Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Wed Nov 20, 2024 5:03 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Chaotic Fiction » Marble Hornets
[SPEC] "How much do you know about this area?"
Moderators: Giskard, JKatkina, Zarggg
View previous topicView next topic
Page 3 of 7 [101 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Author Message
Lithp
I Have No Life


Joined: 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 2058

 		I see what you're saying, but those are not actually mutually exclusive. There are 2 ways to read those statements. One is how you are reading them, which is roughly:

"They intended for the criminals to be stretched out like on a rack, but said criminals would always die of dehydration before that could happen."

Another way is like this:

"They intended for the criminals to be stretched out like on a rack, although what they actually died from was dehydration."

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:47 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
paladin181
Unfettered


Joined: 14 Nov 2011
Posts: 502
Lithp wrote:
I see what you're saying, but those are not actually mutually exclusive. There are 2 ways to read those statements. One is how you are reading them, which is roughly:

"They intended for the criminals to be stretched out like on a rack, but said criminals would always die of dehydration before that could happen."

Another way is like this:

"They intended for the criminals to be stretched out like on a rack, although what they actually died from was dehydration."
Not seeing much of a difference there, if any at all. The point is exposure and dehydration killed many people on trees who were subsequently burned, whether or not they actually intended to stretch them.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:11 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
ReeseSparrow
Decorated


Joined: 09 Jan 2013
Posts: 172
Location: The Dark Margin

 		I'd say that this sounds a lot more like the origin of TO than anything else. TO could easily be one of the criminals that was put on trial, or very possibly even the "God" that these people were put on trial before. Trosephim doesn't seem to be in the habit of devoting an entire entry to an unrelated story that has nothing to do with anything. Personally, I think that TO was accidentally created during one of these ritualistic trials, and he's just following a sort of angry path of revenge.

I'd say the more interesting fact is the fact that Alex knew anything about it. Alex had lived around the area for a couple years, theoretically, and somehow he knew this entire back story on Rosswood park. However Tim Reportedly grew up in the area and has never made any mention of it, considering he spent some time in a mental institution and is now experiencing all of these strange things with TO and Hoody, and he has also watched the entries, we can assume that if he knew anything about it he probably would have mentioned it. It's probably likely that Alex gained this information from being in close proxemity to TO/communicating with him. I'm actually pretty curious what, if anything, happened in the time between the switched tapes. It seems pretty unlikely that Alex brought him out there, then let him leave without doing anything. It is possible while Jay was switching tapes TO showed up and did something.

On an unrelated note, this story, and entry 65 for that matter, make a lot more sense after 6 vicodin.
_________________
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and much too rare to die.

Chaos isn't a pit, chaos is a ladder.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:05 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Jingleman
Decorated

Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 239
Location: Texas
Lithp wrote:
Your argument is invalid. You can't say it's an origin story just because you want it to be. They wrote it, if they say it's not The Operator's origin, then it's not.

Haha, yeah, I kind of thought there would be a lot of negative reaction to my assertion that this is probably an origin story. But the fact remains that the only evidence to the contrary is out of game, and I don't believe that such evidence is determinative, which, by the way, is a valid standard. I don't particularly like this origin story, so I wouldn't say that I want it to be one, but it's the only thing that comes close so far, and I don't think we can just disregard it because of an OOG comment that we want to be true.

Two reasons: first, the creators have complained in the past (forgive me for not looking up the citation) that we the audience use too many OOG facts for our theorizing. Second, authors are imperfect people. They change their minds, they (relevantly) make mistakes in their writing that misalign with their intent, and sometimes they rewrite history. Their comments can be useful for context and interpretation, but they shouldn't trump the content of the work itself, which must stand on its own. I don't think it was a malintentioned comment, but it doesn't line up with what we're seeing in the entries. I'll leave you with perhaps the most famous example of an author who claims something about his work that no one believes -- a certain G. Lucas still tries to convince us that Greedo has always shot first!

My friends, accept the OOG comments if you wish, but I will never again buy the comments of a creator if it conflicts with what I'm seeing (and what others seem to be seeing until they're corrected with the OOG stuff). Because I dislike this as an origin story, I remain open to any theory that it isn't one, if that theory did not come about as a result of hearing the OOG comment.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:00 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
paladin181
Unfettered


Joined: 14 Nov 2011
Posts: 502
Jingleman wrote:
Lithp wrote:
Your argument is invalid. You can't say it's an origin story just because you want it to be. They wrote it, if they say it's not The Operator's origin, then it's not.

Haha, yeah, I kind of thought there would be a lot of negative reaction to my assertion that this is probably an origin story. But the fact remains that the only evidence to the contrary is out of game, and I don't believe that such evidence is determinative, which, by the way, is a valid standard. I don't particularly like this origin story, so I wouldn't say that I want it to be one, but it's the only thing that comes close so far, and I don't think we can just disregard it because of an OOG comment that we want to be true.

