"This man protected the weak, as every true knight must."~ Jon’s personality.

[the conquoring bastard25]

Always tries his best no matter what situation he is in - Like when he goads Slynt and killls him? Like when he goes "fuck it" and abandons the defense against the Others to go and fight south of the Wall?

What a minute... Jon calls Slynt to his chambers, he takes half the damn day to respond to the summons. Then Jon offers him the command of one of the abandoned castles. Slynt refuses, Jon thinks well lets hope that morning brings a different attidude. Then he finds Slynt in the dining hall, and Slynt starts saying that he's a bastard, that he's got the mark of the beast, that he's just a boy of a traitor no less. Now we know how much Jon loves hearing about Ned Stark being a traitor. He stops and thinks, could have sent him the ice cells, could have strapped him onto his horse, made him a cook. but he dislikes those because, he would desert and how many would he take with him, he would never dare eat another turnip, then he mentions hanging the man.

Then when there are preparing to hang him something doesn't feel right. Slynt by this time has gone quiet. Then at the last minute when Iron Emmett and company are getting him out of his cage he say stop and fetch me a block. Slynt by this time is back to saying he's a bastard boy, he's got the mark of the beast, that he's the son of a whore and traitor(by the way no one ever said that Rheagar paid lyanna so how is she a whore)...

Where in all of this did Jon goad Slynt in to being a douche to get him to take his head? I thought it was the other way around. that Jon was trying to find away not to have to kill the man, only like with Theon, Slynt talked himself into his early grave.

[David Selig]

He tried to murder Thorne just because he felt insulted by Thorne saying what as far as everyone at the Watch was the truth. Funny how nobody holds this against him, both in-universe and outside, but if someone says something mean to the special snowflake, that's unforgivable.

[Nyrhex]

Always tries his best no matter what situation he is in - Like when he goads Slynt and killls him? Like when he goes "fuck it" and abandons the defense against the Others to go and fight south of the Wall?

What a minute... Jon calls Slynt to his chambers, he takes half the damn day to respond to the summons. Then Jon offers him the command of one of the abandoned castles. Slynt refuses, Jon thinks well lets hope that morning brings a different attidude. Then he finds Slynt in the dining hall, and Slynt starts saying that he's a bastard, that he's got the mark of the beast, that he's just a boy of a traitor no less. Now we know how much Jon loves hearing about Ned Stark being a traitor. He stops and thinks, could have sent him the ice cells, could have strapped him onto his horse, made him a cook. but he dislikes those because, he would desert and how many would he take with him, he would never dare eat another turnip, then he mentions hanging the man.

Then when there are preparing to hang him something doesn't feel right. Slynt by this time has gone quiet. Then at the last minute when Iron Emmett and company are getting him out of his cage he say stop and fetch me a block. Slynt by this time is back to saying he's a bastard boy, he's got the mark of the beast, that he's the son of a whore and traitor(by the way no one ever said that Rheagar paid lyanna so how is she a whore)...

Where in all of this did Jon goad Slynt in to being a douche to get him to take his head? I thought it was the other way around. that Jon was trying to find away not to have to kill the man, only like with Theon, Slynt talked himself into his early grave.

1. Goading a man with Slynt's ego into doing something stupid isn't that hard. We see how Jon gives Slynt the order. Not trying to difuse the explosive situation (an officer of the NW refusing and order), giving the order with naked steel in hand (a clear threat), while thinking this:

Jon slid the oilcloth down his bastard sword, watching the play of morning

light across the ripples, thinking how easily the blade would slide through skin and fat and sinew to part

Slynt’s ugly head from his body. All of a man’s crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all

of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood

between us.

2. By Jon's own admission, sending Slynt to that castle would only result in him deserting. Jon never expected Slynt to agree. Jon constantly tries to get more men for the NW, but the second Slynt gives him the excuse, he kills him. How about sending him to use an oar on one of the ships? Or chain him to the elevator? No? Only death? For a guy who tried to kill an officer twice, and succeded once, Jon sure is hard with his punishments...

3. Jon came with 7 guards. Jon never goes with more than a couple. He was ready for resistance because he knew he would need muscle. He even hoped that Thorne would oblige him and give him pretex to kill him as well.

