From TheKolWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

How can we put that these are the only combonation of moons, no double full, or anything not shown? And do it with a nice deminer?--Fly boy42 21:47, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Grimace's observatory text implies that this is the start of a new event/story:

One of the astronomers nods, smiling. "I see you've found Grimace, one of our two moons. Due to its influence on magical energy, ancient scholars called it Magicus Gluteus, or 'The Wizard's Moon'. They also predicted that some sort of terrible catastrophe would befall it..." He turns to look at a calendar. "Well, any day now, actually. But naturally that's a load of rubbish. What could possibly happen?"

In this light I think we should have seperate pages for Ronald and Grimace and each one's unique history (as well as observatory images). --NewZorkBat 11:50, 15 May 2006 (CDT)

How does the orbit of Hamburgler even make sense? Given that Ronald orbits at twice the rate of Grimace, it isn't possible that Hamburgler could establish a stable orbit around both moons. Someone with a better understanding of orbital mechanics should address this.--AhabTRuler 11:44, 7 June 2006 (CDT)

A comet seen in the moons "bar" area

As of 7:45AM Eastern Time on Friday, May 26th (Petember 3rd), I saw a comet in the same "bar" area as the moons (next to the Asymmetric Publications copyright notice). I think this represents that in a few days (best guess) one or both moons will be struck by this comet and have their behavior altered, as I think was suggested in a J&S discussion. The comet itself is linked to the Observatory, so this discussion could be moved to that page as well. - Eevle (#76998)

The comet's effect on moon patterns

As of June 3rd, a comet has struck Grimace, leaving a small hole. This may have caused the patterns of Grimace to change. We need someone to see if the stat days have been affected. If not, please tell me, so I can remove the needs work bar. --StrongbadfanEX 08:25, 3 June 2006 (CDT)

  • What we know:
    1. Currently, Temporary Lycanthropy gives -50%. That means that with the moons being Moon3.gifMoon2a.gif as they are today, it counts the same as if it was Moon3.gifMoon1.gif. The white section with the black hole counts as a black section. The black sections with white holes probably count as white sections. Presumably the Talisman of Baio and the Jekyllin hide belt are similarly affected.
  • What we won't know without further information (and will be mostly revealed in time if we just watch the sky):
    1. Whether Grimace's phases happen at a different speed now.
    2. How and when Moon2a.gif becomes Moon2b.gif.
    3. Whether the hole is actually a hole in Grimace, or a piece of the comet orbiting it. It is infact a moonlet due to grimace of june 4.
    4. Whether Grimace==Moon6a.gif counts as a Muscle day rather than Moon5a.gif.
    5. If #4 is yes, how this affects Moxie days.
  • My gueses are: "No", "Some pattern that doesn't line up with the months (like every 3/5 days, or something)", "Piece of the comet", "Yes", and "Something complicated", respectively. Having #2 not line up with the months will make stat days reasonably complex, without making Grimace have irregular phases (there are still only 8 images for it to go through, so to be regular it would still need a multiple of 8 days in its cycle... otherwise it would be like "2 days on this phase, then 1 on that phase..." which would just be bad... I'm pretty sure Jick said he wanted to avoid this, on the radio show when they were brainstorming about it). Phlip 08:42, 3 June 2006 (CDT)

Well, if Grimace hasen't been thrown off phase, the new table would look something like the one below. I'm posting it to see if it helps to visualize. I got rid of "resting" - assume it works as usual on stat days. (Speaking of stat days - today really seems like it should be a moxie day, doesn't it?) This table is just for visualization right now - we can add values later if it turns out to be useful. I wanted to compress it, so I used some abbreviations. bef=before and aft=after. Lycan=Temporary Lycanthropy. Baio=Talisman of Baio. Jek=Jekyllin Hide Belt. --LucySpace 16:44, 3 June 2006 (CDT)

Table of the Moons

Okay, I changed the table to reflect the normal moon phases. We can update them later or change them around according to the minimoon. --LucySpace 00:50, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