Two reasons: first, the creators have complained in the past (forgive me for not looking up the citation) that we the audience use too many OOG facts for our theorizing. Second, authors are imperfect people. They change their minds, they (relevantly) make mistakes in their writing that misalign with their intent, and sometimes they rewrite history. Their comments can be useful for context and interpretation, but they shouldn't trump the content of the work itself, which must stand on its own. I don't think it was a malintentioned comment, but it doesn't line up with what we're seeing in the entries. I'll leave you with perhaps the most famous example of an author who claims something about his work that no one believes -- a certain G. Lucas still tries to convince us that Greedo has always shot first!

My friends, accept the OOG comments if you wish, but I will never again buy the comments of a creator if it conflicts with what I'm seeing (and what others seem to be seeing until they're corrected with the OOG stuff). Because I dislike this as an origin story, I remain open to any theory that it isn't one, if that theory did not come about as a result of hearing the OOG comment.
Yes. The words of the people making the media you're watching mean nothing. I mean, why would what they say actually matter?

You're comparing this, a story that never claims it is an origin story to Star Wars where a version of a scene says something different than it's original release? It's apples and oranges. This is a case of people thinking that the story represents something whether it does or not, versus a visual action that we can see did or didn't occur. It was poorly manipulated in the newer version of the movie, but in that movie, Greedo did indeed shoot first.

this is simply a case of people saying "Hey, there has to be an origin of the Operator, and look, Alex is telling scary stories about criminals. Theymust be related." Or not. I'm not going to tell you you're wrong, but don't be surprised if your idea doesn't gain a foothold here, and is infact dismissed by pretty much anyone who watches the series more in depth than as "the creepy slenderman story on youtube."

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:20 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Wubblz
Boot

Joined: 06 May 2012
Posts: 28

 		They are quite forceful in the commentary when they state that it isn't an origin story. They hesitate to say they won't ever give an origin story, but they do state that this particular story is not it. I think there words were "Alex is being creepy."
I don't think that "Alex being creepy" necessarily negates the story from being a local legend, which strikes me as being more telling than an origin story would be.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:18 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
BranRainey
Unfettered


Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 371

 		Not being an origin story doesn't necessarily mean it's not about the Operator.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 5:37 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
granitemoth88
Boot

Joined: 05 Jan 2013
Posts: 51

 		Maybe after Alex saw the Operator he started doing some major research into the area and it's history, and after finding out about that story he made a connection. Alex might think that's where the Operator came from somehow, but in reality (IG) he came from somewhere else.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:34 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
jackofnotrades
Unfettered


Joined: 06 Nov 2010
Posts: 330

 		What if it is an origin story, but not for the Operator? Maybe its an origin for TTA or masky-like entities cropping up, or even an origin for one of our characters? He's vague about the timeline...for all we know the kid he's talking about could have been in enttry 37, a character's father or ancestor could have been one of those punished in this way, or maybe the ark was something that was used to perform such punishments.

It wouldn't go over well if they tried to put a definitive origin on the Operator, but one of their own characters or plot points? Could be cool if they decided to do it, and do it right.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:43 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
granitemoth88
Boot

Joined: 05 Jan 2013
Posts: 51
jackofnotrades wrote:
What if it is an origin story, but not for the Operator? Maybe its an origin for TTA or masky-like entities cropping up, or even an origin for one of our characters? He's vague about the timeline...for all we know the kid he's talking about could have been in enttry 37, a character's father or ancestor could have been one of those punished in this way, or maybe the ark was something that was used to perform such punishments.

It wouldn't go over well if they tried to put a definitive origin on the Operator, but one of their own characters or plot points? Could be cool if they decided to do it, and do it right.


That's a really interesting theory. Maybe Hoody is tied to the story somehow? I personally think Hoody is Brian, based on perceived circumstantial evidence that I won't get into on this thread, but I would love for him to be a completely new character that's connected to the Operator in a whole different context than say Jay or Tim.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:52 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
RandomH-bomb
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jun 2012
Posts: 134
BranRainey wrote:
Not being an origin story doesn't necessarily mean it's not about the Operator.


Yeah, perhaps the events in the story weren't what created The Operator, but rather, what drew him to Rosswood Park.

Perhaps those grisly events somehow accidentally summoned or called The Operator to the area (The child being killed marks the arrival of TO).

There seems to be an interesting parallel that could potentially be drawn between the fates of the criminals in the story (a ritualistic way of killing) and the man Alex killed, whose body was taken by TO afterwards.
They could both be considered almost sacrificial; maybe the violent death and abundance of corpses to harvest or feed upon or whatever is what attracted The Operator. Or maybe the people at that time were aware of TO's presence and the criminals were offered up as sacrifices, but eventually it got out of hand and he killed the child. Note that Alex doesn't specify what happened to those people afterwards, just that they stopped stringing up criminals.

I guess what I'm getting at is that to me, the story feels less like "The Operator was created because some people burned murderers in a forest" and more like "The Operator was involved with this crazy stuff that happened in the 1800s." At the very least it confirms that TO has existed for hundreds of years.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 2:10 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Lithp
I Have No Life


Joined: 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 2058
Quote:
Not seeing much of a difference there, if any at all.


