[BOOK SPOILERS] Rant and Rave Without Repercussion

[kissdbyfire]

No he wrote the episode before that when they were first caught at Craster's Keep and you can hardly blame him for having to follow an outline.

But they also sometimes shift scenes around to different episodes, like I'd bet Hill did NOT write the Stannis and Shireen scene for Sons of the Harpy.

Yep Cogman wrote Oathkeeper where Pod says "Ser. My lady." to Brienne and with Ser Pounce and all the little details and language that just feels right, to me anyway. One of his early episodes (can't remember which one) I thought Martin had wrote it and I recall being surprised when I found out, so now I always look forward to his episodes.

Now things are so crazy I don't know what he could do to fix things but it surely won't be quite as jarring as this latest episode was for me... anyway I hope so.

I think (feel) that Cogman gets it whereas the usurpers don't. But as you said, there's only so much he can do within what's outlined for him.

I don't remember any of the scenes from last year you've mentioned... Completely forgettable and disposable. :uhoh:

[Mindwalker]

I know , the Trolly McTrollingtons will keep coming but it will at least clear out some of the confusion from people who genuinely don't really know what happens in this thread.

Alternative titles:

- The Dark Side

- DarthViewers

[Daphne of House Vakarian]

I don't believe there is anyone who genuinely doesn't know what "rant and rave" without repercussion means.

I 've seen some people come here in peace trying to start a debate or discussion without resulting to petty trolling tactics ,people who were later told that this place is not for debate and that they should start a new thread for a debate.

That's why I think there should be a copy/paste statement in the opening post.To avoid confusion :)

[Lady Fevre Dream]

I still think that it is incredibe that they admit to this perverted devergence from the books came to them when Sophie was a little 14 year old filming seaon 2. It is beyond sick what these guys are doing and they either are too stupid to admit how sexually obsessed they have been with her or they just do not care that they are admitting to thinking about this for that long.

I have to admit, I have a lot of the recent info confuddled in my mind, it's been quite the tiring week in RL, but what exactly did they say about the plotting and planning since the second season of certain aspects of the Sansa story?

[Cas Stark]

I think (feel) that Cogman gets it whereas the usurpers don't. But as you said, there's only so much he can do within what's outlined for him.

I don't remember any of the scenes from last year you've mentioned... Completely forgettable and disposable.

I'm not sure if the usurpers really don't "get" it, or if, worse, they actually are and believe they can improve the story. I believe they do get it, if they didn't get it we wouldn't have had season 1.

They get it, but they are also amateurs who are in way, way over their heads with running a show like this and are not capable enough, detail oriented enough, experienced enough or humble enough to get the help they need.

They have also become incredibly arrogant and seem to believe that the success of GOT is not due to the story and the characters that Martin created, but that they did it, and so since "they did it" they now think that whatever stupid as fuck ideas that should never get out of the conference room are genius and end up on the show. Beetles. Olly/Brutus. Black Sansa the Goth Girl. Carol Lannister. Ironborn and Dogs.

[ummester]

I 've seen some people come here in peace trying to start a debate or discussion without resulting to petty trolling tactics ,people who were later told that this place is not for debate and that they should start a new thread for a debate.

That's why I think there should be a copy/paste statement in the opening post.To avoid confusion :)

Why is it so hard to clarify the direction that the Rant and Rave must take in the thread title? The issue is that all the Rant and Rave thread titles lack a description of the bias, they present something that is open, when they are in fact not. The titles are misleading - change that and you will change the interpretation.

[Elaena Targaryen]

Rant and rave is a clear definition, there is nothing wrong with that - the thread title just needs to define exactly what direction the Rant and Rave is supposed to take. The bias should be clearly explained in the title.

Rant and Rave against the show, without any argument or discussion to the contrary - call the thread exactly what it is supposed to be.

It's quite simple - this is not a debate thread.

That has been explained over and over. Just like the Rating Thread is not a debate thread, the Positive Nitpicking is not a debate thread. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Why is it necessary to specify "ranting and raving on the show" in the show sub forum?

I had thought you were not this simple minded as you have proven quite clever in the past so I must conclude your are instigating disruption on purpose... why would you do that?

[Daphne of House Vakarian]

Alternative titles:

- The Dark Side

- DarthViewers

Even though it sounds cool, it may end up more confusing.

I personally like Rant and Rave but I just wanted to share my opinion about the statement in the opening post.

[Cas Stark]

I 've seen some people come here in peace trying to start a debate or discussion without resulting to petty trolling tactics ,people who were later told that this place is not for debate and that they should start a new thread for a debate.

That's why I think there should be a copy/paste statement in the opening post.To avoid confusion :)

I don't mind a little discussion, a little back and forth.

There is a difference between some discussion and someone who is a show apologist who makes up excuses out of thin air or someone who comes to the thread to tell everyone they're sad and immature for not liking the show.

[ummester]

It's quite simple - this is not a debate thread.

That has been explained over and over. Just like the Rating Thread is not a debate thread, the Positive Nitpicking is not a debate thread. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Why is it necessary to specify "ranting and raving on the show" in the show sub forum?

I had thought you were not this simple minded as you have proven quite clever in the past so I must conclude your are instigating disruption on purpose... why would you do that?

So title it as such

Rant and Rave about the show could mean shout and complain about how this critic wrongly disliked this scene, or something. Include the direction of bias in the title and make it clear.

I am not instigating disruption, I am trying to clarify exactly what the thread is. If it is a hate on the show thread - it should own up to what it is in no uncertain terms.

[rosehustle1]

Did they ever explain why they took away Jaime's Riverlands arc? I also wonder if the Blackfish, Manderly, or even Howland will ever be mentioned. The stuff they choose to cut versus the stuff they make up boggles my mind.

[Cas Stark]

So title it as such

Rant and Rave about the show could mean shout and complain about how this critic wrongly disliked this scene, or something. Include the direction of bias in the title and make it clear.

What do you think "without repercussion" means?

[Le Cygne]

The usurpers also have serious issues with the whole notion that women are people, too.

[Daphne of House Vakarian]

Why is it so hard to clarify the direction that the Rant and Rave must take in the thread title? The issue is that all the Rant and Rave thread titles lack a description of the bias, they present something that is open, when they are in fact not. The titles are misleading - change that and you will change the interpretation.

I understand what you are mean, but I think the titles should be always kept short.

A tile is a title, it has to just give a tiny taste.

I believe the existing title gives that taste.

I used to be oblivious about the existence of this thread once.Because I didn't frequent the show section at all.

Once I did, sometime in Season 4, by reading the title I immediately knew this thread was for complaining about the show (and english is not my first language)

When you get that first taste from a title, you have to read the OP to see what truly the thread is about.

Thus,I am advocating for an opening statement in each new thread .

[Lady Fevre Dream]

bhahahaha This thread has been here for years, it just has an updated name. I don't like being someone who flags posts, but I will....if people want to continue to pretend to be that obtuse.......I'd be happy to ask a moderator to explain it to them in the next thread incarnation.

[JonInVa]

Perhaps for clarity of purpose the thread should be called Rant and Rage, rather than Rave?

The latter tends to denote either delusions (stark raving mad.. No pun), or admiration (raved on and on about the great party).

Unless the purpose was always to allow for negative ranting, and positive raving?

[kissdbyfire]

It's quite simple - this is not a debate thread.

That has been explained over and over. Just like the Rating Thread is not a debate thread, the Positive Nitpicking is not a debate thread. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Why is it necessary to specify "ranting and raving on the show" in the show sub forum?

I had thought you were not this simple minded as you have proven quite clever in the past so I must conclude your are instigating disruption on purpose... why would you do that?

That's exactly what s/he is doing, see how he uses the same bait words in several posts, until someone reacts! Latest one is 'bias' - explain the bias, etc etc.

S/he is pretending to not understand what the idiom means. It's quite funny and infantile, actually. The previous bait was 'petty and sad'. :laugh:

@MordredDayne is absolutely right, we should just ignore the distraction. I have a 'don't feed the trolls' n my sig, but that's exactly what I was doing.

[Le Cygne]

bhahahaha This thread has been here for years, it just has an updated name. I don't like being someone who flags posts, but I will....if people want to continue to pretend to be that obtuse.......I'd be happy to ask a moderator to explain it to them in the next thread incarnation.

This...

[Lord Damian]

I have to admit, I have a lot of the recent info confuddled in my mind, it's been quite the tiring week in RL, but what exactly did they say about the plotting and planning since the second season of certain aspects of the Sansa story?

They got the idea of having Sansa marry ramsay Bolton (Snow) back in season 2. They feel that Sophie was going to be and is in their minds, a strong actress. My take is that if she shows nudity, it is more the case of identifying her then as a nieve actress who obviously knew she struck gold with no professional experience on a show that took off beyond her wildest expectations.

[Troy Reynolds]

I'm not sure if the usurpers really don't "get" it, or if, worse, they actually are and believe they can improve the story. I believe they do get it, if they didn't get it we wouldn't have had season 1.

They get it, but they are also amateurs who are in way, way over their heads with running a show like this and are not capable enough, detail oriented enough, experienced enough or humble enough to get the help they need.

They have also become incredibly arrogant and seem to believe that the success of GOT is not due to the story and the characters that Martin created, but that they did it, and so since "they did it" they now think that whatever stupid as fuck ideas that should never get out of the conference room are genius and end up on the show. Beetles. Olly/Brutus. Black Sansa the Goth Girl. Carol Lannister. Ironborn and Dogs.

I actually don't think they get it, at least not the last two books. They said at the beginning that they did this series to film the Red Wedding, and lo and behold this series started going to hell the moment that was over; not that seasons 1-3 were perfect but by and large pretty good. I would agree that they are in way over their heads but the funny thing is that on the logistical side of running they show, where they had no experience, they seem to be OK. By logistical I mean the coordination of multiple units in multiple countries. But they were writers and that is where their ultimate failure lies.

The things they said at the Oxford Union really opened my eyes to them. You're entirely right about their egos are on overdrive, having an actor that writes a multipage letter pleading his case to have his character not die and, being second guessed, wanting to kill the character more. And not knowing Sam was a point of view? How is that even possible for them not to know? Not to mention the Inside the Episode where they thought Needle was Arya's revenge.