I updated the table to include kublai's 11x16 hypothesis (as described below by dentarthurdent) because it seems to be the best one going. I've put in hypothesized values for statdays, wereseal, and lightness, but not grue, baio or jekyllyn--DirkDiggler 01:35, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Ok, I'm confused; I thaught that on the 5th, the minimoon was nearer to Grimace. According to the 11x16 theory that is where it was, but on this table, someone changed it to be right in the center. Could someone change that back to reflect how the moons actually were? --Deadgoat 13:07, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Yeah that was me. I've fixed it for the future days too now, but there's no way to do it without having the moon alignment dance in the column -- sometimes there are two things between the moons, and sometimes there is one. Is there a missing graphic we haven't seen yet? Also, this is nitpicky but it would make the layout of the above table neater if we called the minimoon drawings "minimoon0" (no minimoon), "minimoon1" (white), and "minimoon2" (black); but I'm not smart enough to fix that or convinced that it's worth the trouble. Also Also, this page is about due for a cleanup. --DirkDiggler 20:17, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Moved table to main page. --DirkDiggler 10:15, 9 June 2006 (CDT)


Below I've put my new predictions for the moons. I assumed an elliptical orbit with Ronald and Grimace as foci. If you think otherwise, please post new predictions. The big problem with my predictions is that it does not include predictions on when the minimoon appears on the outside edge of the moon. That bothers me. --LucySpace 01:19, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

Ronald Grimace
Smoon3.gif Smoon2a.gif
Smoon4.gif Smoon2.gifSminimoon2.gif
Smoon5.gif Sminimoon.gifSmoon3.gif
Smoon6.gif Smoon3.gif
Minimoon2.gifSmoon7.gif Smoon4.gif
Smoon8b.gif Smoon4.gif
Smoon1.gif Smoon5a.gif
Smoon2.gif Smoon5.gifSminimoon2.gif
Smoon3.gif Smoon6.gif

I think what will happen is that the moon will have an orbit going back and forth, but turning white to black every so often. I think seeing how the next two days work will make a lot of this confusion clear. Otherwise the minimoon.gif (which is a white mini moon) becomes useless. and I was making this table on my own, but I'll just help with this one now. Much easier for me.

Also, I've a pic of the moons before rollover when the comet hit. They looked like this: Moon2b.gifMoon1.gif What it looks to me is that the moon will move across the moons, and perhaps moving from Ronald to Grimace changes its color. Picture is on Noodlebandit's wordpress page if you want to go see it yourself. --Ashallond 09:09, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

So the thing we need to remember is that these are orbiting moons, not rotating objects next to one another. Hamburglar is orbiting Grimace. Not Ronald and Grimace. I'm currently working out images to show the positions of the moons around whatever planet the Kingdom is on, and will see where that takes me, given the images of the moons with Hamburglar from the last couple days. --Shaft1986 (signature pending)

  • Fantastic, Ashallond! I added it to the table. Thanks for the heads up. Hm, you think it might change color when changing moons? I just assumed it did that because either it was a drawing and we wouldn't be able to see it if it was black on black or because celestial objects look light when viewed alone but look dark when eclipsing a bigger object with greater luminosity. The next few days will be interesting. --LucySpace 14:31, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

  • Possibly. but there is a version of each phase with a white and black moon in front of it, so I think it might be a rotation around *off to the right and then back from the left or right, weaves left then back right like some oscillation* but every time that it goes from Ronald to grimace it might change. tomorrow will tell me a lot about what I think the attern will be, but I doubt that the third moon will ever be off the baord. --Ashallond 16:20, 4 June 2006 (CDT)
    • That's an interesting theory. I really hope there's no weird retrograde motion. You don't think Hamburglar will ever disappear behind the moons? --LucySpace 17:54, 4 June 2006 (CDT)
    • Possibly. I can see an oscillation pattern or a loop around (front and behind) both moons in my head. I really need to see where the moonlet goes for a day or two more. once we get enough data points to extrapolate the pattern, we can knock this thing out fairly quickly. **EDIT** um...never mind this one just threw me for a loop. --Ashallond 22:56, 4 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Well, with today's info narrows everything down about the moons from a given position, save stat days...
    • Count one for each quarter of each moon's surface that's white (like we used to).
    • Subtract one if a black Hamburglar is occluding a white piece of larger moon (but not if it's just a black Hamburglar elsewere).
    • Add one for a white Hamburglar, either in front of a black piece (probably) or elsewhere.
    • Take the total to be out of 8.
  • Which makes sense, since the effects are basically based on the amount of light we get from the moons... now we just need to know their exact movements, their effects on the stat days, and what determines whether Hamburglar's lit when it's not over a moon. Phlip 23:37, 4 June 2006 (CDT)
      • Who on earth named the little moonlet hamburglar?--SomeStranger (T | C) 12:56, 5 June 2006 (CDT)
        • Riff said [here] that the dev team had taken to calling it Hamburglar. --DataVortex 13:20, 5 June 2006 (CDT)
          • um, ronald and grimace are pre-existing terms, but hamburglar is a coinage. those evil arch people will surely slap some C&D's on our very sorry arses if we insist on using this. we're no morgan spurlock. --Evilkolbot 13:29, 5 June 2006 (CDT)
            • Haha, I get it!--Ronald McDonald, Grimace(The purple blob guy), and Hamburglar. It took me a while to figure it out. But I dont think therell be any legal problems, since we are not portraying the Hamburglar negatively nor using it to advertising our item. In fact, our use of the name could be considered free advertising for Mickey-Dees.

