Are the theorists sages?

[WoLong]

Thog was the champion, Malack was a vampire, Belkar shall be undead. Is it time to admit that the dreaded conspiracy theorists are actually wise shamans and future-psychics?

[Doxkid]

1000 monkeys with typewriters.

Eventually one will predict as aspect of The Giant's plot.

[WoLong]

1000 monkeys with typewriters.

Eventually one will predict as aspect of The Giant's plot.

These were not random theories, but repeatedly voiced to the extent where many were aware of them. Your propaganda will never prevent the theorists from claiming their rightful place!

[ThePhantasm]

To put things in perspective, think of the hundreds of crazy theories on this forum that haven't come true. Yeah. The one's that get it right are a small percentile of the whole.

[WindStruck]

No, they are not wise shaman and future-psychics (as elan put it), but it is time for people to stop having downright hostile attitudes as they refute every single plausible theory for lack of "evidence" that, by definition, can't exist in the first place until the events occur.

[Vinsfeld]

I wanna see them finding out what is the MitD :smallamused:

[Bling Cat]

No, they are not wise shaman and future-psychics (as elan put it), but it is time for people to stop having downright hostile attitudes as they refute every single plausible theory for lack of "evidence" that, by definition, can't exist in the first place until the events occur.
To be fair, I think the last debate I was involved in with you is actually entirely invalidated and proven wrong by this most recent strip, given that Belkar's 'death' is affected by Roy's foreknowledge exactly 0%. And that debate frequently cited that you didn't need evidence.

But in the interests of not dragging other threads arguments here, I'll make a different point. The idea that theories do not require any evidence, as such cannot exist, is wrong. In any good narrative, such as the one in progress, a certain amount of foreshadowing is expected of the author alluding to future events. As per the most recent developments, there was in fact lots of foreshadowing that Malak was not all as he seemed and if we take The Oracle's on the record prophecy literally, the very fact that a loophole exists is also quite good foreshadowing.

The idea that no theory can be dismissed due to lack of foreshadowing evidence is flawed in that that opens up floodgates in regards to everything. For example, I could state my theory that the resistance had found Miko's body and had raised her in secret before being crushed, and she went after The Order and will indeed appear at the same time as Team Evil at Girard's gate. Can you refute me? No? Then obviously my theory is correct, due to there being no evidence against it.

In fairness you do have the corollary "plausible", but that is so subjective as to be useless. What defines a plausible theory? One which the plot has alluded to beforehand? Well, then there will be foreshadowing evidence. One that can be surmised logically from other plot developments? That by definition will have evidence in it's favour. I don't think we can say that no theory requires evidence to be taken seriously merely because two theory that many considered to be false, but have both been alluded to to different degrees have turned out to be true.

[WindStruck]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to push for that idea here. Though it still could be possible, what, with Belkar most likely to be up and moving within a bit again and rejoining the order sometime... Roy could still be swayed by that prophecy, regardless, until either Belkar is officially kicked out of the order or destroyed by some other means.

The thing I'm talking about with evidence, though, comes up when, say, we're trying to delve into the inner-workings of a character's minds. Or in the oracle's case, being asked to show evidence that such-and-such statement was false, even though that would only be possible in the future when events that confirm or deny it would unfold.

To me, a "plausible" or "reasonable" theory could have one or more possible hints supporting it. Plus, anything else you can extrapolate with sound logic and reason. The problem here is when people have their own ideas about what should happen or what is more likely to happen, so they find any reason to dismiss these possible hints.

For example: Malack being a vampire. I thought that was funny. I didn't think it was likely. But I still said it was possible. I was even more delighted since it turned out true.

However, Malack really being Miko in disguise... no, I think that would be implausible. :smalltongue:

[Acanous]

Malak being a Vampire took me entirely by surprise.
Belkar being made undead, I had filed under "Possible, but unlikely".
Thog being the Champion was pretty well alluded to, and most of us guessed that one.

I do wonder how things will progress from here, though.

[Morph Bark]

These were not random theories, but repeatedly voiced to the extent where many were aware of them. Your propaganda will never prevent the theorists from claiming their rightful place!

If one monkey accidentally types up a plot point, all it takes is a parrot to spread the word.

[Bling Cat]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to push for that idea here. Though it still could be possible, what, with Belkar most likely to be up and moving within a bit again and rejoining the order sometime... Roy could still be swayed by that prophecy, regardless, until either Belkar is officially kicked out of the order or destroyed by some other means.

The thing I'm talking about with evidence, though, comes up when, say, we're trying to delve into the inner-workings of a character's minds. Or in the oracle's case, being asked to show evidence that such-and-such statement was false, even though that would only be possible in the future when events that confirm or deny it would unfold.

