Jump to content

the trees have eyes

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About the trees have eyes

  • Rank
    Council Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,035 profile views
  1. the trees have eyes

    Do You Think Sam Will Forge His Chain?

    Yes but not in the timeline of ASOIAF - Like the Stark children growing to adulthood there is not enough room or time for that in the story itself. I doubt we'll get a detailed LOTR-style epilogue outlining the subsequent lives of the main characters but I think there will be something of the fates of the surviving characters and enough to make clear that Sam will become / becomes a maester. I think Randyl and Dickon Tarly are in for the chop and that Gilly's babe will end up inheriting Horn Hill. I can't see Sam inheriting (he would be a fish out of water and hate it) and whether or not the NW endures at the end of the series he is likely to be buried in books, either at Castle Black or the Citadel in Oldtown.
  2. the trees have eyes

    How far south will the Others get?

    There's meant to be "a time for wolves". I know the title of the last novel was changed from that to "A Dream of Spring" but the total destruction of the North seems at odds with that. And though it's lost in time and myth the original destruction of The Long Night doesn't seem as total as what you have in mind.
  3. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Varys a Woman?

    Yes, I'm in the "no" camp (nor, for the record, do I believe he is a merman). I'm waiting for you to make one of your "little jokes" or your arguments against the poll's premise (or that of any of the polls). I'm not holding my breath mind.
  4. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Varys a Woman?

    You mean there is a textually established incident of a young girl temporarily adopting the disguise of a young boy among complete strangers, one of whom (Gendry) still manages to see through her ruse after a few weeks. It's not as if Varys would have to maintain his disguise for decades under intense scrutiny at the heart of Government where one false slip would be all a rival like LF needed to get rid of him or one jolly jape by Aerys or Robert at his expense would have a rather awkward denouement.
  5. the trees have eyes

    Do You Think Sam Will Forge His Chain?

    Yeah, Euron's success has been so quick and easy so far that he's due for one of the rather terminal roadblocks that GRRM likes to send his characters's way. I think his role is more likely to be another type of Renly (or Robb) promising much but not delivering and ultimately sinking fast.
  6. the trees have eyes

    Victarion GreyJoy is a Jerk

    Unfortunately not, Vic is hedging his bets, seeking power from both R'hollor and The Drowned God: A Dance with Dragons - Victarion I The captain answered with a nod, grim-faced, then called for the seven girls he had claimed to be brought on deck, the loveliest of all those found aboard the Willing Maiden. He kissed them each upon the cheeks and told them of the honor that awaited them, though they did not understand his words. Then he had them put aboard the fishing ketch that they had captured, cut her loose, and had her set afire. "With this gift of innocence and beauty, we honor both the gods," he proclaimed, as the warships of the Iron Fleet rowed past the burning ketch. "Let these girls be reborn in light, undefiled by mortal lust, or let them descend to the Drowned God's watery halls, to feast and dance and laugh until the seas dry up." Near the end, before the smoking ketch was swallowed by the sea, the cries of the seven sweetlings changed to joyous song, it seemed to Victarion Greyjoy. Sacrificing virgins for favourable winds is one thing but imagining the screams of people burning to death as a "joyous song" is an act (or conceit) of a true believer.
  7. the trees have eyes

    How far south will the Others get?

    Winterfell. Can't be wiping out all of the North. If the "dead things in the water" are able to travel by sea I can see raids along the coast down to KL or Lannisport but not effective conquest.
  8. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Daario actually Euron?

