Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nienna
Nogrod – has the most stuff under his name in my notebook… so that is interesting in and of itself… he gets kind of defensive and wonders why no one is duck-hunting… though after that he doesn’t really try to hunt any ducks himself… interesting.
|
No wonder you had most stuff under my name as I had time on my hands on Day1 and tried to do my best to throw some real suspicion left and right to see how people would react and to catch the ducks. And I really hoped some others would have tried that approach too. Sadly a very few tried and that is the reason why we are this clueless at this point of the game. ToDay I have been busy and have only been able to catch up with the thread a few times and post only short comments. And it's now 2.30AM here as I at last have spare time in my hands. But I'll will do my best before going to sleep.
To be sure, I think I have learned a thing or two from my inqueries yesterDay - and comments on them toDay. A person who is going for responses should also be able to consider when a trial proves negative (or if not "proved" negative, there could be reasons enough to make it look like a probable missfire). The ducks can stay consistent with their suspicions and look smooth but we innocents need to try and bounce the ball here and there, considering and reconsidering as we go, for we don't have the knowledge the ducks have.
It would be great if we had more of these reactions and possibilities of thinking / rethinking things but sadly there was little of that on offer on Day1 and most of toDay.
The latest posting looks a bit more promising though and I'm happy about it. Hoping to add to that in a moment...