Why would someone need to make such separations if her intentions were true and of one mindset?
This is the question posted on OpAphid's blog. We have been discussing it in the chat, and thought I should make a topic for it so we can keep the forum updated. There is a bit of debate over the Tachyon transcripts (whether I and i refer to one person or two people) but I think the general consensus is that the importance of this question is to look at the WHY. ie Why would Tachyon be involved with the order? Why would Tachyon want to steal something?
My personal opinion is that Tachyon is one person... there has been quite a bit of discussion on this, so I wont post it all here. Im not really sure on the Why yet.....
My first idea was that Tachyon describes Daniel (in posting a video on the internet) as having similar interest:
I was surprised thought: The things
I missed were actually
videotaped...
Someone else with a similar interest posted a video onto the
internet.
So perhaps they Why is related to Bree.....
Anyway I think this is the area we should be looking at
OpAphid's Question: Why would someone need to make such sepa
Moderator: Moderators
Alright, just putting my theory out here to start some discussion. Yesterday when we were substituting a name (Julie) for one if the "i's" it made me think that maybe Tach is not talking only of herself. Maybe she is talking about 2 people.
One of the reasons I think this is because some of the sentences don't sit well with me. They just seem out of place for what we know. For instance, the fact that Tachyon says that she must say goodbyes and leave on a pleasant note. This makes no sense to me.
I emailed Op about this and here is what was said:
davishl wrote:
> Ok, people are taking your advice and looking at the "i's" so to speak a little differently. There are a few good theories in the forum, but I'm just trying to cover all bases so I have a question.
>
> Is it conceivable that one of the "i's" is actually another person. For instance, they are substuting "Julie" for lower case "i." The sentence "Julie (i) should leave on a pleasant note." is curious to me. Tachyon certainly did not leave on a pleasant note. Anyways, this is just me covering other angles. Am I way off?
> -Luv2LuvEm
OpAphid said:
We do not know when she left, but we have not received reports about anyone saying goodbye after the break-in.
More soon
So my theory is that it is concievable to me, that maybe there was someone else working with Tachyon regarding the break-in.
Food for thought...make of it what you will, but please discuss this the topic of this thread. It is obviously important that we do so.
One of the reasons I think this is because some of the sentences don't sit well with me. They just seem out of place for what we know. For instance, the fact that Tachyon says that she must say goodbyes and leave on a pleasant note. This makes no sense to me.
I emailed Op about this and here is what was said:
davishl wrote:
> Ok, people are taking your advice and looking at the "i's" so to speak a little differently. There are a few good theories in the forum, but I'm just trying to cover all bases so I have a question.
>
> Is it conceivable that one of the "i's" is actually another person. For instance, they are substuting "Julie" for lower case "i." The sentence "Julie (i) should leave on a pleasant note." is curious to me. Tachyon certainly did not leave on a pleasant note. Anyways, this is just me covering other angles. Am I way off?
> -Luv2LuvEm
OpAphid said:
We do not know when she left, but we have not received reports about anyone saying goodbye after the break-in.
More soon
So my theory is that it is concievable to me, that maybe there was someone else working with Tachyon regarding the break-in.
Food for thought...make of it what you will, but please discuss this the topic of this thread. It is obviously important that we do so.
Proud member of "The Collective"
and
Official member of "The Smooth Operators"
I shall get some rest when the profile tells me to.
and
Official member of "The Smooth Operators"
I shall get some rest when the profile tells me to.
"Why would someone need to make such separations if her intentions were true and of one mindset?"
Maybe I'm oversimplifying it--because this seems to obvious to me--but maybe she used the I/i thing so that anyone just casually viewing it wouldn't notice anything odd, other than she used informal capitalization.
But someone who knew her "code" would be able to make the distinction between her public "order" self and the private self who was working for someone else.
But, that seems too obvious; maybe there is a deeper underlying meaning.
Maybe I'm oversimplifying it--because this seems to obvious to me--but maybe she used the I/i thing so that anyone just casually viewing it wouldn't notice anything odd, other than she used informal capitalization.
But someone who knew her "code" would be able to make the distinction between her public "order" self and the private self who was working for someone else.
But, that seems too obvious; maybe there is a deeper underlying meaning.
-
covedweller
http://lonelygirl15.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2602
I put this theory on The List post, but it can go here as well as it relates to the separation.
I put this theory on The List post, but it can go here as well as it relates to the separation.