(Q - Exalastro: So if I continue with the review, what I retained from the last discussion that we made of it together, these blocking points where we say to ourselves: well,
we're breaking our teeth a bit on subjects that are supposed to be accessible, I'm not going to say simple, but clever, the PER is one of them. There were 3 of us who had the chance to present a bit of our review and we.
is each time, I listened again and I feel confronted with a definition of the review by saying to myself, Well today we have access to that there is a review which in itself is quite basic
and affordable, and we have the impression of not speaking the same language And so I wanted to continue to break my teeth on this because we have to review these sentinels But without saying too much since I understand.
that the object today is not to go into too much detail about the puzzles, but still my sticking point for me is the PER Not to mention the super solution, not to mention the 12th puzzles, no.
for me it's the review of the sentries, I can't do it and so I say to myself what is missing today for ordinary mortals to be able to understand it while for you it seems obvious and
pretty basic and I say to myself, no.
So yes, I didn't do my military service, but I don't have the impression of being the only one who doesn't understand anything about it.)
MB: You're not the only one not to have done your military service either, I believe. Which is perhaps not trivial. In this case, I think the most qualified people to talk about reviewing are people who have practiced reviewing professionally. That's probably much more interesting. Knowing that the review is one of the elements that we can mention, but it is far from being the only one there. Well apparently you are locked or focused on this passage in view. Maybe it's not just that. If we have to talk about the review, it's a review. What do we do in a review? What do we get out of it? What is the goal, how does it happen? So ! If we have to talk about this, we have to talk about it as we can all things, in detail, clearly specifying the ins and outs, and from there, we have to find a way to understand what it's about. acts.
(Q - Gringos: Would people accept the review solution in your opinion? Because I found something very, very simple and I think that if I explain it in a way formal, they will say “Yes, but we have already seen that, we have already talked about it so it is not that. Have you already heard about the good solution mentioned like you? say it or did we flirt?)
MB: I just had a call, we were cut off for a few seconds, let's start the question again.
(Q - Gringos: The review gives me a super simple solution. I'm afraid that by exposing it to the other players, by offering this solution, they will tell me no, it's too simple. Isn't the problem of hunting to accept the simplicity of the final find?)
MB: So that's probably one of the things this game lacks the most, it's an objective vision in relation to its level of difficulty. So it's relatively simple. It's a relatively simple game. To that, I answer yes, without a doubt.
(Q - Gringos: Yes, so people will accept the simplicity of my supersolution? Let's try a review!
It was simple, it's been 2 times that you asked the players to review it. There, if I give the exact review, what will you be able to answer me? That's what scares me actually, you're not going to be able to tell me anything. You won't be able to say that it's good, what will we do afterwards?)
MB: I think the Gringos character has a particularity. It is to use one's ability to intervene in a group, in a position of leader, to validate or invalidate certain sensations, impressions or convictions that one may have. He uses the group. And he tries to integrate me into the group, he is clever Gringos.
(Q - Gringos: My review, it was simple and personal.)
MB: And he's very smart and he's very uncertain. He's not confident at all and he tries to grab onto everything that comes his way. He's a fucking opportunist.
(Q - Gringos: You're right.)
MB: I don't know if I'm right, but I feel that way and therefore the fact of exposing a theory as you could do here in the next few minutes could cause a certain embarrassment because I answer, I don't answer, a silence from the audience who will say to themselves “Ah what will answer?” And what are we going to get out of all this? And being on stage is also a bit of the Gringos vocation.
(Q - Gringos: If a player gives the correct review, what will you be able to answer? You will not be able to answer while remaining factual.)
MB: A good review leaves no room for doubt.
(Q - Gringos: I have no doubt. And it leads to a principle that must then be exploited and so I don't know why we conceptualized something so simple, it was just a shift and being positioned in a good place and noticing something that no one notices While it's simple, it's before our eyes, it's huge. This error leads to a “wow” which opens up a simple, basic concept to us. This is basically the review I have and we have everything in front of our eyes!)
.
MB: Your lyricism is absolutely captivating. I am in love. No, but I have not known many people, officers, non-commissioned officers who, we speak so much in military terms and even outside the military, I do not know many people who carry out passenger reviews and who proceed by concept. A passenger in sight, it's yes or shit eh, is it good?
(Q - Gringos: Exactly! Well, there's a soldier, he's not there. Ah, why isn't he there? That's the thing I mean. Hold him , I'm making the call, it's weird, there should be this person instead of that one, there's a problem.)
MB: During a review, we don't make the call. It has nothing to do. We see that you have not done military service. A review is a review, it has nothing to do with the call.
(Q - Gringos: If he's missing his beret, we'll notice, that's what I meant.)
MB: Ah, that’s something else! If a beret is missing, no one is missing. A beret is missing, it's not the same. To finish with Gringos, I understand everything, I understand your approach well. And at some point, get over it.
(Q - Gringos: Exactly. Thank you. I found it. There you go.)
(Q - Laloupe: Hello Michel, it's Laloupe. )
MB: Well yes, no one is perfect. Do you have vision problems too?
