR.....hmmmm


ok, ignore most of above post....i'm too damn slow

[GunsmithCat]

[Dorkmaster]

I'll tell y'all what... I think I really like talking to you two, Shad0 and GunsmithCat. We have logical arguments! YAY!!! (I could do this all day!)

Ok, so (1) thanks Shad0 for showing me the stuff on how Melissa Deleted SPDR. So, that explains where we put SPDR in future conversations: (to quote StrongBad) DELETED! (2) Ok, so is there any way to timeline when the coordinates went up vs. SPDR being deleted? How come SPDR recognized flea, but not Melissa? Maybe the flea did in fact get to become so good at imitating SPDR that... well, I won't go that far... I guess I'm saying that while I don't buy it yet, I see the weight shifting off my side of this scale, and growing closer to even here. Good on both of you!

SPEC: should we ask the princess what she makes of this situation, then? What do you think? (Edit - I'm going to ask the Princess what she thinks of this.)

[GunsmithCat]

[GunsmithCat]

[Dorkmaster]

[Dorkmaster]

I'm so sorry I can't organize my thoughts into smaller text. I really wish I didn't post War and Peace each time, but I have to to make my point clear (I want to connect the dots for all, so I can show where I get certain arguments, is all...)

Also, I think we need to better define Occam's razor in this type of scenario, because while simpler is better, by that thinking, simpler isn't always agreed upon. And I think for this principle to work, we need a clear, widely accepted definition of simple. (I know I'm sounding stupid, but follow me on this for a bit:)

I think you're seeing simple as "how hard to connect the dots is it?"

For example, the whole flea being capable of changing HTML thing. It's entirely possible that since the flea could imitate the words to its advantage, why couldn't it imitate the style of the words... It's an easy extension. I understand that completely and do not disagree, except this:

However, let me propose this as my definition of simple: "Does it concur with all previous exact info? (taking no leaps)"

Everything that's worked out so far, has worked by that principle, for example: figuring out who wrote the 8/3 email from Margaret's account. We used past experience as a precedent to determine the identity of the author to be the Princess.

So that's where our primary differences are coming from. I suppose no argument is less valid in this context, just different. But to avoid Politically Correctness, and get to more important info, I think we have to adopt one or the other, so we can work together constructively on this topic.

By your definition, it's hard to draw a line and say "this doesn't fit" because there's always that grey area that can be argued. Whereas, my definition is clear. If we don't have textual evidence to support it previously, then we can't stand on that for further speculation.

Since we have no text evidence that the flea has imitated the style of SPDR's speech, we have nothing to stand on to say "the flea wrote the coordinates". I know it's spec and all, but I think it's dangerous spec because now we get into "hmm... I wonder..." without grounding it on something.

By your reasoning, we have to draw an arbitrary line of "how far is too far before something is unreasonably incongruent?" Whereas with my theory, we can start applying a razor to items that don't fit previous info in ALL ways. (that's why new info is so confounding, cuz we don't have precedent.) For example, the reason we're having such a hard time with this, is because the flea has never said anything but the "Evade, Reveal, Escape" stuff and "the whole of the law" stuff, but now we get a lot more, so there's no precedent except the style of the text (the voice).

So, again, IMHO, I think we need to be more selective in what is fact, what is potential, and what is really stretching, and I think Occam's razor is only good for that if you have a good solid, black line that determines the cutoff between simple/likely and complex/unlikely.

[Crzygeoff]

Please keep it up! This is great. Unfortunately, I feel like instead of an ARG, we're playing a "who can come up with the best spec to make the story better" game. If any PMs are reading, please give us something a little more tangible/substantial!

[GunsmithCat]

[Nova]

Wow, I go away to work for a few hours and look what happens. Here are some of my thoughts.

Melissa has on several occasions mentioned the Spider in her monologue - I'm trying to remember, has she ever directly mentioned the Flea? We know that the Spider can see the Flea, as it tries to kill it, but can Melissa?

The Flea is obviously having some influence over Melissa. But, if she can't see the Flea, it's as if it's whispering into her ears, and she is taking these ideas and believing she has come up with them on her own.

The SPDR obviously wants to get rid of the Flea. Either this is because the Flea is malevolent, or because the SPDR is ignorant of its purpose and is programmed to purge things it doesn't recognise. Which, it's impossible to say at this point. Now, though, the SPDR is apparently gone, if we are to believe the Princess's story. If that's the case, the Flea has removed the one entity that can identify it as an enemy - or, it has tricked Melissa into eliminating the one entity that can identify it as an enemy.

Melissa says the Spider is stupid, and has served its purpose. However, the possibility exists that her beliefs regarding the Spider have been created by the Flea - it wants to get rid of the Spider before it repairs her to the point where she might see it and recognise it as an enemy.

Of course, the opposite is also possible.

[Samari]

the theory that the SPDR was wiping memory as part of the cole protocol is false. the AI doesn't have to be totally destroyed, just its nav information about where earth is.

[Nova]

That's an interesting thought. The SPDR is just trying to restore Melissa to full operational state, but in doing so is overwriting the memory of some important event (Apocalypse?) that she witnessed. Perhaps the Flea, recognising the importance of it, is trying to preserve that memory. Whether for the "good guys" or "bad guys" is not yet known. Interesting.

[Shad0]

Re: SPDR