D
Deleted member
Guest
I think you're conflating the stuff he has heard with the stuff that he is speculating and trust me that's easy to get mixed up based on Fatman's verbiage. I do it all the time but that's what makes his case so unique compared to Sabi and Verge. Fatman's not a leaker. He's a speculator. He's doing the exact same **** he's been doing for over a decade, just this time he has his been dealt a hand where some of the cards give him access to certain information we don't. He understands this responsibility and is frankly handling it well. Granted, he hasn't always but he's owned up to his mistakes and did so publically. He's only sharing his opinions so that those suffering this leak drought can have a piece of mind. He doesn't owe us anything but is still happy to share because he enjoys doing this and he understands how painfully annoying it can be.If you're bringing in outside information that hasn't been publicly discussed by other sources, then you're the point of contact for that particular idea/rumor and thus the "leaker" in question. Sabi and Vergeben just give us information based upon what their sources tell us, thus they are "leakers" because they are the point of contact for new information. Fatmanonice pushing certain ideas regarding fighter #5 based upon some sources he has heard (such as it will be disappointing or not a fan favorite) are really the first time we've heard of these things, so yes, at that point, you're moving beyond speculation and becoming the point of contact.
I cannot condone the idea of disqualifying him from speculating and besides Fatman's not even certain about half the **** he's spueing and admits that. You won't get that from ego-driven leakers looking for street cred. If Buddy Holly or Jimi Hendrix gave me some tips on how to play guitar, should I just give up playing guitar?
(That metaphor is probably dumb af but pot is legal in my country so idc)
I may have my biases for Fatman and I consider him a friend but even I don't buy into it. It's on me though to take his word for gospel or not. He's not selling you anything but people are still willing to purchase. If you subsequently get buyers remorse, then that's on you bro. I don't agree with him on this however I'm not gonna try to antagonize him and tell him he shouldn't be sharing his theories. That's just his thing and he enjoys it. Why strip him of this?He's the only one claiming that #5 will be disappointing to the Smash fan base and the only one who has ever spoken publicly to the idea that "Season 2" will be more fan favorite based.
(fyi I'm not accusing you specifically of doing any of this Eric. You make some great posts and I enjoy reading them but I'm kinda just summing up my feelings in this post while responding at the same time).
Since when did we start giving limitations to what's considered speculation or not? Like, I'm totally pickin up what you're laying down and he definately has certain privileges that we don't. But he hasn't put all his eggs in one basket based on the things he said because even he's not sure what the outcome may be despite these privileges. Once Easter comes though and he does start overflowing that basket with eggs, than yeah, we can put him on "leaker" status but this isn't the case.If you're playing with additional information not known to the public, then you're most certainly going beyond "just speculation" at that point regardless of how legitimate or illegitimate that information is. It can be a mix of your speculation and your "sources," but if the information that you're speculating around isn't known to the public and you're the first to talk about it, you're still officially the "leak" at that point.
If a random leaker were to personally call me up and give me some deets like: "bro, fp5 is gonna be super cool and someone from a playstation console" and I started speculating whoever he/she may be, does that automatically void my speculation too solely because I got some insider info? I don't think that's fair.
Last edited by a moderator: