The execution of Janos Slynt was spot on

[Varysblackfyre321]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Robb also thinks he can haggle with the Watch, buying a man out of his sacred vows by giving them more men - as if a sacred vow wasn't a personal commitment an individual made. Instead he seems to think the Watch owns Jon like a slave, and he could buy his freedom.

It was perplexing how it seemed Robb did not understand that the watch is something every man swears upon his god(s) to be in until they can't anymore. can't be undone by a king; you'd think given his new position as "King in the north" he'd realize the controversy his decision would garner among well the north. Really weird. 

[The Fattest Leech]

9 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

It was perplexing how it seemed Robb did not understand that the watch is something every man swears upon his god(s) to be in until they can't anymore. can't be undone by a king; you'd think given his new position as "King in the north" he'd realize the controversy his decision would garner among well the north. Really weird. 

You do know that GRRM has been clear that there is precedent for brothers in the past honorably leaving/discharging the Watch. It did not happen often, but t happened.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Fattest Leech said:

You do know that GRRM has been clear that there is precedent for brothers in the past honorably leaving/discharging the Watch. It did not happen often, but t happened.

Nope, there is no such precedent as far as we know. There is precedent for people being offered to renounce their vows as a maester, but there is none about leaving the Faith, the Kingsguard (until Blount) or the Night's Watch.

[Lord Varys]

7 hours ago, teej6 said:

Lol. Tywin pushing his will/agenda on the neutral NW through underhanded means and Marsh using said Tywin’s letter to convince Yarwyck is just harmless coercion. But Sam lying to Mallister about Stannis choosing Pyke and vice versa is “fixing the election”. Got to just laugh at the hypocrisy of these arguments and the subjective and selective reading of some.

I'd say both men used corrupt tactics, but Samwell actually went very far by outright lying to commanders of the Watch while the others were just trying to make Yarwyck see reason. Only morons would back the doomed pretender Stannis. By throwing in with the Lannisters the Watch is not going to go down with Stannis. 

And while Mallister and Pyke claimed they would not back Slynt it appears to be that the tendency was that Slynt would win anyway, in the end, since nobody came up with an alternative until Sam suggested Jon.

If Slynt's loss was a foregone conclusion Sam should have decided to scamper back in his cell after he realized that Slynt would never win.

After all, Jon Snow did not want to be Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, or did he? And a lot of the issues Jon has with being Lord Commander is ... that he has to be Lord Commander now. That's not what he wants, and it is difficult to fill an office if you have no taste for power and don't know how to properly take a hold of it and keep it.

I don't have a lot of issue with this backstabbing and plotting. In this world, most LCs should have gotten into office by bribing, threatening, and blackmailing their 'brothers'. 

But if we look at the methods Sam the Slayer has most definitely dirtier hands than Thorne and Marsh. They did not lie to Yarwyck, but Sam lied not only once, but twice.

[kissdbyfire]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

'Id say both men used corrupt tactics, but Samwell actually went very far by outright lying to commanders of the Watch while the others were just trying to make Yarwyck see reason.

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Only morons would back the doomed pretender Stannis. By throwing in with the Lannisters the Watch is not going to go down with Stannis

Stannis may be a doomed pretender, but Tywin is a very dead so I don't even know what you're trying to say here. 

They wanted to brown nose Tywin, they got the letter he had Pycelle send to the Watch calling Slynt a "dear friend" or whatever. But now Tywin is dead and all their noses are covered in dead man poo.

[The Fattest Leech]

37 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nope, there is no such precedent as far as we know. There is precedent for people being offered to renounce their vows as a maester, but there is none about leaving the Faith, the Kingsguard (until Blount) or the Night's Watch.

Seriously, this flirting has got to stop

But anyway, George is the god. His world, his rules.

Q: The second concerns the oaths of the Night Watch, Maesters, King's Guard, silent sisters, etc. Both Robb and Stannis, and presumably Robb's great lords, thought it was possible that Jon could be released form his oaths. Other than the precedent established by Joffrey with Ser Barristan, is there any other past precedent with any of the other organizations were the members swear poverty, celibacy, etc. to be honorably released from their vows? I ask because if the NW has been around for 8000 years, and many great lords and/or their families may have joined (not entirely willing in some cases), there seems to be a lot of potential for "exceptions" to develop as time went on.

GRRM: Yes, there have been a few other cases, but they have been very rare. Such vows are taken very seriously.

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

You do know that GRRM has been clear that there is precedent for brothers in the past honorably leaving/discharging the Watch. It did not happen often, but t happened.

Yes I realize there's been  a few rare cases(that seemingly no one in universe remembers), of a black brother being allowed to allowed to leave. We are given no real explanation for why, or the inevitable fallout from such decision, what exactly was the reasoning(perhaps the religious leaders of a particular brother's religion said their god said doesn't mind).  However as far Robb knows he's the only king of the north or really king who would have actually done this. And to be clear we're not talking about Jon really leaving honorblely or being honorblely discharged; Robb would be buying Jon, through promising the watch much needed materials, to go fight in the secesion movement, he's not arguing Jon himself has done anything to which would justify him being excused. And given Robb's record so far it would look as though the guy does not really respect the idea of people having to keep their oaths-he broke his word to House Frey after they held up their end of the bargain, him trying to buy the freedom of Jon, just tarnishes his image.

[The Fattest Leech]

1 minute ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes I realize there's been  a few rare cases(that seemingly no one in universe remembers), of a black brother being allowed to allowed to leave. We are given no real explanation for why, or the inevitable fallout from such decision, what exactly was the reasoning(perhaps the religious leaders of a particular brother's religion said their god said doesn't mind).  However as far Robb knows he's the only king of the north or really king who would have actually done this. And to be clear we're not talking about Jon really leaving honorblely or being honorblely discharged; Robb would be buying Jon, through promising the watch much needed materials, to go fight in the secesion movement, he's not arguing Jon himself has done anything to which would justify him being excused. And given Robb's record so far it would look as though the guy does not really respect the idea of people having to keep their oaths-he broke his word to House Frey after they held up their end of the bargain, him trying to buy the freedom of Jon, just tarnishes his image.

See my post previous to this. George is god.

And Robb didn't pull his idea out of thin air.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Seriously, this flirting has got to stop

But anyway, George is the god. His world, his rules.

Q: The second concerns the oaths of the Night Watch, Maesters, King's Guard, silent sisters, etc. Both Robb and Stannis, and presumably Robb's great lords, thought it was possible that Jon could be released form his oaths. Other than the precedent established by Joffrey with Ser Barristan, is there any other past precedent with any of the other organizations were the members swear poverty, celibacy, etc. to be honorably released from their vows? I ask because if the NW has been around for 8000 years, and many great lords and/or their families may have joined (not entirely willing in some cases), there seems to be a lot of potential for "exceptions" to develop as time went on.

GRRM: Yes, there have been a few other cases, but they have been very rare. Such vows are taken very seriously.

As usual, you don't care about the question asked. The person asked about the NW, maester, Kingsguard, and Silent Sisters.

We don't know whether George was talking about the NW here or about some of the other orders mentioned in the question. And while stuff isn't published George's words don't have all that much meaning, anyway.

10 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Stannis may be a doomed pretender, but Tywin is a very dead so I don't even know what you're trying to say here. 

They wanted to brown nose Tywin, they got the letter he had Pycelle send to the Watch calling Slynt a "dear friend" or whatever. But now Tywin is dead and all their noses are covered in dead man poo.

LOL, who cares about that? Last time I looked people made political decisions on the basis of their knowledge, not on the basis knowing when their enemies and allies might die.

And it is still pretty likely that the Lannisters will prevail in the end, especially if you don't know anything about either Daenerys, Aegon, or Euron. Ramsay and Roose might flay Stannis right now, and if they did that, the good men of the Watch would be next, thanks to Jon Snow's great leadership.

[The Fattest Leech]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

As usual, you don't care about the question asked. The person asked about the NW, maester, Kingsguard, and Silent Sisters.

Yeah, but no. That is in no way shape or form "my usual" and nothing you nor anyone else has ever complained about before with me. Sooo

The asker even gets to the point of his question by stating:

I ask because if the NW has been around for 8000 years, yadda yadda yadda

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

16 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

See my post previous to this. George is god.