(Q - Laloupe: On the review, a little bit too, yeah. I had a question. I've been thinking for a long time that the Owl has an important place in the game. And he tells me seems that you have said several times that indeed the role of the Owl is important. Does it seem at a given moment to really ask the question, “who are we”? Who are we really in this? hunting? Is it important or is it decisive?)
MB: No, it has nothing to do with who we are. I think everyone knows who they are, each and every one of them. No, I think it's more at a certain moment to say to yourself “what am I doing”? And if I do it, I do it.
MB: You're not the only one not to have done your military service either, I believe. Which is perhaps not trivial. In this case, I think the most qualified people to talk about reviewing are people who have practiced reviewing professionally. That's probably much more interesting. Knowing that the review is one of the elements that we can mention, but it is far from being the only one there. Well apparently you are locked or focused on this passage in view. Maybe it's not just that. If we have to talk about the review, it's a review. What do we do in a review? What do we get out of it? What is the goal, how does it happen? So ! If we have to talk about this, we have to talk about it as we can all things, in detail, clearly specifying the ins and outs, and from there, we have to find a way to understand what it's about. acts.
(Q - Gringos: Would people accept the review solution in your opinion? Because I found something very, very simple and I think that if I explain it in a way formal, they will say “Yes, but we have already seen that, we have already talked about it so it is not that. Have you already heard about the good solution mentioned like you? say it or did we flirt?)
MB: I just had a call, we were cut off for a few seconds, let's start the question again.
(Q - Gringos: The review gives me a super simple solution. I'm afraid that by exposing it to the other players, by offering this solution, they will tell me no, it's too simple. Isn't the problem of hunting to accept the simplicity of the final find?)
MB: So that's probably one of the things this game lacks the most, it's an objective vision in relation to its level of difficulty. So it's relatively simple. It's a relatively simple game. To that, I answer yes, without a doubt.
(Q - Gringos: Yes, so people will accept the simplicity of my supersolution? Let's try a review!
It was simple, it's been 2 times that you asked the players to review it. There, if I give the exact review, what will you be able to answer me? That's what scares me actually, you're not going to be able to tell me anything. You won't be able to say that it's good, what will we do afterwards?)
MB: I think the Gringos character has a particularity. It is to use one's ability to intervene in a group, in a position of leader, to validate or invalidate certain sensations, impressions or convictions that one may have. He uses the group. And he tries to integrate me into the group, he is clever Gringos.
(Q - Gringos: My review, it was simple and personal.)
MB: And he's very smart and he's very uncertain. He's not confident at all and he tries to grab onto everything that comes his way. He's a fucking opportunist.
(Q - Gringos: You're right.)
MB: I don't know if I'm right, but I feel that way and therefore the fact of exposing a theory as you could do here in the next few minutes could cause a certain embarrassment because I answer, I don't answer, a silence from the audience who will say to themselves “Ah what will answer?” And what are we going to get out of all this? And being on stage is also a bit of the Gringos vocation.
(Q - Gringos: If a player gives the correct review, what will you be able to answer? You will not be able to answer while remaining factual.)
MB: A good review leaves no room for doubt.
(Q - Gringos: I have no doubt. And it leads to a principle that must then be exploited and so I don't know why we conceptualized something so simple, it was just a shift and being positioned in a good place and noticing something that no one notices While it's simple, it's before our eyes, it's huge. This error leads to a “wow” which opens up a simple, basic concept to us. This is basically the review I have and we have everything in front of our eyes!)
.
MB: Your lyricism is absolutely captivating. I am in love. No, but I have not known many people, officers, non-commissioned officers who, we speak so much in military terms and even outside the military, I do not know many people who carry out passenger reviews and who proceed by concept. A passenger in sight, it's yes or shit eh, is it good?
(Q - Gringos: Exactly! Well, there's a soldier, he's not there. Ah, why isn't he there? That's the thing I mean. Hold him , I'm making the call, it's weird, there should be this person instead of that one, there's a problem.)
MB: During a review, we don't make the call. It has nothing to do. We see that you have not done military service. A review is a review, it has nothing to do with the call.
(Q - Gringos: If he's missing his beret, we'll notice, that's what I meant.)
MB: Ah, that’s something else! If a beret is missing, no one is missing. A beret is missing, it's not the same. To finish with Gringos, I understand everything, I understand your approach well. And at some point, get over it.
(Q - Gringos: Exactly. Thank you. I found it. There you go.)
(Q - Laloupe: Hello Michel, it's Laloupe. )
MB: Well yes, no one is perfect. Do you have vision problems too?
(Q - Laloupe: On the review, a little bit too, yeah. I had a question. I've been thinking for a long time that the Owl has an important place in the game. And he tells me seems that you have said several times that indeed the role of the Owl is important. Does it seem at a given moment to really ask the question, “who are we”? Who are we really in this? hunting? Is it important or is it decisive?)
MB: No, it has nothing to do with who we are. I think everyone knows who they are, each and every one of them. No, I think it's more at a certain moment to say to yourself “what am I doing”? And if I do it, I do it.