Ser Alliser Thorne reached for his sword hilt. Go on, Jon thought. Longclaw

was slung across his back. Show your steel. Give me cause to do the same.

Jon knew perfectly well what he was doing.

[David Selig]

Ser Alliser Thorne reached for his sword hilt. Go on, Jon thought. Longclaw

was slung across his back. Show your steel. Give me cause to do the same.

Jon knew perfectly well what he was doing.

So after Jon got a slap on the wrist for trying to murder Thorne, he's goading Thorne to attack so he could execute him for it. What a hypocrite.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

snip

I never said that Jon objectively is the epitome of a true Knight.

But even if we observe the true knight's characteristics in the books.

a touch on the right shoulder with the blade. "In the name of the Warrior I charge you to be brave."

The sword moves from right shoulder to left. "In the name of the Father I charge you to be just."

Right shoulder. "In the name of the Mother I charge you to defend the young and innocent."

The left. "In the name of the Maid I charge you to protect all women....

I do believe that Jon, if isn't one of the of the few who are close to be one, qualify the premises to be one. For more imformations look here.

[Nyrhex]

1. I never said that Jon objectively is the epitome of a true Knight.

2. But even if we observe the true knight's characteristics in the books.

3. I do believe that Jon, if isn't one of the of the few who are close to be one, qualify the premises to be one. For more imformations look here.

1. No, but you claimed that you believe that he is the closest thing to one, and then asked for opinions. In my opinion he is not the closest to one. I have explained why IMHO the traits that you listed in the OP don't fit Jon. I did not provide my own list because I don't have to in order to prove my point, and I don't wish to turn this into a hate thread where posters would start to fight about Jon being bad/good and then worse/better, and then worst/best. All I had to do was establish that Jon is not the closest thing by debasing your assesment of his character, and then provide one that is closer than him to the spirit of being a true knight.

2. And what makes a ture knight in the books? That alone is a question worthy of a thread. For a different version of the Knight's oath (IIRC, the one you brought is from The Hedge Knight), see Here (scroll down to Knight).

3. And I believe that Jon does not qualify. By either definition. Going by the one in the OP, I believe that his handeling of Slynt was not just. How he saw the Wildlings before Stannis showed up at the Wall is also up for debate, but I'll stick to one point at a time.

[Saint Saga]

We know by his thoughts that the was not serious,and not really intended to harm the baby.Why are you complaining?

[Nyrhex]

We know by his thoughts that the was not serious,and not really intended to harm the baby.Why are you complaining?

Do we? We know by his words that he claims to think he can find a use for him, but his thoughts say the opposite. He does'nt think he can use him to help Hobb in the kitchen. He does'nt think he can trust him away from CB, for fear of desertion, or in CB, for fear of plotting. So killing him is simply put the easy way to get rid of him. Jon, who had tried to kill an officer, managed to kill one but claimed that it was not murder (and all they have is his word), and then tried to kill an officer again, is still walking around and is not dead. So for refusing an order, which is a far lesser offence, he executes someone who he has a personal vendetta against?

That does'nt seem like the opposite of justice?

Jon treats Slynt bluntly, and I claim with intention to provoke him. Jon did get stabbed because he miss-judged how people would react to his words and actions, but to see that Slynt isn't going to change his mind should'nt realy have been an issue, and it was handeled in a way that guaranteed Slynt's refusal. It was murder. Slynt being less of an idiot would make it harder, but it was still murder.

It was according to the rules (that dosen't apply fairly to all), and it was against a character we the readers hate, but it was still murder. Look at it from a fan's perspective, and you don't see a problem. Look at what it stands for, and it means that a personal opinion on someone is the difference between life and death, and not the actual deed/crime. Slynt came to the Wall not for commiting a crime, but for following orders and then getting double-crossd by the family he thought he served because Tyrion for some reason felt bad for a few murdered kids he heared about, but not of the concept of the murdered/raped women and children that the Vale Clansmen that he re-armed are responisible for at the same time. Slynt still went to the Wall, was accepted by the NW officer in KL according to his rank and station, commanded the first Eastwatch reinforcements to the Wall during the Wildling siege, and aided in the defense of the Wall. He too, thought he can make some use out of a brother of the NW that he thought is up to no good. But in Jon's POV that does'nt matter, and Slynt is just an ass that killed his father. So, first chance Jon gets, he kills him.

Since they share a history, since the law is not equal to all in this case, since Jon got off with nothing for bigger crimes, and since Slynt's reaction would have been different had Jon rubbed two brain cells to try a different tactic with how he delivered his orders, since Jon was thinking about killing Slynt as they spoke, since Jon came with a larger escort than usual to Slynt, since Jon himself admits that his orders made no sense, and since Jon then openly thinks about how he wants to goad Thorne as well, I conclude that this was murder, and therfore I complain about it.

[The Wolves]

Do we? We know by his words that he claims to think he can find a use for him, but his thoughts say the opposite. He does'nt think he can use him to help Hobb in the kitchen. He does'nt think he can trust him away from CB, for fear of desertion, or in CB, for fear of plotting. So killing him is simply put the easy way to get rid of him. Jon, who had tried to kill an officer, managed to kill one but claimed that it was not murder (and all they have is his word), and then tried to kill an officer again, is still walking around and is not dead. So for refusing an order, which is a far lesser offence, he executes someone who he has a personal vendetta against?

That does'nt seem like the opposite of justice?

Jon treats Slynt bluntly, and I claim with intention to provoke him. Jon did get stabbed because he miss-judged how people would react to his words and actions, but to see that Slynt isn't going to change his mind should'nt realy have been an issue, and it was handeled in a way that guaranteed Slynt's refusal. It was murder. Slynt being less of an idiot would make it harder, but it was still murder.

It was according to the rules (that dosen't apply fairly to all), and it was against a character we the readers hate, but it was still murder. Look at it from a fan's perspective, and you don't see a problem. Look at what it stands for, and it means that a personal opinion on someone is the difference between life and death, and not the actual deed/crime. Slynt came to the Wall not for commiting a crime, but for following orders and then getting double-crossd by the family he thought he served because Tyrion for some reason felt bad for a few murdered kids he heared about, but not of the concept of the murdered/raped women and children that the Vale Clansmen that he re-armed are responisible for at the same time. Slynt still went to the Wall, was accepted by the NW officer in KL according to his rank and station, commanded the first Eastwatch reinforcements to the Wall during the Wildling siege, and aided in the defense of the Wall. He too, thought he can make some use out of a brother of the NW that he thought is up to no good. But in Jon's POV that does'nt matter, and Slynt is just an ass that killed his father. So, first chance Jon gets, he kills him.

Since they share a history, since the law is not equal to all in this case, since Jon got off with nothing for bigger crimes, and since Slynt's reaction would have been different had Jon rubbed two brain cells to try a different tactic with how he delivered his orders, since Jon was thinking about killing Slynt as they spoke, since Jon came with a larger escort than usual to Slynt, since Jon himself admits that his orders made no sense, and since Jon then openly thinks about how he wants to goad Thorne as well, I conclude that this was murder, and therfore I complain about it.

Really?

Jon gave Slynt multiple chances to follow his orders he even gave him command of a castle and even praised his shitty corrupt skills to get him to comply, Jon did not goad him.

It was Slynt who has resisted Jon's command since the beginning and he would have continued to do that. Jon gave him a whole night, he even let Slynt's disrespect slide multiple times. And Jon had a large escort because Slynt had surrounded himself with a lot of man.

Jon DID think he could make some use out of a brother he didn't think was up to no good and even gave him command of Greyguard, Jon did recognize Slynt's skills and tried to use it to the best of the Night's Watch ability. Jon had every right to do what he did(call it murder and I'm good with that)someone under his command was being insubordinate and disrespectful, he didn't have time for that shit or the constant looking over his shoulder from Slynt if he did let it slide.

[Torrhen Blackwood]

Do we? We know by his words that he claims to think he can find a use for him, but his thoughts say the opposite. He does'nt think he can use him to help Hobb in the kitchen. He does'nt think he can trust him away from CB, for fear of desertion, or in CB, for fear of plotting. So killing him is simply put the easy way to get rid of him. Jon, who had tried to kill an officer, managed to kill one but claimed that it was not murder (and all they have is his word), and then tried to kill an officer again, is still walking around and is not dead. So for refusing an order, which is a far lesser offence, he executes someone who he has a personal vendetta against?

That does'nt seem like the opposite of justice?

Jon treats Slynt bluntly, and I claim with intention to provoke him. Jon did get stabbed because he miss-judged how people would react to his words and actions, but to see that Slynt isn't going to change his mind should'nt realy have been an issue, and it was handeled in a way that guaranteed Slynt's refusal. It was murder. Slynt being less of an idiot would make it harder, but it was still murder.

It was according to the rules (that dosen't apply fairly to all), and it was against a character we the readers hate, but it was still murder. Look at it from a fan's perspective, and you don't see a problem. Look at what it stands for, and it means that a personal opinion on someone is the difference between life and death, and not the actual deed/crime. Slynt came to the Wall not for commiting a crime, but for following orders and then getting double-crossd by the family he thought he served because Tyrion for some reason felt bad for a few murdered kids he heared about, but not of the concept of the murdered/raped women and children that the Vale Clansmen that he re-armed are responisible for at the same time. Slynt still went to the Wall, was accepted by the NW officer in KL according to his rank and station, commanded the first Eastwatch reinforcements to the Wall during the Wildling siege, and aided in the defense of the Wall. He too, thought he can make some use out of a brother of the NW that he thought is up to no good. But in Jon's POV that does'nt matter, and Slynt is just an ass that killed his father. So, first chance Jon gets, he kills him.

Since they share a history, since the law is not equal to all in this case, since Jon got off with nothing for bigger crimes, and since Slynt's reaction would have been different had Jon rubbed two brain cells to try a different tactic with how he delivered his orders, since Jon was thinking about killing Slynt as they spoke, since Jon came with a larger escort than usual to Slynt, since Jon himself admits that his orders made no sense, and since Jon then openly thinks about how he wants to goad Thorne as well, I conclude that this was murder, and therfore I complain about it.

You can try to reason the Slynt situation anyway you like but it is not murder, whether you like it or not. It was clear cut insubordination to a commanding officer in a martial institution. Janos had his chances and he refused and laughed in his Lord Commander's face. I'm not gonna sit here and wax poetic about Jon being the ingenious leader or moral paradigm of ASOIAF, but he gave Janos Slynt a clean death worthy of a lord. In Slynt's situation that was more than he could have hoped for.

[Lyse Stark]

You can try to reason the Slynt situation anyway you like but it is not murder, whether you like it or not. It was clear cut insubordination to a commanding officer in a martial institution. Janos had his chances and he refused and laughed in his Lord Commander's face. I'm not gonna sit here and wax poetic about Jon being the ingenious leader or moral paradigm of ASOIAF, but he gave Janos Slynt a clean death worthy of a lord. In Slynt's situation that was more than he could have hoped for.

And if you were in a military organization, you are familiar with the chain of command, and what defying orders ends in. And by that I mean a court martial.

Slynt's situation is similiar in that he defied Jon and he paid the price. Where nowadays he would end up with a court martial and a dishonourable discharge, in the medieval setting of Westeros, he was executed.

The reason why I referenced the court martial analogy in the context of chain of command is to help you guys understand why Jon executed Janos Slynt. My uncle was in the Canadian armed force, so I have a basic understanding of the chain of command, and how disobeying orders disrupt that order.

It's not Jon who goaded Janos Slynt, but the other way around.

[The Abominable SnowOther]

:cheers: @ The Wolves, TB, and LS :cheers:

Your all bosses.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

We just keep seeing everything with our 2014 goggles.