And Robb didn't pull his idea out of thin air.

I did not dispute in the past, there have been black brothers excused from their vows(we do not know the how or why or what the actual fallout of those cases), I did point out as far as anyone in-universe knows(including Robb-the best is he offers for why he can release Jon is Barristan was released from the kingsguard by the king), no brother has been released from his vows-especially through bribery, actually doing this would be controversial and would likely do more harm than good by virtue of Robb gaining the appearance of someone who does not care about oaths or northern values.

[The Fattest Leech]

 

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 

And while stuff isn't published George's words don't have all that much meaning, anyway.

I will remember this was said.

 

[Clegane'sPup]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And while stuff isn't published George's words don't have all that much meaning, anyway.

This is rather exaggeratedly and distastefully complimentary.

3 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

I will remember this was said. 

Priceless, so will I.

 

[Lord Varys]

17 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Yeah, but no. That is in no way shape or form "my usual" and nothing you nor anyone else has ever complained about before with me. Sooo

The asker even gets to the point of his question by stating:

I ask because if the NW has been around for 8000 years, yadda yadda yadda

 

And did George specify in his answer that he was talking about the NW? No, he did not. That's not confirmation that men got out of the NW, especially since nothing in the novels indicates this happened.

8 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

This is rather exaggeratedly and distastefully complimentary.

Priceless, so will I.

Well, I actually asked George a yes/no question once, and he said the answer was 'yes' when it fact it turned out to be 'no'. Other people can build theories on such words, but I don't. 

It makes no sense to presume to hold an author to words about unfinished/unpublished material. Writing is a process. 

[Clegane'sPup]

4 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And did George specify in his answer that he was talking about the NW? No, he did not. That's not confirmation that men got out of the NW, especially since nothing in the novels indicates this happened.

Well, I actually asked George a yes/no question once, and he said the answer was 'yes' when it fact it turned out to be 'no'. Other people can build theories on such words, but I don't. 

It makes no sense to presume to hold an author to words about unfinished/unpublished material. Writing is a process. 

And it makes no sense for you to speak/type as an undisputed expert.

[The Fattest Leech]

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

And did George specify in his answer that he was talking about the NW? No, he did not. That's not confirmation that men got out of the NW, especially since nothing in the novels indicates this happened.

Actually, once the point of the question was gotten to, the point being the NW, George does answer. I think he even says, "yes,...", instead of "keep reading" or something of the sort.

 

1 minute ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, I actually asked George a yes/no question once, and he said the answer was 'yes' when it fact it turned out to be 'no'. Other people can build theories on such words, but I don't. 

It makes no sense to presume to hold an author to words about unfinished/unpublished material. Writing is a process. 

IF and when he ever changes his mind, then that will be the new "word of god". Until then, this is his plan.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Actually, once the point of the question was gotten to, the point being the NW, George does answer. I think he even says, "yes,...", instead of "keep reading" or something of the sort.

You make just an inference there. Treating this as 'confirmation' that men got out of the NW is twisting the whole setting of the question.

3 minutes ago, The Fattest Leech said:

IF and when he ever changes his mind, then that will be the new "word of god". Until then, this is his plan.

No, actually we treat things George said informally and in interviews as 'semi-canon' which basically means it may or may not be true. Even if he said point blank this or and this guy did get out of the NW and this is how then this would still not be canon until such time as these people/facts are actually referenced in any published works.

 

[teej6]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd say both men used corrupt tactics, but Samwell actually went very far by outright lying to commanders of the Watch while the others were just trying to make Yarwyck see reason. Only morons would back the doomed pretender Stannis. By throwing in with the Lannisters the Watch is not going to go down with Stannis. 

And while Mallister and Pyke claimed they would not back Slynt it appears to be that the tendency was that Slynt would win anyway, in the end, since nobody came up with an alternative until Sam suggested Jon.

If Slynt's loss was a foregone conclusion Sam should have decided to scamper back in his cell after he realized that Slynt would never win.

After all, Jon Snow did not want to be Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch, or did he?