The difference is basically whether or not the stretching happened before the victim died. Either way, it isn't what killed them.

Quote:
Haha, yeah, I kind of thought there would be a lot of negative reaction to my assertion that this is probably an origin story.


I can't speak for anyone else, but I am "reacting" because there is a difference between what you believe & what is supported by the facts.

For starters, it is not valid reasoning to disregard the OOG statement because it is OOG. This is not a matter of opinion. Valid means that the logic follows. "It's an origin story" does NOT follow from "it's only said not to be an origin story outside of the series itself," nor does "so we can dismiss it as untrue."

Now, as for Trosephim's stance, it's pretty obvious that they want us to heed this comment, or else they wouldn't have made it. When they said not to use OOG info for theories, they were referring to things like the build of the actor who played Hoody, & the real-life layouts of the buildings, not specific statements that they've made to clarify a point.

I did mention that it is possible that they are being misleading, but as mentioned before, that is not sufficient reasoning to disregard it entirely. As someone else mentioned, there is a difference between an author blatantly lying about something he put in his work, & making a statement that explains or retcons (while acknowledging the retcon) the story.

Just as there are lying creators, there are also numerous examples of a plot point that is difficult or even impossible to interpret without outside explanation. The word of the author is at least as important as the work, because the work is also imperfect. It is limited by things like time and budget, and may not have anywhere to put explanations of fine details. It can't correct its mistakes, it can't explain the significance of something you don't understand, & overall it can't revisit something once it's been finished.

Ignoring either facet on principle is just intentional blindness, it cannot lead you to a better understanding of the plot. Besides, this does not contradict the Entries. There is nothing that actually says that it is an origin story.

Finally, I find fault with the fact that you want to disregard a theory if it was even inspired by the OOG comment. This is just plain unrealistic. I might even ask where you get off demanding this standard of proof. You're the one who wants to disregard the established explanation. Shouldn't it be your responsibility to put forth a good argument for why we shouldn't believe Trosephim?

PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 3:31 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Ithilwen22
Entrenched


Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 1074
Location: Trapped in the Midwest
RandomH-bomb wrote:
BranRainey wrote:
Not being an origin story doesn't necessarily mean it's not about the Operator.


Yeah, perhaps the events in the story weren't what created The Operator, but rather, what drew him to Rosswood Park.

Perhaps those grisly events somehow accidentally summoned or called The Operator to the area (The child being killed marks the arrival of TO).

There seems to be an interesting parallel that could potentially be drawn between the fates of the criminals in the story (a ritualistic way of killing) and the man Alex killed, whose body was taken by TO afterwards.
They could both be considered almost sacrificial; maybe the violent death and abundance of corpses to harvest or feed upon or whatever is what attracted The Operator. Or maybe the people at that time were aware of TO's presence and the criminals were offered up as sacrifices, but eventually it got out of hand and he killed the child. Note that Alex doesn't specify what happened to those people afterwards, just that they stopped stringing up criminals.

I guess what I'm getting at is that to me, the story feels less like "The Operator was created because some people burned murderers in a forest" and more like "The Operator was involved with this crazy stuff that happened in the 1800s." At the very least it confirms that TO has existed for hundreds of years.


I'm kind of leaning toward the "sacrifice" theory as well. I think it's too much of a coincidence to say that it's "just a story". It also currently jives with the idea that TO is drawn to violence/anger/volatile emotions/or however you want to put it. The alleged fast-growing trees also indicates that Rosswood may be some sort of halfway eldritchy place.

Of course, it could be they were just going for the "make Alex creepy" angle, but since it's so similar, I would like to see a connection made, even if it's brief.

Another theory of mine is that the townspeople are at least tangentially aware and perhaps just don't talk about it at all, perhaps even covering all that up, and that's why Jay hasn't heard anything else about it.

I dunno. Speculation is fun. XD

PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:17 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Lithp
I Have No Life


Joined: 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 2058

 		I like the "Operator manipulates those around it into violence" theory, as well. It's puzzling to me why Jay doesn't just revisit the bloody story. Even a simple "I can't find anything, I think Alex was lying" would answer so many questions.

So, maybe it really will be somewhat important later on.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:46 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
TheOperator
Unfettered


Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 711
Location: You don't wanna know

 		If somebody wants to believe it's an origin story in spite of what the creators say, let them. Creative works are up for interpretation and sometimes what the creator says doesn't coincide with what the viewer wants to believe.

Having said that, I do prefer the theory that the sacrifices merely lured The Operator to the area. It makes sense for him to be at the mental hospital, since his victims tend to go crazy but without this entry, one must wonder why exactly he's so drawn to certain parts of Rosswood. Or perhaps the hospital was built next to Rosswood specifically because multiple patients' issues had been connected to the park.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 6:11 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 3 of 7 [101 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Chaotic Fiction » Marble Hornets
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group