--PhantomTrogdor 20:52, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Updated the baio info for today. J&S said last night they need to come up with a generic name that still fits in the theme, but not a copyrighted name. We also need to sort out the pattern of the moonlet. --Ashallond 13:29, 5 June 2006 (CDT)

  • Why, in the big chart, does the first day have a picture of Ronald with a white version of the moonlet. I don't seem to remember it being there.--SomeStranger (T | C) 16:15, 6 June 2006 (CDT)
    • It appeared after the emergency maintenance but before the nightly maintenance. Perhaps you didn't log in during that time? Here is a screenshot. See above where Ashallond mentions, "Also, I've a pic of the moons before rollover when the comet hit." --LucySpace 16:56, 6 June 2006 (CDT)
      • I see now, I wonder why it changed...--SomeStranger (T | C) 18:23, 6 June 2006 (CDT)
  • I think the mini moon has 16 possible positions, but moves 3 spaces at once. There are 8 spots infront of the big moons, and 8 spots behind the big moons. 4 of the 8 "behind" locations will show through, because they are on the sides of the moon. The entire cycle of the minimoon would repeat every 16 days, leaving many of the possible images unused though. --Ark42
  • Possible. I'm of a theory that it's a 12 day cycle. If a 16 day cycle was used it would mirror with Grimace, not giving the variety that Jick wanted to redo the moons. 12 gives some interesting combo opportunities with 8,12,16 having tons of common multiples. Anyway, on another note. I'm starting to suspect that the moonlet phase pattern is two days white, two days black, two days white, etc. Baio info for today updated. --Ashallond 23:43, 6 June 2006 (CDT)
  • What makes you think it looks like a 12 day cycle? I would hope actually that it ends up being something which doesn't have a nice multiple of 16, so that it plays out a much longer total moon cycle, but the only pattern I can see in the known positions is 16 spots where it moves 3 spots at once. A 12-day cycle would seem to me that it should have only 1 position between Ronald and Grimace instead of 2 positions in my 16-day idea, and also only have 1 position at each far endpoint where it turns around instead of 2 seeminly overlapping positions where it just moves from "in-front" to "behind". That 12-day idea would have worked if the minimoon moves 2 places per day, up until the Mysticality stat day, but the minimoon would have to have been hidden behind the left side of Grimace, and it wasn't. I see no pattern in the dark/bright part of the minimoon though, unless you just say it is dark when on the far left or right, and bright when it is between the two moons, and inverted of the moon behind it when it overlaps. --Ark42
  • It seems like it would be best if there were a table of the observed moons with a date for every day since the collision. That way anyone who came to this page would know for sure what's gone before so that new-comers can follow the discussion and add worthwhile theories instead of just reading what other people think might happen. I'd do it, but I don't have a reliable enough list. If anyone else does it, please just delete this. --Kilor
  • Er.. so you want to add dates? Okay, I can add dates to the big table. --LucySpace 14:06, 7 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Thanks. I think it helps. --Kilor
  • I think the minimoon has 11 positions in its orbit, like so:


where R is in front of Ronald, G in front of Grimace, and X is where the minimoon is not visible. It moves forward 2 positions each day; that's why it went from R to G without stopping in between. It also explains why the minimoon was hidden behind Ronald, but didn't hide behind Grimace. This odd-numbered cycle will make the moon phases very irregular; it will take 16x11 = 176 days for the complete cycle to repeat. —Dentarthurdent(T,C) 15:48, 7 June 2006 (CDT)

    • That's ridiculous. It's not even funny.
  • I've been keeping track of moon phases and the effects they've had on stat potions and bloodys mary since yesterday. This will hopefully allow someone to focus their theories on the new effects of Ronald, Grimace, and Hamburglar.

Moon Phases Experiment Chart

I'll keep this going until a full cycle has passed.

--Snap E Tom 20:40, 7 June 2006 (CDT)

  • Hmm... So this time the minimoon on its own and lit gave +2 thingies, but last time it gave +1... maybe it's more because it's in front of the moons this time? Oh, and I like your theory, Dentarthurdent... it certainly fits so far. Phlip 23:26, 7 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Okay, this guy explained it a bit better. As far as the color goes: it seems that when the mini-moon is in the front-center position, it's white; when it's in the rear or side positions, it's black; and when it's in front of a moon, it's the opposite of that quarter of that moon.
    • Actually, he's saying that it's white when between moons, not just front and center. He's only saying that it's black at the sides; in the rear it's either hidden or white. This way actually agrees with the pic of the suggested eleven minimoon positions above and with the observed phases. Your summary actually contradicts the chart for 06/05/2006 (Calvember 5), where the eleven positions theory places the minimoon behind the moons and nearer Grimace, but not blocked by it.

As you pointed out, Phlip, the front-center position gives +2 to light, instead of +1. That means we'll eventually have a +8 day, with +100% wereseal, like so: Moon4.gif Minimoon.gif Moon6.gifDentarthurdent(T,C) 23:42, 7 June 2006 (CDT)

    • There's also the two myst days, Moon5.gif Minimoon.gif Moon3.gif and Moon5.gif Minimoon.gif Moon7.gif. The first will happen on 24 August, 2006 (Bor 5, 75 days from today), by my calculations. Phlip 00:38, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Is someone going to fix the mushroom growing page for the gloomy black mushroom once this is figured out?
  • If we also extrapolate that when a large moon blocks the moonlet, that it acts as a +2 dark, then it explains the anomolous grue attacking

on June 6th.--Ashallond 19:52, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

  • I think the light value from the moonlet is +1 when it is white (except for the +2 in the front center position), 0 when it is on the far sides, and -1 when it is dark and blocks a white piece of Ronald or Grimace. The Grue must have been changed to attack on light ranging from 0 to 5, instead of the old 0 to 4, to makeup for the additional light that happens on a lot of days now, just to prevent the Grue from being too useless now. --Ark42 *EDIT* Here is a prediction based on the 11-day cycle theory, which will create a full 176-day cycle between all of the moons -
  • On the radio Xeno just said that a full cycle was "about half a year". He intentionally didn't state the exact length (for fear of reverse-engineering) but this is consistant with the 16x11 theory. Phlip 00:10, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

Sweet! I've moved this table (with disclaimers) to the front page, and created a "Moons (before the Comet)" page for the old content. (Also, I added links to Phlip's preceding comment) --DirkDiggler 02:03, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

  • If TPTB install the ParserFunctions extension, per my suggestion on Discussion#Since we are changing things around anyways...., I've written a collection of templates that will generate the moon table for 16 days, centred on today (well, 5 days before and 10 days after). So it will have enough for planning ahead (including a full cycle of stat days) without having to draw up a table with 176 rows. It uses a lot {{#expr}} and {{#switch}} to generate it all though, so I'll have to wait until the ParserFunctions are installed to set it up. I'll be able to rewrite {{moons}} with it too, so that custom extension won't need to be updated. Phlip 22:11, 9 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Check out here, I've graphed out the progression of "Lightness" throughout the 176-day pattern (day 1 being the first of June - conveniently the first phase of both Ronald and Grimace, and the first position of the mini-moon). Phlip 01:31, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
  • Well based on today's moons, I would say the minimoon color is based on the left or right edges of Ronald and Grimace, depending on which it is closest to. When it is in the front center position, it takes on the value of both edges, and in the case of Carlvember 8, this lets it get 2x light value. --Ark42
    • Hmm... interesting theory, and fits everything we have so far... I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens... by your prediction tomorrow the minimoon will be light, yes? Phlip 23:25, 10 June 2006 (CDT)
      • The simplest explaination so far would be to just count the color of the edge slivers of the big moons, so yes, tomorrow the minimoon should be lit and on the far left, since Ronald's left edge sliver will be lit. It may be more complex though, who knows. --Ark42
    • What, then, will happen on Boozember 3d, when the moons are centered next to a light and a dark segment :
Moon3.gif Minimoon.gif Moon2.gif
Moon3.gif Minimoon.gif Moon2.gif
? --DirkDiggler 00:31, 12 June 2006 (CDT)
      • Lit, but only +1, I would guess... Phlip 23:13, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
      • I would think that would give the minimoon a light value of 1. When in the front center position, the minimoon light value is the sum of the right edge of Ronald and the left edge of Grimace. On Carlvember 8, this was 1+1=2, so on Boozember 3, 0+1=1. There is no purpose to counting "darkness" values - just start with 0 and count moon lightness. The only time you every subtract is when a lit piece of the big moon is covered by the dark minimoon, such as on Carlvember 3, where I would say R=2, G=1, mini=-1, 2+1-1 = 2 total light. --Ark42
      • Myself, I suspect we'll see a half-lit minimoon with a light value of +1. That's assuming there's half-lit minimoon images that we just haven't seen yet...--Temporary man 19:52, 13 June 2006 (CDT)
        • I think they use the same image for +1 and +2 in the front center spot, since they used the same image for +1 on the back center and far sides spots as they did for the front center +2. --Ark42
          • It seems this prediction is correct - the moon is indeed today front and centre, lit and giving +1. Phlip 23:20, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

