Book 2 – Page 19

[atteSmythe]

I imagine it's a little bit of both - but I'm personally of the opinion that Jetstone's warlords are going to have FAQ's forces under some scrutiny. Slately, at least, doesn't seem too terribly comfortable with them.

Maybe they have their eyes to the horizon...but I personally don't expect us to have an 'in ur base, killin' ur mans' moment here.

[Oberon]

how about a new question to add to the question you have not bothered to answer...
Why would wanda and Jack try it?

I can't say that, and so all I could do to satisfy you is to speculate. And that wouldn't get us anywhere. This is, by the way, the reason I don't address your every point even though you ask me to. You either want me to speculate about things I can not know, or, as in this case:

30*11=330... but anyway

You bring up over and over some niggling little objection which has been addressed more than once by the simple explanation that Vinny was estimating the number of enemy units, and rounding 330 down to 300 is well within character for a 50s greaser/gangster. But that won't stop you from tossing it out multiple times as if you've found some kind of inherent flaw in my reasoning, and so this is why I have avoided addressing a great many of your points: As I see them, they do not bear addressing. They are irrelevant. They do not concern me. Ask the authors why they showed what would appear to be a low odds chance succeed, I can not speak authoritatively to this question. But I'll repeat myself: If you look for only high odds results as being realistic, you're going to be greatly disappointed with a great deal of fiction. The next time you see Bruce Willis take down a helicopter with a car and a makeshift ramp, remember this discussion, please. Citing "plot trumps odds" does not suddenly change the rules. As long as the slightest chance exists, the main characters in most fiction can be expected to succeed, especially while under the greatest of duress or at the most inopportune time for the other characters. This has happened many times previously within this story, do not be surprised nor dismayed when it happens again.

And what i am saying is that vinnie's number had no real meaning to it... it was not an actual calculation but just a way of saying "the chances are really low"... kinda like saying the chances are "million to 1"; no one did the math to get that number, they just chose a high number... and no, not everyone uses numbers like "million" or a "thousand" when making such statements... it is a logical and valid argument

It is not a logical and valid argument to watch Vinny take X, multiply by an estimated Y, come up with the nearest round number which represents X * Y, and then hand wave it all away with a claim that "it was not an actual calculation." I mean, really...

Why don't you argue with the authors? This is how they chose to have Vinny state their chances. I just read it and accepted it at face value. Why can't you?

Because you are the one who THINKS he knows what they know.

Quite the opposite. I'm the one who accepted what the authors told us within the story, and didn't make up a hugely convoluted chain of supposition and guesswork to try to guess what they really meant, since accepting what they told us is apparently somehow objectionable to you.

Occam's razor doesn't really apply here, but just for fun let's compare how much more work you had to do to come to your conclusion than I: All I had to do was see Vinny multiply 11 * 30 and state that it was "about 300", and then accept that he meant what he said. You had to, I don't know. I really don't know, but it wasn't as easy as what I did by a long shot.

[MonteCristo]

how about a new question to add to the question you have not bothered to answer...
Why would wanda and Jack try it?

I can't say that, and so all I could do to satisfy you is to speculate. And that wouldn't get us anywhere. This is, by the way, the reason I don't address your every point even though you ask me to. You either want me to speculate about things I can not know, or, as in this case:

The very fact that you can not answer those question is one of the biggest problems with your stance
THAT is why i can not except your theory that it is simple X*Y=N math; because your theory is full of holes
Your stance is riddled with huge holes... the more holes your stance has, the weaker your stance becomes
you can not provide an answer when no answers exist and when no answer exist that's damn good evidence that there are serious problems with your theory
your stance raises many questions, creates plot holes, and out right contradictions... and you have no answers to back it all up... that's a good way of telling me you're wrong
that is part of how logic and theories work...

when you come up with a theory you got to be able to answer ever question that comes up... the more unanswered questions, the weaker the theory...
it's only when all questions are gone, does a theory become fact (or as close as it can possibly get anyway)...
what i know for sure is that my theory hasn't raised any questions i haven't been able to answer, while your theory has A LOT of unanswered questions


frankly, i give enough respect to Rob's writing to expect him to not leave such huge gaping plot holes in his story, as your theory leads to

[Oberon]

The very fact that you can not answer those question is one of the biggest problems with your stance
THAT is why i can not except your theory that it is simple X*Y=N math;

So now I understand you much better. You can not accept what is shown to us directly and unambiguously, within the strip, because it doesn't answer all of your questions. Good luck with that.

[MonteCristo]

The very fact that you can not answer those question is one of the biggest problems with your stance
THAT is why i can not except your theory that it is simple X*Y=N math;

So now I understand you much better. You can not accept what I have personally interpreted as the meaning behind the authors words, within the strip, because it doesn't answer all of your perfectly valid and logical questions that illustrate how illogical and utterly wrong my interpretation is. I'm sorry that i do not understand the basics of holding arguments and theory and stand by my unsupportable interpretation that a refuse to accept might actually be wrong.

Fixed that for you

[Oberon]

You are hilarious. You claim that I am "interpreting" the authors, when all I'm doing is quoting the exact words used in the strip.

"We got 11 pairs of warlord eyes here, and he's got 30 or so units. So there's like 300 chances to blow the veil, if he's got one."

Would you care to quote anything from the strip which supports your position? I doubt you could even pull single words from the entire run of Book 1, Summer Updates, and Book 2 and make something that sounded coherent. But please go for it, it might be as amusing as your other attempts.

But your editing of my words is rather like your editing of the authors words. You don't like it, you can't accept it, and so you change it. Bravo.