    Always good (and seldom easy) to admit when you're wrong. Not to be too irksome but how many "theories" do you have? Most of the polls here are just rehashes of old topics but, leaving that aside for the moment, if you have 100 theories and 99 of them are wrong are you really vindicated?
  9. the trees have eyes

    The High Sparrow's Plan

    Oh he wants power. He would rather be the power behind the throne than a theocratic ruler but he does not want to be a tame High Septon tending only to spiritual matters. The refounding of the Order of the Stars and Swords shows that clearly. The struggle taking place between him and Cersei seems grounded in the medieval papacy's power struggle with the Holy Roman Emperor and other European monarchs. What's not clear is how revolutionary he is. If he settles for tending to the needs of the poor (in the face of the neglect of the monarchy and nobility to do so) and squeezing money and concessions out of the Crown to better the position and status of the Church he'll be tolerated as a potential ally. If he seeks to make more millenarian changes or to redistribute property he'll run into the same backlash that any social movement or peasant's revolt did in a highly hierarchical society with power, wealth and military expertise concentrated in the Crown and nobilty. I'm not convinced he's a Savonarola type figure though: he may be a zealot with more limited goals (if that's not a contradiction in terms!), wary of risking what he's already gained through overreach. Treatment of Margaery Tyrell will settle that one as making an enemy out of Mace with potentially 100,000 men at his call is a good way to judge the flexibility of his aims and convictions.
  10. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Sweetrobin the Son of Littlefinger?

    No. Lysa knows who she slept with and when. Her history of miscarriages with Jon led to only one live birth, the sickly Robert. I understand the appeal to some of Petyr unknowingly poisoning his own son but that's one of those "better" versions of the story than the one GRRM wrote that people come up with from time to time.
  11. the trees have eyes

    Is x character a psychopath?

    Nah, ruthless =/= psychopathic. Bronn kills for profit and personal advancement not because he's mentally deranged and can't control his impulses or has a need to kill for pleasure or out of obsession. No Ramsay's hunting and killing of women for sport, his apparent derangement and lack of remorse, self control or any shred of empathy is the textbook example of a psychopath. Yes Septon Utt's serial sexual abuse and murder of children shows a similar derangement and lack of impulse control though his realization that what he is doing is wrong and his demand that he be scourged afterwards as a punishment shows a little more social awareness. It's not really empathy though and, similar to how medieval monks scourged themselves to rid themselves of impure thoughts or as expiation of guilt for any trivial sins, it looks more like he is going through a ritual to clear his conscience and expunge his guilt so he can move on without any deeper reflections on his actions and with a "clear" conscience. Yes And Biter? Whether the filed teeth and brutal training in the illegal fighting trade in Flea Bottom made him what he is, or whether it was there in his character before, he is clearly deranged and his penchant for cannibalism only adds to the horror. Given he can't speak and we never see him act independently it's hard to look beyond the horror of his actions but left to his own devices he would probably kill fairly easily and routinely as it is all he seems to know. Yes Roose and Littlefinger lack any real empathy and are fairly diabolical but their actions are tightly controlled and carefully reasoned and always taken out of calculated self-interest not an irrepressible urge. Neither displays any particular mental problems - an unhealthy egotism and ruthlessness is undesirable but not evidence of illness - and don't partake in any unnecessary killing to sate any twisted appetites. No Likewise the Tickler and Clayton Suggs are torturers by profession, however sickening that may sound. They may enjoy their work but a certain detachment from their victims (and what they are doing to them) is probably necessary for their own mental state, however troubled that may be, and their torture is as directed by their superiors not inflicted on the general populace in an indiscriminate or uncontrolled fashion. No The same is true of Amory Lorch, who is merely a soldier (and a knight) selected for a scorched earth and terror campaign in the Riverlands as a military tactic. No Gregor falls somewhere between Lorch and Ramsay. He is a soldier given specific orders by Tywin in the Riverlands campaign and has no problem carrying them out. His impulse control is poor though, as with the needless rape and murder of Elia and the manner of baby Aegon's murder at KL, the rape of the innkeeper's daughter (it being clear from Chiswyck's recollection that this is unlikely to be a unique occurrence) or the killing of the spectator (a child) who got to close to him in his duel with Oberyn, his attempt to kill Loras after he lost the joust in the Hand's Torney (and the killing of his own horse), or indeed the early childhood scarring of his brother for stealing a toy, the strange death of his father and the apparent death of at least two wives and disappearance of a number of servants at his House. I'm not sure this makes him a psychopath, rather a terribly dangerous person with a very short temper and a propensity for awful violence when triggered. He certainly doesn't exhibit a need to kill as opposed to a readiness to do so when ordered or when provoked though more knowledge of circumstances at his family home might change that view. Maybe And Vargo Hoat? How much is his wide scale use of amputation a deliberate tactic of terror to sow fear rather than to meet a psychological urge to carry it out? It's undeniably brutal and loathsome but is it the brutal calling card or trademark of a mercenary letting prospective employers know he will do whatever dirty work they need doing? He's quite clear that Brienne is not to be raped as she is a valuable hostage while maiden and can control his impulses (unlike Rorge & Shagwell) until after her father has declined to pay a suitable ransom. Even Jaime's amputation has a practical and political purpose rather than being mindless violence. All the slobbering, lisping and amputations make it hard to see past the fairly monstrous image to assess whether he is deranged rather than brutal and ruthless. Maybe The Weeper has been mentioned. Again, how much does he want to sow fear in his enemies and how much is he unable to control his urges? Does he inflict similar punishments on other wildlings or only on the NW or victims south of the Wall to instill fear in pursuers? Tribal warfare is often horribly savage by our standards with the taking of heads and the cutting off of the genitals and placing them in the mouths of dead enemies being historical practices that this is on a par with. Without knowing more about him all we can say is that this is terror as a tactic against enemies. Maybe Victarion. No, just no. A fairly limited man but with a full emotional range and whose violence is unleashed in battle not in satisfying psychological urges and who displays no mental abnormality whatsoever. No Euron. A very similar character to Littlefinger or Roose. The mere act of (apparently) ordering Balon's murder adds to his sinister reputation but then history is full of examples of sibling conflict or murder when power is at stake. The memory of "the squeal of a rusty hinge" in Aeron's chapters seems to hint at childhood abuse by his elder brother which is a textbook sign of a disturbed personality (displaying lack of empathy and the willingness to harm others in fulfilling personal urges from a young age) but an abusive personality is not necessarily a psychopathic one. The crewing of Silence by mute slaves, the apparent feeding of one of the captured warlocks to the unknowing others for no discernible reason other then cruelty and the enjoyment of it and the chopping of Baelor Blacktyde into seven pieces in mockery of his belief in the Seven rather than the Drowned God is all unquestionably dark. He certainly indulges his appetites more and has the superficial charm, dishonesty, guile and shallow emotional response that many psychopaths do but his cruelty is not indiscriminate or unhinged and nor does his violence shock his contemporaries the way, say, Ramsay's, Utt's or Biter's would. He's dark and dangerous but he's not mentally ill. No
  12. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Daario actually Euron?