To me, a "plausible" or "reasonable" theory could have one or more possible hints supporting it. Plus, anything else you can extrapolate with sound logic and reason. The problem here is when people have their own ideas about what should happen or what is more likely to happen, so they find any reason to dismiss these possible hints.

For example: Malack being a vampire. I thought that was funny. I didn't think it was likely. But I still said it was possible. I was even more delighted since it turned out true.

However, Malack really being Miko in disguise... no, I think that would be implausible. :smalltongue:

Hmm. I certainly agree that people dismissing ideas out of hand is a bad thing, I try to give thought to almost anything people bring up, and if I ever come across as dismissive I apologise, that is never my intention.

I guess our difficulty here is where exactly we draw the line as to what is plausible or reasonable. I always considered the possibility of Malak being a vampire reasonable, given the amount of hints dropped, and the fact that it would, and did, provide an interesting twist that furthers the story. The theory of Belkar surviving indefinitely as undead, while 'plausible' doesn't strike me as the most likely outcome, because that doesn't seem like a very good ending to a story about a remorseless serial killer. But I'm getting off track again.

I suppose it is inherently difficult to draw an objective line between plausible and non-plausible theories, due to the nature of story-telling and the fact that there are so many people with different internal definitions of plausible.

Plus, I think it's obvious Miko became a vampire at this point, and then travelled back in time in order to masquerade as Malak and make Belkar subservient to her will by turning him into a vampire. I mean really. It's the only explanation. :smalltongue:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

1000 monkeys with typewriters.

Eventually one will predict as aspect of The Giant's plot.


I wanna see them finding out what is the MitD :smallamused:

At this point, there is a good chance someone has, but only because of Doxkid's point. Check the whole list of guesses in the MitD thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13783861) (section 3).


No, they are not wise shaman and future-psychics (as elan put it), but it is time for people to stop having downright hostile attitudes as they refute every single plausible theory for lack of "evidence" that, by definition, can't exist in the first place until the events occur.

The evidence that Malak was a vampire existed. This doesn't fix the problem with your position ("Roy changed his plans because he knew Belkar was going to die" or some such; details not important, since it is now clearly wrong) was that you had nothing to back it up other than your "feelings".

This is a discussion forum. Discussion of anything more complex than what we each hope for must be rooted in rational evidence, because otherwise there can be no discussion. Just like you can be convinced of your position based on your feeling on the matter, I could be equally convinced of the opposite position based on my feeling on the matter. Without evidence for one side or the other, or both, there can be no discussion beyond "this is what you feel, and this is what I feel".

Grey Wolf

[Onyavar]

I wanna see them finding out what is the MitD :smallamused:

I will tell everyone who want's to hear it that I consider only one option plausible within the story (so far): "Snarl junior".
I KNOW there is a word of author about it not being a "monster he will invent on the spot", but imho that statement has been widely misinterpreted by the 'sage' theorists who now claim that it can't be a "being invented by Rich at all". (and for the wiseguys among you: yes. I know the exact wording from Rich, too, and think it is a matter of interpretion.)
So, does my theory make me a theorist, and a sage? Errr... :smallconfused:

(I also stated this opinion in some of those MitD threads. I just repeat it here to confirm that I get bragging rights once I have been proven right in the last book. :smallcool:)

[Acanous]

Could someone please point me at the "Malak is a vampire" hints? I seem to have missed them entirely.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I will tell everyone who want's to hear it that I consider only one option plausible within the story (so far): "Snarl junior".
I KNOW there is a word of author about it not being a "monster he will invent on the spot", but imho that statement has been widely misinterpreted by the 'sage' theorists who now claim that it can't be a "being invented by Rich at all". (and for the wiseguys among you: yes. I know the exact wording from Rich, too, and think it is a matter of interpretion.)
So, does my theory make me a theorist, and a sage? Errr... :smallconfused:

(I also stated this opinion in some of those MitD threads. I just repeat it here to confirm that I get bragging rights once I have been proven right in the last book. :smallcool:)

The Snarl has not displayed any of MitD's abilities/characteristics, down to and including teleportation, hunger, earthquakes, strength, morality, speech or physicality. And there is no need to stretch Rich's words: he invented the Snarl for this story, and he says he didn't invent MitD's species for this story which straight reading discards the Snarl, if all of the above wasn't enough.

And this is the last I will say on the matter here: there is a thread for discussing MitD, and this is not it.

Edit: Also: bragging rights? The Snarl is in the "frequently proposed" section for a reason. Half the forum seems to have come up with the same idea.

Edit:
Could someone please point me at the "Malak is a vampire" hints? I seem to have missed them entirely.

Off the top of my head, "special diet", "special condition" and the references to his children (and the "special bond" with them) with no reference to a wife.

GW

[Incom]

Thog was the champion, Malack was a vampire, Belkar shall be undead. Is it time to admit that the dreaded conspiracy theorists are actually wise shamans and future-psychics?

