Chekhov MacGuffin wrote: MeiTanteixX wrote:
Chekhov MacGuffin wrote:It's logically easy to look back after you know the solution and say they mean a certain thing, but that's your personal bias, trying to force the data to a known solution. Was that one restaurant "Aska" where Okino Yoko and Higo "dated" a sign that this case was plot significant, or a meaningless tease? Were the crows that appeared at the burned apartment building in Okiya's intro a sign that the Black Organization is lurking, or simple foreboding to make Okiya seem creepier? Did the hunt for the Chocolate Black Spy commercial mean we were supposed to pay extra attention for the spy-like Bourbon in the white day case, or was it just some random case story Gosho inserted?
Just like how that mindset is your personal bias.
First off, those were examples of the types of hints you are using now, only I was offering various tea-leaf interpretations to show how different people with different biases might approach them. I never said I believed they had a certain meaning, and I believe I made it clear in my prior post that I think those hints are meaningless in mystery-solution context and thus not really worth thinking about anyway.
My method is wait for decisive evidence, ignore the rest. And that means waiting patiently for diagnostic hints to come in before committing to a single sound theory. I'm not going to stake a theory claim early if I think it's going to compromise my being correct for only
the right reasons. My somewhat okay reputation is proof that it's a respectable strategy. I can't really support your method of chasing shadows because it has resulted in you seriously supporting two mutually exclusive Rumi theories at once. It's like accusing two separate people of being the murderer because you are pretty sure you are right, but aren't sure which one did it.
When I said "mindset", I was referring to that very thing you just explained. That following hint and red-herring-pattern is pointless. Clearly, you're off the mark with your examples. the only closest example to my pattern-analysis is the "crow" one, because it was the only one that actually pertained to a character introduction(which my analysis was clearly focused on).
Wow. So suddenly, this is a competition of who calls something first?? Is that really how u see things, just because my early pattern analysis doesn't follow your usual routine? for your sake, I'm gonna ignore that you just made it sound like having a good reputation is your goal in theorizing and discussing fiction.
Oh really? So me doing thorough and detailed theories for multiple directions automatically makes me a blind supporter for only those multiple directions? It's funny how that's your immediate impression, rather than me simply exploring multiple options from the info we have gotten so far. I'm not surprised though, considering that your routine involves doing long theory posts for things that has to be correct
, while I like to enjoy the theorizing journey(which involves debunking and creating theories as we go) until we get closer to the truth and it eventually becomes obvious. I respect your way of doing things, but it looks like it's not a mutual matter.
Chekhov MacGuffin wrote:
MeiTanteixX wrote:"Aska" thing was never even close to be, or seem, like a tease in my personal opinion("Aska"-->"Asaka" is a very off interpretation, with no actual meaning or context).
You think it is totally kosher to claim a "mysterious female-yaiba" (File 968) and the DB's discussion of Kid's disguise choices are "hints" we should seriously consider RE: Rumi, but the name of a restaurant one letter off from the most mysterious arc word is just coincidence and not something reasonable people could possibly entertain had meaning? (And let me be clear I'm not claiming any of those are valid clues with meaning, I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy when claiming one is "bias" and the other is a "clue".)
As I mentioned before, my analysis was specifically focused on how Gosho handles character introduction
. "Aska" is not even a contestant in that department. I was pretty thorough with my reasoning, in terms of the type of foreshadowing(and what it foreshadows) through the examples I presented. Just like those examples, my reasoning was that Gosho was possibly alluding to that Rumi was a disguise(like Kid-disguises), hence the disguise conversation right before her introduction. The "Yaiba" hint is equivalent to "red guy" reference in Subaru's intro or the "bourbon" reference in Amuro's intro. I don't generalize all those different types of foreshadowings like you do(ultimately making it look I'm choosing biases "because they are all the same"). I compare them with older ones, based on their context and delivery. That's a crucial part in the pattern analysis(which u seem to ignore).
Chekhov MacGuffin wrote: MeiTanteixX wrote: Chekhov MacGuffin wrote:
MeiTanteixX wrote:The story progresses, and what was once a reliable radar can end up being as unreliable as Yamamura. As I addressed, what Gosho introduced in the Bourbon arc(File 856) is suggesting inconsistency in her abilities, right after her fake death. Vermouth was full-on action-mode when she fell on Jodie to retrieve the bug(as seen with her evil smirk)(file 852), and Haibara didn't react one bit.
Retrieving a bug is just a bit different than smashing a face in.
the fact still remains that she couldn't sense her, when track-record suggests otherwise. In mystery train, she felt her presence when she was just walking out from a room(not even looking like she was in "action-mode" or aware of Haibara being nearby). In bus-hijack, she was mostly sitting and observing Conan. No action, still a strong sensation from the moment she entered to who-knows-how-long.
I'm not disagreeing that Gosho has being trending towards a more unreliable Haibara radar, I just disagree with a conclusion that would rely on Vermouth, the most Ai-triggery char, not setting off Ai's radar at point blank when she has full on "killing intent". Recall that Akai was under Ai's radar most of the time as Okiya, except when he decided a criminal needed to get some, and Ai would reliably freak every time. My opinion is that Gosho has not indicated that Ai's radar is so far gone that her top-priority triggers no longer get a response, and that it would be out of character if he decided to make it so, especially with Vermouth
. If you asked me if I thought it was possible for Rum could smack someone up and not set off current Haibara, I'd say maybe, but not Vermouth. Vermouth was still sending strong signals during Detective's Nocturne and the mystery train, even though Haibara believed Conan when he said he bargained with Vermouth to lay off.
Haibara addressed it very clearly why she couldn't sense anything. Whether her words is reliable or not is a different matter, but to claim that something is unreasonable, when we haven't even gotten another scenario that proves your point, it's like being ignorant to a potential development for that plot-device(sensing abillity). Your Vermouth example is pre-mystery-train(fake death), so it doesn't help your argument that she would've sensed her.
Overall, I hope that in the future, you don't force your impressions about others as facts. Just because you can't relate to it doesn't mean that there's only one way to see it.