    No, this is simply a false paradigm. The "invading" army in this case is actually a liberating army which is made up of ultra-disciplined Unsullied, a handful of Dothraki, hordes of ragtag former slaves who are hot for justice against slavers (and some revenge too) and equally hot for freeing the poor buggers held in slavery as they were so recently and some mercenaries who understand all too clearly where Dany's sympathies lie and, after both Astapor and Yunkai, what she wants to achieve. They would be fine with butchering a few Ghiscari elite or soldiers, but entirely not so with murdering slave children. And if they were so inclined for the lulz both they and we know very clearly what fate would await them if Dany found out what they were doing. It's an absurd and unnecessary risk. Dany already intends to capture Meereen so there is nothing to be gained by riling her, except of course if you were a defender seeking to demoralize her forces and bait her into a mistake. Nor do the defending forces in this case give a shit about the slave element of the local population, slaves not being part of the population but it's prisoners and victims who they routinely train and have fight to death in the fighting pits for their amusement. The Meereenese don't see their slaves as human beings while conversely Dany's forces are either indifferent (at worst) or see them as valued assets to be protected, a position normally reserved for the defenders. I'm sure you are aware of all this and it's frustrating to waste time in correcting these breathtaking distortions of obvious facts so please try and be remotely real in the situations you portray in order to make your case. First. this is not a pissing contest about the 163 and Dany's response though you are deflecting it in that direction. It's about whether there is any reason to suspect that Daario is Euron and whether you can provide any support for that claim. YOU introduced the wild claim that Daario murdered the children in pursuance of this argument which is a weird response to being challenged on lack of evidence and is leading us further down the rabbit hole of your assumptions built on assumptions which leads us to Second, finding a body is indeed not an "airtight case" for that person being the murderer. God forbid anyone should ever report finding a corpse for fear of your keen nose smelling the whiff of responsibility. Without going into forensics if you're caught in the act of nailing up a dead child then presumably you would be covered in blood and the wounds would be fresh, unless of course the victim had been dead for long enough for the wounds to have stopped bleeding but then you have to wonder how and when Daario killed this child (and all the others) and how long he kept it (them) without anyone noticing. That logistical problem leads into the logistical problem of how he nailed a child up on a post on his own (many times over) and why, if he was found at the scene, no one asked him why he had a hammer and a bag of nails - unless of course he nailed them up with his swords? Means, motive and opportunity. The Meereenese have all three and plenty of time to do this before Dany's forces arrive. Daario, acting alone has none of these things however much it appeals to you. He has no slave children to dispose of, no need to try and curry favour with Dany who is already indebted to him for Yunkai (and attracted to him) or to point her attention at Meereen where it is already fixed, and no opportunity to single-handedly carry out an atrocity on a huge scale over 163 miles in complete secrecy. It's established in the text. If you want evidence then you can join the brigade who claim that Rhaegar never died on the Trident because there is no pov that clearly saw his face and recognized him so it's fine to argue it was someone else in his armour. I've outlined in several posts and above the case for the Meereense as guilty parties that is established by the author (unlike any such case for Daario) and the fairly obvious and reasonable deductions that are not spelled out by the author because the reader can be expected to make them for him or herself. No, it's not curious. Meereen has a ruling council not a monarch or commander in chief so the ruling body is who Dany deems responsible. No Meereense are introduced to the reader until after the sack so for the reader there is no particular benefit or mystery to no individual or group of individuals being introduced / named, blamed and executed in the space of a page. Afterwards, when we move into the city politics of Meereen there is a point to spending ink in creating and building up Meereenese characters and that is what GRRM does. There is also a certain grisly symmetry between the 163 Meereenses nobles being as nameless and undifferentiated as the slave children, almost as if their power and wealth made them no more valuable than the children of slaves. No, you're making incorrect assumptions. What I said in a single half sentence was I find it odd that none of them protested their innocence when she demanded a very specific number of their lives in reprisal. You seem to find it easier to misconstrue that as a different statement altogether and build a bunch of conclusions around it. I do believe that the Meereenese who arranged the murders would have known exactly why she was so angry and those who had no idea what she was on about would be desperate to find out and try and save themselves. If on the other hand it's not a state secret and they do know then they probably didn't waste their breath begging for mercy: the Karstark guard who begged for mercy with the argument that he knew what Rickard Karstark was going to do in murdering the Frey / Lannister prisoners at Riverrun but wasn't involved as he merely watched being a good pointer here as to what to expect. Unlike the luckless guard the Meereenese could at least fight like cats among themselves for who was to be handed over and who spared. None of which of course has a whit to do with Daario being Euron. If only that was all there was to it, hey? Um, no. You took a half sentence on one particular point and have tried to make that the main point. This is distortion not comprehension of what I have said. No, that's not right. Clearly some of them took the decision and ordered it, others indeed all of them may have known. I've elaborated on that above. You're confusing whether Dany punished innocent as well as guilty parties (almost certainly) with whether the lack of culpability of individual Meereenese nobles is some overall exoneration that adds weight to your indictment of Daario. It's not and it doesn't. Ah, so you continue with the reduction ad absurdum rather than deal with the logic of the taunt, which is bang on the money. I guess you're the one who's got nothing! And you continue with the blatant falsehood that the slave children are "Meereenese" and part of the Ghiscari population equally as likely to suffer depredations from the invading army as the Ghiscari elite rather than their release being the reason Dany's liberating army is marching on Meereen in the first place. Please make credible arguments. While you have attempted to make this case it rests on nothing other than a misrepresentation of the slaves as the "local Ghiscari population" and Dany's liberating army as an "invading army" unable to understand the difference or comprehend why they are marching on Meereen. This has no merit as an argument and is all too resonant of your attempt to argue that there was equal reason to suspect that Daario is Euron as there is to suspect that the Gravedigger on the Quiet Isle is The Hound. It's a false comparison and there is no equivalence between the two arguments just as there is no comparison between the Meereenese and the liberating army being equal suspects when it comes to motive however many times you state it as if it were so. Why is the burden of proof on you? Well, why do you think? The culpability is established in the text so if you want to present an alternative narrative it's up to you to establish it. I don't need to prove Daario is innocent any more than I have to prove that Dany didn't nail them up while sleepwalking. The burden of proof is on you to back up your accusation. I'm not trying to do any such thing. I don't need to prove Daario is innocent as (bearing in mind that's not how trials work as you prove guilt) there is no credible case to argue for his guilt. What evidence at each of the 163 crime scenes do you have and what assessment of the means, motive and opportunity you must believe he had convince you of his industrial scale of abduction, mutilation, murder and diligent nailing up of corpses in total secrecy? I'm curious. All those things can be and have been easily explained for the Meereenese as authors of the act. Nah. The reasons for the Meereense to act this way and their means, motive and opportunity are very easy to establish. The idea that I have no reason to consider them culpable other than an ignorant dismissal of the "prime suspect" Daario just indicates how you think about this. In reality the Meereenese are established as the perpetrators and indeed they are the only logical perpetrators, Daario lacking all of means, motive and opportunity to be the perpetrator as I'm tired of reiterating. Nah, the point of the parody is just distraction and obfuscation to avoid having to rebut the very logical argument for the Merreenese to taunt Dany and demoralize her forces. The fact that you consider Daario actually did this in the sure knowledge that Dany and every single one of her varied followers would believe the Meereenese