- Jul 31, 2013
I wish I had the time to say why this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how credible insiders operate. Suffice it to say, people are really bending themselves backwards to justify how a near-unanimous wave of insiders with matching claims somehow isn't indicative of accurate info proliferating.
These aren't people who just showed up with claims expecting to be taken seriously, like some 4chan post. That's when you try to keep it safe and believable. These are people with existing reputations, not trying to convince, but trying to inform. If they were trying to convince, they would've said more than "don't believe it". They're not here to pull a quick caper, their basis is their reputation. Meanwhile the few insiders that do share more are lambasted and accused of this kinda conspiracy-weaving stuff.
And the very reason why others believe the Grinch Leak more is because there is more information that people can track down and digest, like the character banner portrait and the LinkedIn Bricard employee. Even if Bricard says opposite, you can still base it off of being under the NDA.
No leaker who hopes to continue operating within insider channels is going to throw out claims predicated on tenuous theories like the sprout orb or guessing as to the identity of Vergeben hints. Basing claims on such speculative conjecture will catch up with them, they will eventually be wrong, and will find themselves blacklisted. Only if you're some anon would that kind of stuff be inconsequential.
Don't work backwards trying to justify a conclusion by filling in the gaps. Look at things from all angles and keep an open mind. Oh and fwiw "No "insider" is going to ignore Isaac after the sprout leak." Literally they all have, minus one.
tl;dr Unless these "insiders" give us more information than claiming it was what their "sources" said then it is just hearsay and can easily be based off of the other claims.