My case on HH boils down to.... associative tells between Hourai and Sect. If you guys want more details I'm go into it, but for now I'll get the basics down.
The first [ur=http://www.shrinemaiden.org/forum/index.php/topic,9126.msg611036.html#msg611036l]vote[/url] HH places is on Sect. To me this looks rather forced, and I think the reasons for voting are not great, but I'll admit this is nothing terrible. Everyone wants to place a vote down for some reason, HH just nitpicked on little stuff. W/e.. Both
me and
shadoweh called Hourai on it. This leads to a very strong
reaction. This reactionary post does a few things. It reaffirms the first, forced case on Sect while A) prodding Sect in a rather obvious way to "make a case," which presumably was all Hourai wanted to hear from Sect. B) It turns an "attack against Hourai" into a "defense of Sect," by adding motives like "you are contradicting yourself or don't want people attacking Sect," and C) serves as the starting point for a vote on me due to dubious reasons (defending someone who I never tired to defend).
So all this looks like IIoA, or there abouts. So why are there associative tells? getting to it. First none of them (Sect and HH) directly answer the others concerns.. It's always through a medium. This is probably why shadoweh was so confused.
A.k.a when Hourai asks Sect for a case: Sect doesn't start out with: "Hourai, I think..." It's always, "so this is what I think shadoweh.." anyway to use an analogy, it felt as if Sect and Hourai were playing a game of ping pong where Shadoweh was the ball. This is exactly how I felt later. Similarly, Hourai never presses Sect again, ever, after the ED1. In fact I would even call the pair defensive over one another.
The first true signs of it come from this
post by Sect. Sect acknowledges the question from HH, yet answers only very weakly, and I see no bones about it from HH's side. However, that doesn't stop HH from attacking me over Sect again in what I can only consider a
ridiculous post where HH construes every word I utter as motivated to defend Sect.
cut by Kiro, I thought I made a very quick reply to Sect's 2nd post, in fact wasn't it that one?? you know the one UK went *headdesk* on? I felt quite strongly at the time that Sect's points were weaker than charlie sheen's torpedo tour. I'll give a more detailed opinion if you want later.
Where was I? O yes.. then Sect votes me and asks this
"Dan! Why am I the focal point behind your attack on Bardiche and your defense against HH?"I just don't get it. At all. This is why I thought Sect had ties to Bard, because this question is just.... Let's skip the first part and answer the 2nd, a.k.a "Dan! Why am I the focal point behind your defense against HH?"
Two things: 1) Sect deliberately interpreted framed the question as a "defense" instead of a attack. 2) Did Sect really forget that Hourai is claiming I am defending him? Of course not. This is some sort of protection of HH, in a really odd manner. Anyway these are the basics and I am well over the word limit. But HH and Sect are just too damn friendly for my tastes.
There is also that slip form HH later.. which now reads a little like HH knew Sect was Scum.. more on this later.