culpable by following that same exercise in logic shows you understand clearly enough and are just deflecting from being unable to address it effectively. Well, just so you know, quoting selectively from a single passage while ignoring the inconvenient parts that don't support your argument does precious little to establish any credibility and certainly raises concerns over your objectivity. I quoted that part as you seemed to be indulging in Dany bashing by simplifying her reflections on the reprisal killings and ignoring her post hoc realization that she made a mistake. If there was a point to your passage other than to try and make her appear unreflective (and presumably blind to Daario's duplicity and real nature - something hardly born out be her later internal reflections on him) it was not clear. Not at all. Again you act as if that was the whole argument rather than a mere observation that it's odd that none of them protested their innocence. And again it seems more to illustrate your own thinking: that because Dany had 163 of them killed in reprisal without establishing their guilt then it's ok to assume all of them were innocent and ergo, prime suspect Daario must be guilty! I mean that is the core of your argument: we have not proven forensically or by confession the guilt of specific Meereenese and Daario is a fishy kind of guy hence he must have done it. It's amusing you give the Meereenese so much benefit of the doubt but hold Daario to an entirely different standard! Wut? No, man, you are expounding your own reasoning for why you think it was Daario not the Meereenese and attributing to me the thought processes that you went through and rejected in reaching that conclusion as if I went through your thought processes but reached a different conclusion. That's not the argument I'm making. I'm not obsessed by Daario and I think there are both compelling (and rather obvious) reasons for why it was the Meereenese and why it could not have been Daario and I've outlined them. Only someone approaching this from your pov on Daario could try and reduce the whole argument to the odd paradigm you did there. Interesting. All distraction of course but you wanted to justify your approach so meh. This is not the place for it but as to the bolded I would argue none of the three. She was angry and thought she was carrying out justice but she was wrong. Whether that meets your definition of evil is up to you. However I can't quite help thinking that your hostility towards Dany lends you to both the interpretation that the Meereenese were victims of her "stupidity, craziness and evilness [sic]" and of course the cherry on the top of that line of reasoning, that she was duped by Daario (the true villain) into murdering innocents. In other words it's not that you really care about incriminating Daario here (sorry, Euron) as much as you do about Dany bashing. Ah, ok, so all of the Stormcrows are in cahoots with this then? It's not as if there is an awful risk in carrying this out that would see them all brutally executed. And sellswords are known for their loyalty and closemouthed nature, they are utterly loyal to Daario and will unquestioningly do what he demands rather than betraying him to Dany for favour and advancement much as he betrayed his own two co-captains at Yunkai. Or...not. There is even less reason for the Stormcrows collectively to carry out this incredibly risky enterprise than there is for Daario alone as there are no conceivable benefits to them and very terminal consequences should it come to light. The same analysis applies to Daario acting alone but the advantages of acting alone (secrecy) are more than outweighed by the practical difficulties of sneaking off to carry out wholesale butchery on an industrial scale over an expanded period of time without anyone noticing. Barristan is "Arstan" at this point, a mere squire in service to Strong Belwas. Only after he kills Mero and proves himself to Dany in the capture of Meereen does he gain a position of command. The only real attraction of the argument for Daario given the logistical and practical difficulties and the totally unnecessary risk involved seems to be as a gotcha moment. He's untrustworthy, sure, and may well be one of Dany's three betrayals, but I don't see how this would have changed the story at all (except to complicate post-conquest government in Meereen and there would have been resistance anyway), any convincing reason for him to have done this (to benefit either as Daario or Euron) or how this whole line of thought helps to argue that Daario and Euron are the same person. Rather it looks to re-imagine the text in a way you find more appealing while glossing over the very large problems of doing so.
  13. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Daario actually Euron?

