Talk:Watcher - Revision history

Zoey: /* watchers, good or bad? */

2007-09-27T07:58:04Z

‎watchers, good or bad?

Platypusrex256 at 06:15, 27 September 2007

2007-09-27T06:15:41Z

Phoenician: /* Elders, Watchers, and the Rest */

2007-07-25T00:58:36Z

‎Elders, Watchers, and the Rest

Zoey: /* Elders, Watchers, and the Rest */

2007-07-25T00:47:38Z

‎Elders, Watchers, and the Rest

SilverBULLETx3: Elders, Watchers, and the Rest

2007-07-24T16:48:17Z

Elders, Watchers, and the Rest

SilverBULLETx3: /* Gemma, Watchers, and the Order */

2007-05-10T21:47:18Z

‎Gemma, Watchers, and the Order

Brucker: /* Gemma, Watchers, and the Order */

2006-12-19T22:39:16Z

‎Gemma, Watchers, and the Order

OwenIsCool at 21:27, 19 December 2006

2006-12-19T21:27:36Z

Brucker: Gemma, Watchers, and the Order

2006-12-19T21:00:32Z

Gemma, Watchers, and the Order

New page

== Gemma, Watchers, and the Order ==

It seems to me that if indeed it is true that Gemma works for the Order, and the Order is "the bad guys", then that calls everything Gemma has claimed into question. This has been noted on the page by someone else, but the thing that occurs to me, and I have always suspected, is that perhaps the Watchers and the Order are two separate groups that are, in fact, in opposition to one another. The guy at the motel who stood outside their room all night smoking surely was staking them out. If Gemma was in with the Order, why would she tell Bree that these guys were trouble unless they were working ''against'' the Order? So far, the Watchers have done nothing but stand around. The only reason they were given to worry about them is Gemma's warnings. --[[User:Brucker|Brucker]] 15:00, 19 December 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:58, 27 September 2007
Line 22:		Line 22:
	* watchers tend not to do anything other than watch... except once they yelled "we're here to help!" or something		* watchers tend not to do anything other than watch... except once they yelled "we're here to help!" or something

−	- [[user\|platypusrex256\|platy]] sep 26	+	- [[user:platypusrex256\|platy]] sep 26

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:15, 27 September 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:I thought Elders redirected to Deacons... am I mistaken? Do you think THOSE two should be seperate? --[[User:Zoey\|Zoey]] 19:47, 24 July 2007 (CDT)		:I thought Elders redirected to Deacons... am I mistaken? Do you think THOSE two should be seperate? --[[User:Zoey\|Zoey]] 19:47, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
	::I agree that Deacons & Elders should be separated eventually, but I don't really think we've had enough information to distingish them, really. Personally, I think the Deacons answer to the Elders, but I don't think there's really been any solid dialogue/proof to that assumption. Looking at the current Deacon page, Deacons & Elders could really be the same thing --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 19:58, 24 July 2007 (CDT)		::I agree that Deacons & Elders should be separated eventually, but I don't really think we've had enough information to distingish them, really. Personally, I think the Deacons answer to the Elders, but I don't think there's really been any solid dialogue/proof to that assumption. Looking at the current Deacon page, Deacons & Elders could really be the same thing --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 19:58, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
		+
		+
		+	== watchers, good or bad? ==
		+	* is it possible that the watchers are protecting clair, even as she fights against the order?
		+	* watchers have had plenty of opportunity and yet they tend not to interfere. have they ever interfered?
		+	* watchers tend not to do anything other than watch... except once they yelled "we're here to help!" or something
		+
		+	- [[user\|platypusrex256\|platy]] sep 26

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:58, 25 July 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:

	:I thought Elders redirected to Deacons... am I mistaken? Do you think THOSE two should be seperate? --[[User:Zoey\|Zoey]] 19:47, 24 July 2007 (CDT)		:I thought Elders redirected to Deacons... am I mistaken? Do you think THOSE two should be seperate? --[[User:Zoey\|Zoey]] 19:47, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
		+	::I agree that Deacons & Elders should be separated eventually, but I don't really think we've had enough information to distingish them, really. Personally, I think the Deacons answer to the Elders, but I don't think there's really been any solid dialogue/proof to that assumption. Looking at the current Deacon page, Deacons & Elders could really be the same thing --[[User:Phoenician\|Pheon]] 19:58, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:47, 25 July 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:

	It seems to me as though, after the video [[Proceed with Caution]] (from [[Alex]]), the Elders should get more than a mere redirect to [[Watcher]]. If nobody objects within the next 24 hours, I will create a page at [[Elder]]. <span style="background:DarkSlateGray">[[User:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">  '''•Silver•'''  </font>]] <small>[[User talk:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Talk</font>]] \| [[Special:Contributions/SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Contribs</font>]]</small></span> 11:48, 24 July 2007 (CDT)		It seems to me as though, after the video [[Proceed with Caution]] (from [[Alex]]), the Elders should get more than a mere redirect to [[Watcher]]. If nobody objects within the next 24 hours, I will create a page at [[Elder]]. <span style="background:DarkSlateGray">[[User:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">  '''•Silver•'''  </font>]] <small>[[User talk:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Talk</font>]] \| [[Special:Contributions/SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Contribs</font>]]</small></span> 11:48, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
		+
		+	:I thought Elders redirected to Deacons... am I mistaken? Do you think THOSE two should be seperate? --[[User:Zoey\|Zoey]] 19:47, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:48, 24 July 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	::See, I've not been following the OpAphid stuff closely enough to know how this all ties in, but that sounds like roughly what I was thinking.--[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 16:39, 19 December 2006 (CST)		::See, I've not been following the OpAphid stuff closely enough to know how this all ties in, but that sounds like roughly what I was thinking.--[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 16:39, 19 December 2006 (CST)
	:::One of the new NBR videos had Nikki in a hotel reading a Blackberry that said "Retrieve [[Bree\|the girl]]. The principles of the Hymn of One have failed us. Beware of the Watchers - they will go to any lengths to protect her." Watchers are good after all! [[User:SilverBULLETx3\|silverX3]] 16:47, 10 May 2007 (CDT)		:::One of the new NBR videos had Nikki in a hotel reading a Blackberry that said "Retrieve [[Bree\|the girl]]. The principles of the Hymn of One have failed us. Beware of the Watchers - they will go to any lengths to protect her." Watchers are good after all! [[User:SilverBULLETx3\|silverX3]] 16:47, 10 May 2007 (CDT)
		+
		+	== Elders, Watchers, and the Rest ==
		+
		+	It seems to me as though, after the video [[Proceed with Caution]] (from [[Alex]]), the Elders should get more than a mere redirect to [[Watcher]]. If nobody objects within the next 24 hours, I will create a page at [[Elder]]. <span style="background:DarkSlateGray">[[User:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">  '''•Silver•'''  </font>]] <small>[[User talk:SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Talk</font>]] \| [[Special:Contributions/SilverBULLETx3\|<font color="white">Contribs</font>]]</small></span> 11:48, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:47, 10 May 2007
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:[[User:OwenIsCool\|OwenIsCool]] 15:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)		:[[User:OwenIsCool\|OwenIsCool]] 15:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)
	::See, I've not been following the OpAphid stuff closely enough to know how this all ties in, but that sounds like roughly what I was thinking.--[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 16:39, 19 December 2006 (CST)		::See, I've not been following the OpAphid stuff closely enough to know how this all ties in, but that sounds like roughly what I was thinking.--[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 16:39, 19 December 2006 (CST)
		+	:::One of the new NBR videos had Nikki in a hotel reading a Blackberry that said "Retrieve [[Bree\|the girl]]. The principles of the Hymn of One have failed us. Beware of the Watchers - they will go to any lengths to protect her." Watchers are good after all! [[User:SilverBULLETx3\|silverX3]] 16:47, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 19 December 2006
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:Even more interestingly... if the Watchers are a competing organization, antagonistic to OpAphid... could they be "team Tachyon", so to speak? Hmmm, I'm going to process that for a little while before editing the article. Feel free to go for it if you want, though.<br>		:Even more interestingly... if the Watchers are a competing organization, antagonistic to OpAphid... could they be "team Tachyon", so to speak? Hmmm, I'm going to process that for a little while before editing the article. Feel free to go for it if you want, though.<br>
	:[[User:OwenIsCool\|OwenIsCool]] 15:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)		:[[User:OwenIsCool\|OwenIsCool]] 15:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)
		+	::See, I've not been following the OpAphid stuff closely enough to know how this all ties in, but that sounds like roughly what I was thinking.--[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 16:39, 19 December 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 19 December 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:

	It seems to me that if indeed it is true that Gemma works for the Order, and the Order is "the bad guys", then that calls everything Gemma has claimed into question. This has been noted on the page by someone else, but the thing that occurs to me, and I have always suspected, is that perhaps the Watchers and the Order are two separate groups that are, in fact, in opposition to one another. The guy at the motel who stood outside their room all night smoking surely was staking them out. If Gemma was in with the Order, why would she tell Bree that these guys were trouble unless they were working ''against'' the Order? So far, the Watchers have done nothing but stand around. The only reason they were given to worry about them is Gemma's warnings. --[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 15:00, 19 December 2006 (CST)		It seems to me that if indeed it is true that Gemma works for the Order, and the Order is "the bad guys", then that calls everything Gemma has claimed into question. This has been noted on the page by someone else, but the thing that occurs to me, and I have always suspected, is that perhaps the Watchers and the Order are two separate groups that are, in fact, in opposition to one another. The guy at the motel who stood outside their room all night smoking surely was staking them out. If Gemma was in with the Order, why would she tell Bree that these guys were trouble unless they were working ''against'' the Order? So far, the Watchers have done nothing but stand around. The only reason they were given to worry about them is Gemma's warnings. --[[User:Brucker\|Brucker]] 15:00, 19 December 2006 (CST)
		+
		+	:That is a ''very'' interesting point. I think that should definitely be included. I had been more simplistic and thought that she just made up the watcher thing to scare them (and that the guy was "just a chain smoker"). However, now that you mention it... it's certainly possible that they're a separate group. In fact, it would make perfect sense if that guy had Bree and Daniel's back, so Gemma purposefully led them away from his protection.<br>
		+	:Even more interestingly... if the Watchers are a competing organization, antagonistic to OpAphid... could they be "team Tachyon", so to speak? Hmmm, I'm going to process that for a little while before editing the article. Feel free to go for it if you want, though.<br>
		+	:[[User:OwenIsCool\|OwenIsCool]] 15:27, 19 December 2006 (CST)