Let me get this straight, its been worrying me for a while now... The minimoon DOES NOT affect stat days, only light values right? If so, could someone reflect this on the main page?--Blahking 01:31, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

Possible trouble phases left (unless I fudged 'em up when transcribing):
06/08/06 Carlvember 8
Moon8.gif Minimoon.gif Moon4.gif
Right side Ronald lit, Left side Grimace lit (minimoon could depend on either)... or could always be lit
06/19/06 Boozember 3
Moon3.gif Minimoon.gif Moon2.gif
Right side Ronald dark, Left side Grimace lit (minimoon could depend on left of grimace (part closest to minimoon))... or could always be lit
06/30/06 Dougtember 6
Moon6.gif Minimoon.gif Moon7.gif
Right side Ronald lit, Left side Grimace dark, If minimoon lit, does not depend on either and is always lit.
Moon6.gif Minimoon.gif Moon7.gif
Right side Ronald lit, Left side Grimace dark, If minimoon dark, may depend on the left side of grimace.

Well, now that ParserFunctions have been installed (yay!) I've rolled out the big moon table, including pcentella's hypothesis for the Grimacite equipment formula. I also got rid of {{rewrite}} and rewrote bits of the text to be less uncertain... it seems reasonably clear what's going on now. Phlip 00:21, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Days of Light Discrepancy

I checked the calculation of the distribution of light and came up with a slight discrepancy - 32 days with 4 degrees of light (instead of 33) and 43 days with 5 degrees of light (instead of 42). It changes the average light from 4.27 to 4.28, a really insignificant change, but still I'd like to have the correct figures. Can whoever first calculated the distribution crosscheck with me? I get 4 degrees of light on days 4, 15, 19, 35, 42, 46, 47, 56, 58, 63, 67, 72, 75, 89, 95, 102, 105, 106, 115, 116, 120, 121, 132, 134, 135, 139, 143, 153, 163, 164, 167, 174 and 5 degrees of light on days 6, 10, 11, 13, 20, 23, 27, 29, 39, 40, 41, 43, 52, 52, 57, 68, 69, 70, 73, 78, 87, 88, 94, 100, 101, 103, 104, 107, 108, 117, 126, 136, 137, 138, 141, 142, 148, 152, 154, 166, 169, 171, 172. Thanks. --Gymnosophist 05:32, 16 August 2006 (CDT)

  • I wrote a program extracting data from Full Moon Table to avoid human error:
    Array of light for the 176 days:
    0, 2, 2, 4, 7, 5, 6, 6, 3, 5, 5, 7, 5, 6, 4, 2, 0, 0, 4, 5, 6, 6, 5, 3, 3, 6, 5, 6, 5, 6, 2, 2, 0, 2, 4, 3, 6, 6, 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 6, 7, 4, 4, 3, 0, 1, 2, 5, 7, 5, 6, 4, 5, 4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 4, 1, 0, 1, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6, 4, 6, 7, 5, 2, 3, 0, 1, 3, 3, 8, 6, 5, 5, 4, 6, 6, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 1, 1, 3, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 3, 1, 1, 1, 4, 4, 5, 7, 6, 4, 4, 6, 6, 7, 7, 5, 3, 3, 0, 2, 3, 4, 7, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4, 6, 5, 5, 4, 2, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 5, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 6, 3, 2, 1, 1, 4, 4, 7, 5, 4, 3, 5, 6, 5, 5, 7, 4, 3, 3.