    Your fiction that the Grand Masters did not have 163 children nailed up on every milepost on the way to Meereen to taunt Dany once they knew she had freed the slaves of Astapor and Yunkai is bizarre and frankly silly. You can play devil's advocate and say that Daario did this in complete secrecy and that the poor Meereenese had nothing to do with it but that is not an argument supported by a shred of whisper of a hint anywhere in the text, nor one that should be given more than a second's consideration before calling it the pure bull that it is. The author shows what he wants and needs to for us to comprehend the guilt of the Meereenese and this is clearly established. There is of course plenty of opportunity for the Meereenese to protest their innocence but absolutely no need to include any further text establishing that they not Daario were responsible for the atrocity. Quick disclaimer to say "they" being certain members of the elite, not all of them and the entire episode is well set up by GRRM to make us see how revenge only begets more conflict: quite simply two wrongs don't make a right. Way to go champ, erect a strawman and batter it down like a true righteous internet hero. Except I never said any of that of course. This is pure fabrication and quite absurdly ad hominem. Take your own advice: "Dude, relax", remember? And by the way this fabrication is actually fairly contemptible. You have a real habit of shifting the argument and going on the attack when your arguments are empty but it's a fairly sly debating ploy that I have little time for. Don't be childish or unusually stupid. Taunting an enemy is fairly common in warfare, as with the Yunkai pissing off the battlements to show their contempt for and lack of fear of Dany's ragtag army. It shows defiance to the enemy thus boosting morale and resolve on your own side while either dispiriting the enemy when they realise they are in for a hard fight rather than a surrender or, even better, enraging them and causing them to make poor tactical decisions. The Meereenese believe they are impregnable behind their walls (and indeed Dany has to send a strike party in through the sewers to free the slaves in order to take the city from within), that murdering children will demoralise her ex-slave followers as they see what grizzly fate waits for them also and will bait Dany into launching an ill-considered frontal assault out of rage / to save more slaves that they will easily repel. Of course they do succeed in enraging her and she does lose her temper and her judgment but not in the way they were hoping for.... So far you have reacted to a number of comments that you lack evidence for your argument with the imposition of an ass pull (Daario did it), a pretty contemptible strawman on collective guilt and now another manufactured and childish parody of how the Meereenese acted rather than actually attempting to understand their actions. It's a pretty poor showing all round. If you could only follow through the passage you quote selectively with such close-minded certainty and see the doubt in her mind as to what she had ordered and the beginning of regret and remorse you might have a more balanced picture of her frame of mind but no one would make the mistake of accusing you of objectivity here. A Storm of Swords - Daenerys VI "We will rid ourselves of the corpses, then. Starting with those in the plaza below. Grey Worm, will you see to it?" "The queen commands, these ones obey." "Best bring sacks as well as shovels, Worm," Brown Ben counseled. "Well past ripe, those ones. Falling off those poles in bits and pieces, and crawling with . . ." "He knows. So do I." Dany remembered the horror she had felt when she had seen the Plaza of Punishment in Astapor. I made a horror just as great, but surely they deserved it. Harsh justice is still justice. Your Grace," said Missandei, "Ghiscari inter their honored dead in crypts below their manses. If you would boil the bones clean and return them to their kin, it would be a kindness." The widows will curse me all the same. "Let it be done." None of this exhonerates the particular Meereenese who gave the orders or incriminates Daario so it seems rather a bit of distraction and Dany bashing you wanted to get off your chest rather than a considered argument. You've applied a reductio ad absurrdum line of reasoning to the Merreenese and now you infantilize Dany's thinking. Seems everyone is dumb or easily manipulated except the shining beacon of perspicacity that is you. Give over. It would help to present credible arguments rather than lampoon the characters in order to discredit what they do or think. Once gain, attack is the best form of defense it seems. Where did Daario happen upon 163 children, did he have them in his saddle bags? Did the Merreenese leave groups of children conveniently along the way with bags of nails and hammers so Daario could do this at the drop of a hat? Or did he steal children from Dany's entourage and no one was the wiser or noticed? What need did Daario have to win favour with Dany when he had already won Yunkai for her by bringing the Stormcrows over to her side and earning her trust and favour? What a complete mystery that the only trained cavalry that Dany possesses should go on scouting missions rather than Barristan leading a platoon of Unsullied on foot. What a total and utter mystery, I'm dumbfounded by it Like any poor conspiracy theorist you overlook the obvious and entirely logical explanation because you want something more edgy. Good. The first part of dealing with a problem is admitting you have one.
  14. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Daario actually Euron?

    Eh, don't mistake disagreement and exasperation with your approach for something more serious like contempt. The irony of a "hypothetical" restatement of the text, and let's be honest it's a deliberate contradiction, in a discussion about the absence of compelling evidence is pretty glaring. No, i don't think there is anything to suggest Daario did this and I find it odd that none of the Merreenese protested their innocence when Dany demanded a very specific number of their lives in reprisal. You can make any stuff up and then say "it's not specifically contradicted in the text and I find it likely / appealing so it's a valid approach" but that's a rather pointless game: much better to actually follow the text and support what you argue (even provocative hypotheticals) with something solid. But I guess theoryworld would be a smaller place if that were the case.
  15. the trees have eyes

    Poll: Is Daario actually Euron?

    And, let's not forget explicitly rejecting the text when it doesn't fit whatever flight of fancy is being proposed, sort of like this: The very idea that this is included in a rebuttal (and really a rather condescending lecture as is your m.o.) to someone to justify why you can't find any evidence to convince them of your argument is rather telling and very ironic. Attack is the best form of defense I suppose.