Are you saying that by not backing Slynt, a NW member is automatically backing Stannis? I don’t understand your logic. Using Tywin’s letter to convince a NW member to choose one candidate over another is unethical just as Sam’s lying is unethical. If you call Sam’s actions “fixing an election” (which of course it isn’t), then Marsh and Thorne’s act should also be categorized as such. If anything, Marsh’s scheming is more detrimental to the NW as it goes against one of the principles of the NW of staying neutral and not taking part in the conflicts of Westeros. 

Do you have any actual textual evidence for the bolded? Or is this again another instance of you spouting one of your conjectures as the author’s intent.  Sam did not scamper back to his cell after Mallister and Pyke made their views clear because GRRM wanted Jon to be the 998th LC, as simple as that. As for Sam’s POV, he had already opened a can of worms with his lying and in suggesting Jon as an alternative to Mallister, and therefore he went back to Pyke to do the same. Again, there is not an iota of textual evidence indicating that Mallister or Pyke was ready to fold and back Slynt’s candidacy for LC. 

How was Sam to know Jon would not want/like the role? Does Sam have insight into Jon’s thoughts on the subject? No. Why heck, Jon hasn’t even considered the possibility,  let alone formed an opinion on it. 

[Lord Varys]

36 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Are you saying that by not backing Slynt, a NW member is automatically backing Stannis? I don’t understand your logic. Using Tywin’s letter to convince a NW member to choose one candidate over another is unethical just as Sam’s lying is unethical. If you call Sam’s actions “fixing an election” (which of course it isn’t), then Marsh and Thorne’s act should also be categorized as such. If anything, Marsh’s scheming is more detrimental to the NW as it goes against one of the principles of the NW of staying neutral and not taking part in the conflicts of Westeros. 

No, it isn't. Marsh shows his fellow brothers a letter from the Hand of the King. There is literally nothing wrong with that. The Watch shouldn't take sides in the realms of men but they should take sides when their own mission and survival is at stake. If they don't placate King Tommen they stand on the brink of an abyss even if there were no Others.

Thorne and Marsh also don't make policy based on lies. Their arguments are sound. Stannis is doomed, and everybody knows it.

36 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Do you have any actual textual evidence for the bolded? Or is this again another instance of you spouting one of your conjectures as the author’s intent.  Sam did not scamper back to his cell after Mallister and Pyke made their views clear because GRRM wanted Jon to be the 998th LC, as simple as that. As for Sam’s POV, he had already opened a can of worms with his lying and in suggesting Jon as an alternative to Mallister, and therefore he went back to Pyke to do the same. Again, there is not an iota of textual evidence indicating that Mallister or Pyke was ready to fold and back Slynt’s candidacy for LC. 

You are not making sense. Sam's fear that Slynt might become commander is what triggers his scheming in the first place. Whether his fears were realistic or not is another question. But if they were unrealistic (as you claim) then Sam's actions make even less sense than they do now. Why on earth should he fall as low as lie to two commanders when there is no reason to expect that Slynt is going to be elected?

Bringing the author's intention in is completely out of place when you are discussing motivations of characters. George presumably tries to give his characters motivations - they are not supposed to act as if they know the plot and just go through the motions like puppets.

And again - if Mallister and Pyke had eventually dropped out of the race Slynt would have profited from that even if they hadn't endorsed him. After all, there was no other candidate left.

36 minutes ago, teej6 said:

How was Sam to know Jon would not want/like the role? Does Sam have insight into Jon’s thoughts on the subject? No. Why heck, Jon hasn’t even considered the possibility,  let alone formed an opinion on it. 

Well, perhaps the schemer should have asked his candidate whether he actually wants the office? Sam is supposedly Jon's friend, no? It is pretty clear that Jon Snow did not want to be Lord Commander. He makes that crystal clear.

[Daemon The Black Dragon]

13 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

It was perplexing how it seemed Robb did not understand that the watch is something every man swears upon his god(s) to be in until they can't anymore. can't be undone by a king; you'd think given his new position as "King in the north" he'd realize the controversy his decision would garner among well the north. Really weird. 

You really don't think Robb understands what the Watch is or what their vows are? The NW has been around for 8,000 years, you think no one in that time has ever been released from their vows? It only took the KG 300 yrs before members started getting released from their vows.