    Number of days for each possible degree of light from 0 to 8:
    8, 12, 12, 19, 33, 42, 34 ,15, 1

    Edit: Wait, maybe the data on "Full Moon Table" was wrong due to human error? Where'd you get your data from?--Dehstil (t|c) 21:47, 23 August 2006 (CDT)
  • You're right - my error. I'd used a bunch of goofy Excel formulas to figure things out. One formula had a slight error, meaning that I was off by one light value on day 136 (10/14/2006). Thanks! --Gymnosophist 03:42, 24 August 2006 (CDT)

Crimbo 2007 Moon

Around 4:00 Central Time, Dec. 7, there is a new moon: "December 07 A new moon has appeared in the sky. It's a Crimbo miracle!" That was the message. It looks like a big chunck of... rock. --Wavedash 16:11, 7 December 2007 (CST)

  • I dunno, it looks kind of familiar to me... --Quietust (t|c) 16:18, 7 December 2007 (CST)
    • "That's no moon." --Itsatrap 17:15, 7 December 2007 (CST)
  • Oh.... this could get interesting... --Wavedash 16:19, 7 December 2007 (CST)
    • No don't tell me Uncle Crimbo is going to be killed. I don't think I can stand a second one being killed. --Chunky_boo 16:22, 7 December 2007 (CST)
      • No worries - we're just going to assimilate him. --Grimdel 16:44, 7 December 2007 (CST)
  • Same day as the to the future thing adventure appeared last crimboween? Image named Borg12? Was told it was moving twords us, gonna take us over, and replace with clockwork? Yep we're screwed, at least I warned a few characters before maintaince, and equipped my clockwork apparatus, good luck during the apocalipse. --Diablo 2 22:00, 7 December 2007 (CST)
  • if you look carefully, you'll notice that the minimoon isn't there anymore, either. Perhaps the minimoon has decided to come closer to us, perhaps for a nice crash?--HikaruYami 22:04, 7 December 2007 (CST)
    • Actually I think that the minimoon has just gone behind one of the larger moons as it does often. --Chunky_boo 22:21, 7 December 2007 (CST)
  • I copied the newmoonpad.gif from the game and the borg12.gif and shrunk the borg12.gif to the same size and darkened the coloring in PSP and they're nearly identical due probably to being resized and the stars taken out.--OlyveOyle 02:16, 8 December 2007 (CST)
  • I don't think it can be ignored that the last year, the "not-too-distant future" involved the crimborg collective. The new moon and the previous statement are almost certainly related --Valter 09:05, 8 December 2007 (CST)

Can anyone with a telescope please attempt to look at the stars and see if anything happens? --Devion 11:32, 8 December 2007 (CST)

  • Hmmm... that's a good idea. Probably not though, Jick would do something that exclusive. --Wavedash 16:16, 8 December 2007 (CST)

"December 10 Some amateur astronomers with telescopes in their campsites have determined that the new object in the sky is no moon -- it's a space station!"

That proves it. It just occurred to me that the telescopes could have been in preparation for this December 10 update. Is it possible? I doubt it. --Blazingthunder 16:55, 10 December 2007 (CST)

  • I also doubt it, considering I couldn't see the moon through my telescope. Though, to be fair, mine's only been upgraded once, but that should be more than enough to get a close look at any moon. --Quietust (t|c) 17:02, 10 December 2007 (CST)
  • I have a fully upgraded telescope, but I haven't seen any new messages either. --Andy00 18:00, 10 December 2007 (CST)

$10 says that something will happen when both moons are black. --Wavedash 16:57, 11 December 2007 (CST)

Or maybe there will be something on Dependence Day in reference to the movie Independence Day. Misstrain 17:30, 11 December 2007 (CST)

  • I don't think so, that seems a bit late... maybe not, though. --Wavedash 14:27, 12 December 2007 (CST)

QUICK, someone give me 10 dollars. I was soo right. --Wavedash 22:46, 12 December 2007 (CST)