(Q - Arsène: you could never validate or invalidate a track?)
MB: no. Those who wrote that I invalidated their track, I saw messages passing through, this is false. It happened to me, I will say at most three times and even then I am not even sure, to invalidate not a track, but a movement which is not at all, at all, at all, the same thing.
(Q - nlc: ah thank you! It’s huge!)
(Q - Cleptomaniac: Michel you can't say that! When you say that there is no camera, there were some that had parallel tracks...)
MB: what can't I say?
(Q - Cleptomaniac: that you did not invalidate 2 tracks, for example there were tracks which spoke, I never had in my game, there were tracks which spoke about 'camera, finally I speak
under the control of others, and at some point someone asks you the question, so maybe you didn't know this clue and so you were somehow tricked into it, even if it wasn't not a trap but, no no we are not talking about devices at all
photos in the golden owl, that invalidates Niepce's track,)
MB: I didn't talk about the camera, I talked about Niepce, Niepce is not an element that appears in the solutions, I stand by my answer but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the place to which all this is linked, nor the notion to which it can be linked, but it does not go through Niepce.
(Q - Cleptomaniac: ok, that necessarily invalidates a lead, I'm sorry to insist on that!)
MB: my dear Kleptomaniac, if we did it today, I am incapable of it, but if we took stock of all the leads from all the researchers today, I could still eliminate some of them. is not at the end!
(Q - Cleptomaniac: but do it!)
MB: no, but that is not my role, the only guarantee I can give you is that I answer all your questions honestly and spontaneously, spontaneity is only altered by certain periods of reflection where I I need to look for the words I'm going to use, so as not to cause an earthquake behind, but apart from that, I'm someone extremely cash-based, upstanding and honest, so when someone talks to me about Niepce I say niet, but I fully accept that and for those who based their research on that, I am sorry for them again, once again my approach was never to disappoint these people, especially since I did not even no notion of the number of researchers who were connected on this track if I dare say, so that's not my point, my main point above all is to be honest, so ultimately it's not like that's what I see, but I would be tempted to say at the limit I'm invalidating a track but I don't care that's not my point, my point is not to invalidate tracks, my point is is to be honest with the players.
MB: no. Those who wrote that I invalidated their track, I saw messages passing through, this is false. It happened to me, I will say at most three times and even then I am not even sure, to invalidate not a track, but a movement which is not at all, at all, at all, the same thing.
(Q - nlc: ah thank you! It’s huge!)
(Q - Cleptomaniac: Michel you can't say that! When you say that there is no camera, there were some that had parallel tracks...)
MB: what can't I say?
(Q - Cleptomaniac: that you did not invalidate 2 tracks, for example there were tracks which spoke, I never had in my game, there were tracks which spoke about 'camera, finally I speak
under the control of others, and at some point someone asks you the question, so maybe you didn't know this clue and so you were somehow tricked into it, even if it wasn't not a trap but, no no we are not talking about devices at all
photos in the golden owl, that invalidates Niepce's track,)
MB: I didn't talk about the camera, I talked about Niepce, Niepce is not an element that appears in the solutions, I stand by my answer but that doesn't necessarily invalidate the place to which all this is linked, nor the notion to which it can be linked, but it does not go through Niepce.
(Q - Cleptomaniac: ok, that necessarily invalidates a lead, I'm sorry to insist on that!)
MB: my dear Kleptomaniac, if we did it today, I am incapable of it, but if we took stock of all the leads from all the researchers today, I could still eliminate some of them. is not at the end!
(Q - Cleptomaniac: but do it!)
MB: no, but that is not my role, the only guarantee I can give you is that I answer all your questions honestly and spontaneously, spontaneity is only altered by certain periods of reflection where I I need to look for the words I'm going to use, so as not to cause an earthquake behind, but apart from that, I'm someone extremely cash-based, upstanding and honest, so when someone talks to me about Niepce I say niet, but I fully accept that and for those who based their research on that, I am sorry for them again, once again my approach was never to disappoint these people, especially since I did not even no notion of the number of researchers who were connected on this track if I dare say, so that's not my point, my main point above all is to be honest, so ultimately it's not like that's what I see, but I would be tempted to say at the limit I'm invalidating a track but I don't care that's not my point, my point is not to invalidate tracks, my point is is to be honest with the players.