Don't forget "Familicide killed the Draketooth Clan".

[Kish]

I KNOW there is a word of author about it not being a "monster he will invent on the spot", but imho that statement has been widely misinterpreted by the 'sage' theorists who now claim that it can't be a "being invented by Rich at all". (and for the wiseguys among you: yes. I know the exact wording from Rich, too, and think it is a matter of interpretion.)
If you know the wording, why aren't you using the wording instead of saying Rich said something completely different from what he said?

Would you like to explain what interpretation of Rich's words you're using that leads you to believe that the Snarl isn't eliminated?

[LadyEowyn]

Don't forget "Familicide killed the Draketooth Clan".

Yep. That was one I thought was completely far-fetched. Some people are really good at guessing plot development.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Yep. That was one I thought was completely far-fetched. Some people are really good at guessing plot development.

If the same person had guessed all four, with only one guess each time, you'd have a point. Otherwise, it is, as Doxkid and ThePhantasm pointed out, just the Law of Large Numbers in effect. Throw enough darts, some are bound to be bull's eyes.

Grey Wolf

[SowZ]

Regardless, it goes to show that dismissing most theories outright is not the way to go.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Regardless, it goes to show that dismissing most theories outright is not the way to go.

On the contrary. I direct you, once more, to the MitD thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13783861). "Most theories" in this case can be found in section 3, where I have carefully recorded all one hundred and fifty three (as of latest count) theories on what MitD is (and I don't even bother recording every named species, only those minimally defended).

Now, unless you believe MitD will be all 153 species listed at once, I think that dismissing most theories outright is what you would have to do to retain your sanity, and only concentrate on those that have a modicum of evidence behind them. At least, that's what I do.

Yes, confirmation bias is all nice and good, how we humans remember the people that threw the dart and got the bull's eye while forgetting the hundreds that missed the board entirely, but as rational being aware of this psychological effect, I would like to think we should be more self-aware than that.

Grey Wolf

[Emmit Svenson]

I'm no Nate Silver, but I'll point out that I predicted both Malak's vampirism and that Familicide killed the Draketooths.

If Durkon is also made undead, I'll be batting .750.

If Tarquin is a blackguard, having been converted by Sabine, I'll be 1.000 and you should start asking me about lottery numbers.

I've got no prediction about the MitD. If I had to guess, I'd say

dungeon master :smallsmile:

...but that's a guess, not a prediction. Don't start measuring me for Nostradamus robes.

[ThePhantasm]

that's a guess, not a prediction. Don't start measuring me for Nostradamus robes.

Can you define for me what you think the difference is between a guess and a prediction?

[SowZ]

On the contrary. I direct you, once more, to the MitD thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13783861). "Most theories" in this case can be found in section 3, where I have carefully recorded all one hundred and fifty three (as of latest count) theories on what MitD is (and I don't even bother recording every named species, only those minimally defended).

Now, unless you believe MitD will be all 153 species listed at once, I think that dismissing most theories outright is what you would have to do to retain your sanity, and only concentrate on those that have a modicum of evidence behind them. At least, that's what I do.

Yes, confirmation bias is all nice and good, how we humans remember the people that threw the dart and got the bull's eye while forgetting the hundreds that missed the board entirely, but as rational being aware of this psychological effect, I would like to think we should be more self-aware than that.

Grey Wolf

There is a big difference between disbelief as the default, neutral stance and dismissing a theory outright.

[dps]

They might be rosemary or thyme. Or even parsley. :smallbiggrin:

[Emmit Svenson]

Can you define for me what you think the difference is between a guess and a prediction?

In this context, it's the difference between seeing evidence in the text that leads me to anticipate future events confidently enough that I want share it with others--a prediction--and pulling something out of me bum.

[EatAtEmrakuls]

Malack being a vampire, I felt was self-evident.

Belkar becoming undead, I felt was possible.

But I never once imagined the two would be connected.

[jidasfire]

I'm reminded of the episode of The Simpsons where the family is watching Jeopardy, and Alex Trebek says, "The colors of the Italian flag are red, white and this," to which Homer shouts, "Blue, yellow, green, orange!" And when Trebek reveals the answer to be green, Homer shouts, "I was right!"

Now, to be fair, the comic is dense enough that in retrospect many of the plot points were guessable to varying degrees (though I've always found the Giant a difficult one to predict much of the time). That said, so many guesses are predicated less on evidence and more on simply guessing any and everything. I can't speculate as to the motives because I don't know the people, of course, but I will charitably assume that this comes from a perhaps intense enthusiasm for the comic and a desire to be the first one to figure out what happens next. The series is often quite a nail-biter, and the high moments are very high, so this is understandable. That said, unless actual reasons are presented along with theories, I don't find them generally very credible, even if they turn out to be right.