Jon needed to prove he was an authoritative figure in the Wall, in front of his brothers and in front of a King. Slynt's actions were equivalent of a minor Lord telling his Liege Lord "fuck you" and that needed to be punished, he wasn't some random man he decided to kill so everybody could see his sword was sharp and he meant businness: he was a man who practically flipped him off. Slynt could have been pardoned, yes, but then, Jon would look weak and he couldn't afford that, considering his youth and the circumstances around him, specially those related to his election as LC and having Stannis around him. After the executions, Stannis realised he could be both respected and trusted. Otherwise, remember the lame attempts of killing Edmure Tully and how the Blackfish simply laughed at Ryman Frey: he knew he wouldn't do it and indeed, he never did.

[Lyse Stark]

We just keep seeing everything with our 2014 goggles.Jon needed to prove he was an authoritative figure in the Wall, in front of his brothers and in front of a King. Slynt's actions were equivalent of a minor Lord telling his Liege Lord "fuck you" and that needed to be punished, he wasn't some random man he decided to kill so everybody could see his sword was sharp and he meant businness: he was a man who practically flipped him off. Slynt could have been pardoned, yes, but then, Jon would look weak and he couldn't afford that, considering his youth and the circumstances around him, specially those related to his election as LC and having Stannis around him. After the executions, Stannis realised he could be both respected and trusted. Otherwise, remember the lame attempts of killing Edmure Tully and how the Blackfish simply laughed at Ryman Frey: he knew he wouldn't do it and indeed, he never did.

You understood my point about the court martial analogy. :thumbsup:

[Torrhen Blackwood]

And if you were in a military organization, you are familiar with the chain of command, and what defying orders ends in. And by that I mean a court martial.

Slynt's situation is similiar in that he defied Jon and he paid the price. Where nowadays he would end up with a court martial and a dishonourable discharge, in the medieval setting of Westeros, he was executed.

The reason why I referenced the court martial analogy in the context of chain of command is to help you guys understand why Jon executed Janos Slynt. My uncle was in the Canadian armed force, so I have a basic understanding of the chain of command, and how disobeying orders disrupt that order.

It's not Jon who goaded Janos Slynt, but the other way around.

Well, I was agreeing with your overall assessment, so I'm not sure what your response to me is about. But in the field and on a war-footing a court martial hasn't been the historical methodology (which you said). It is usually swift discipline, be it physical or mental. This is ASOIAF, not a 1st world bureaucratic organization. I don't think Jon or the NW has the time or patience to deal with farce of a trial for a craven like Slynt.

[Minsc]

You can try to reason the Slynt situation anyway you like but it is not murder, whether you like it or not. It was clear cut insubordination to a commanding officer in a martial institution. Janos had his chances and he refused and laughed in his Lord Commander's face. I'm not gonna sit here and wax poetic about Jon being the ingenious leader or moral paradigm of ASOIAF, but he gave Janos Slynt a clean death worthy of a lord. In Slynt's situation that was more than he could have hoped for.

Yet, when Jon twice attacks a superior officer with the intent to kill/maim it appears that the punishment is nothing but a slap on the wrist. Thus, it is argued that Jon was simply abusing his position of power to execute someone that he held a previous grudge against.

This is ASOIAF, not a 1st world bureaucratic organization. I don't think Jon or the NW has the time or patience to deal with farce of a trial for a craven like Slynt.

So what? Just because it would be timely and might be embarrassing for Jon doesn't give him the excuse to not allow Janos the chance to defend himself from punishment. You know like how it is so important that it is carefully investigated to see who of the Good Masters crucified innocent children before they can be punished as there is the slim chance that 163 of them might be innocent. somewhat tongue in cheek

[Suzanna Stormborn]

We just keep seeing everything with our 2014 goggles.

That's for sure.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

So nowadays Slynt was an innocent immaculate martyr who evil Jon killed without any reason? Because at the books I have Slynt disobeyed his LC which someone could call treason. But maybe my books aren't the same with everyone else. :dunno:

[El Guapo]

And if you were in a military organization, you are familiar with the chain of command, and what defying orders ends in. And by that I mean a court martial.

You mean like Jon not allowing Alliser Thorne to his job when he was trying to train Samwell?

[The Abominable SnowOther]

You mean like Jon not allowing Alliser Thorne to his job when he was trying to train Samwell?

Is it Jon's Fault that nobody did anything to him? NO

Does Jon have to do things the way everyone else does?NO