[Bulldog Psion]

Well, I think the problem is that some theories are well thought out. Many aren't. However, due to the large number of wacky theories, people tend to dismiss ALL theories out of hand and default to either "we don't know" or the least dramatic possibility.

It's only natural as a response to the flood of crazy theories, that some decent ones get swept up and ignored also. Malack as a vampire is a good example of a fairly solid theory that was dismissed just because it was a theory, IMO.

"Undead Belkar" is probably fairly solid on it own, but it had a whole bunch of other obviously crazy theories permanently associated with it, such as "Belkar as a fish", "Belkar as a god", "Belkar making a drawing of his last breath", "Belkar changes his name", etc. In short, it was kind of discredited by association with a lot of dumb stuff.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

There is a big difference between disbelief as the default, neutral stance and dismissing a theory outright.

The difference being, like Emmit, jidasfire, Bulldog Psion and others have pointed out, evidence, which is my contention with the likes of Onyavar and WindStruck, who seem to prefer "whatever I feel like it must be right" approach to conversation. It doesn't mean they can't be right, only that, in a discussion forum, I'm here to listen to logical, reasoned conversation, not (seemingly) blindfold shots.

Grey Wolf

[ti'esar]

Personally, I think Rich may actually be deliberately relying on this to a certain extent: with enough readers guessing, there's sure to be some who manage to predict plot points in advance, but since the fanbase as a whole has become pretty jaded towards wild theorizing, they'll tend to dismiss those guesses, and thus preserve the surprise.

[Vinyadan]

I think theorists perceive what is hinted.

When Elan's father first appeared, I was pretty sure it was him; I think it was what the Giant wanted - the character was very unusual in the comic, but it answered very well to other requisites - for example, he looked like Darth Vader.

However, much time before, someone understood that Tyrinaria, Tarquin and Haley's father were all the same thing. I have to say, I would never have guessed it.

Others had guessed that Vaarsuvius had killed the Draketeeth. That was also not so easy. There was just a little hint - the half-dragon being killed.

Thog was not so hard to suppose - a guy with an ax? He kills people gladly? However, I had not got it. If you searched among already-known characters, however, there wasn't much of a choice. It surely was a better idea, story-wise, than implanting a new guy, who would also have needed a new sub-plot.

I had not believed the "undead" part, because I couldn't see it pulled off in a decent way - I had an image of Belkar appearing to the party and saying, "Yo, I am undead. So I can still be part of the party. Because, you know, I'm not any more evil than before."

The only one I really enjoy wondering about is the Umbrellaed Monster. But, if you looked carefully, then you know already - Hello Kitty has fangs, too!

[Grey_Wolf_c]

The only one I really enjoy wondering about is the Umbrellaed Monster. But, if you looked carefully, then you know already - Hello Kitty has fangs, too!

What conclusion do you draw from the fact that the umbrella RC gave MitD is an Evil Kitty umbrella? And why would that have an impact on what MitD actually is? All I can think of is that you are implying MitD, too, is a vampire (the only creature I can think of associated to fangs), in which case, how is it that MitD enjoys burgers and stew?

Grey Wolf

[Vinyadan]

What conclusion do you draw from the fact that the umbrella RC gave MitD is an Evil Kitty umbrella? And why would that have an impact on what MitD actually is? All I can think of is that you are implying MitD, too, is a vampire (the only creature I can think of associated to fangs), in which case, how is it that MitD enjoys burgers and stew?

Grey Wolf

Actually, I was thinking about a 1%er centaur - complete with motorbike.

We haven't seen any motorized vehicle yet, so that would be quite the coup de theatre!

[Seharvepernfan]

Is it time to admit that the dreaded conspiracy theorists are actually wise shamans and future-psychics?

The question is: which ones?

The ones who actually predicted the stuff? Yes.

The others? Not so much.

I think another likely possibility is that Rich himself uses "conspiracy predictions" to test our reactions to plot events, by posting incognito.

[Emmit Svenson]

I think another likely possibility is that Rich himself uses "conspiracy predictions" to test our reactions to plot events, by posting incognito.

You have come up with a conspiracy theory wackier than any I've seen regarding the actual content of the comics. If this was an intentional irony, well done.

[Emmit Svenson]

I'm no Nate Silver, but I'll point out that I predicted both Malak's vampirism and that Familicide killed the Draketooths.

If Durkon is also made undead, I'll be batting .750.

If Tarquin is a blackguard, having been converted by Sabine, I'll be 1.000 and you should start asking me about lottery numbers.

Now batting .750. Hey, someone get Tarquin monologuing about how he got started, ok?

[Zmeoaice]

I think people have also suggested that Durkon would be undead, although not as much. It makes sense based on his other prophecy.

However, I think it's worth noting that Belkar will have a permanent death.