The execution of Janos Slynt was spot on vol 2

[the trees have eyes]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Samwell Tarly was just a recruit at the Watch.

Sam as he is in AGoT simply has no place at the Wall. Maester Samwell might have a place, but not Ser Piggy as he demonstrates when he fucks up beyond the Wall.

So Thorne should tell him that he has no place in the Watch right?  Mormont should refuse his "offer" to join and send him on his way, right?

The system doesn't work the way you are portraying it.

The Watch makes use of every man and both Mormont and Aemon saw an obvious use for Sam that did not have him being sliced into sausagemeat by every sadist that Thorne could persuade to brutalise Sam.

Ofc Sam fucked up beyond the wall.  Doesn't change the fact that Thorne would have no more success than Randyl Tarly in making Sam into a soldier.  That is the part that Mormont agreed with Jon on.

55 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Never contended the opposite-I merely pointed out Jon's actions prior to actually trying to get Aemon excuse Jon warrented  reprimand given the watch is a military order;

Did they?  They did not "sabotage" Sam's training, they saved him from being bullied and beaten into a breakdown.  The scene with Rast is analogous to Jon being set on by some of the other boys earlier on for making himself unpopular.  Donal Noye dismissed his complaints and told him to change his ways.  Same advice could and should be given to Rast.

26 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

There were others Jon threatened. Rast was probably the most extreme given that threats had to be resorted to likely more than recruits than just Rast didn't care to spare Sam because he was a weakling.  

Surely you see the problem with trying to make arguments to defend or excuse Rast? 

36 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Why are you confused with the notion of if you commit insubordinatioion and/or have your peers commit insubordinatioion then your action warrants punishment? 

It's this thing called context that seems to pass some people by.  Your argument is that what Thorne and Rast were doing is ok and Jon is wrong for interfering and stopping it. 

You are simply dead wrong.

42 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yeah, Jon wasn't thinking about some big picture, it didn't even register what exactly Sam could be good for, prior to meeting with Aemon regarding this issue.  He wasn't trying to get the best out Sam as a brother; he was simply to bend everything to more easily cater to the needs of Sam. 

Clearly he had thought about what to say and how to pitch his case before he spoke with Aemon.  Was the plan in his mind from the start?  No, of course not but his behaviour was instinctive and clearly shows the reader a smarter and more effective way of dealing with a hopeless case like Sam than Thorne and Rast's unthinking and unrelenting brutality.

I'm genuinely gobsmacked that this needs to be pointed out.  This is why this thread (v3) has become utterly mind-numbing.

49 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And Mormont doesn't remove Alliser over this issue; that would be bizarre given at this point he's treated Sam just as harshly has he's done really new recruits his way; the guy was chosen as an envoy  to KL(which make little sense), and Endrew Tarth was tasked with substiting for Thorne.

Mormont removes Thorne after he goads Jon into the assault.  Given his comments to Tyrion (much earlier), his decision to overrule Thorne and pass Sam and his later comments about Thorne's unfitness for command it's fairly clear he has a low opinion of Thorne.  Sending him to KL is relieving him of his position without making the demotion a humiliation.

[Lord Varys]

32 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

So Thorne should tell him that he has no place in the Watch right?  Mormont should refuse his "offer" to join and send him on his way, right?

The system doesn't work the way you are portraying it.

It is established that a man who isn't at the Wall because he decided to take the black because he committed a crime can leave the place while he hasn't yet said his vows. Had Sam already said his vows while he was training with Ser Alliser Thorne? No he did not. He was free to take his leave at any time.

In fact, he was in no danger at all. If Sam did not want to be beaten up he could have gone any day. The fact that he was apparently to afraid/stupid to do that doesn't change the facts.

32 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

The Watch makes use of every man and both Mormont and Aemon saw an obvious use for Sam that did not have him being sliced into sausagemeat by every sadist that Thorne could persuade to brutalise Sam.

Only because a recruit ignored the chain of command and went Aegon behind Thorne's back. And they were wrong about this 'use' of Samwell Tarly. Sam could not fulfill his duties as a man of the Night's Watch during the great ranging.

If he had come as a maester - fine. Then he might have been of some use. But in this way? No.

32 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

Ofc Sam fucked up beyond the wall.  Doesn't change the fact that Thorne would have no more success than Randyl Tarly in making Sam into a soldier.  That is the part that Mormont agreed with Jon on.

That is why Mormont should have ignored this ridiculous request and should have decided to tell Tarly to get his fat ass out of his Night's Watch. The Watch isn't a place for men who cannot do the job. And in the end this is a job for soldiers. When the wildlings, wights, or Others come for Sam he would he to fight. But he can't. He is physically and mentally incapable of doing the job. He proves that time and time again. He is even unwilling to try.

'Sam the Slayer' is a joke. If Small Paul hadn't carried Sam as long as he did Sam himself would have long been a wight by the time the Other showed up - and perhaps he might have been able to deal with the Other/not die if Sam hadn't cost him so much strength.

And literally anyone could have killed the Other with the dagger as Sam himself points out. This was an accident.

32 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

It's this thing called context that seems to pass some people by.  Your argument is that what Thorne and Rast were doing is ok and Jon is wrong for interfering and stopping it. 

You are simply dead wrong.

Ah, yes, great, so it is okay when somebody acts against the interests/orders of a superior officer in a military setting and uses the same shady and ugly methods as 'the villains' to get what he wants? Why is it then not also okay that Janos Slynt tells this traitor's bastard and turncloak Lord Commander whose election was rigged to go fuck himself? The man has a right to his views, does he not? And just as Jon Snow he should be allowed to do as he pleases and also to get away with everything he does.

You cannot outright condemn one behavior and then idealize the other.

And this has nothing to do with being there for a friend - Jon could give Sam comfort and help, etc. - but not by breaking the rules. In a military setting that kind of thing should not be tolerated, no?

[Clegane'sPup]

Talking about woulda shoulda coulda can be fun and enjoyable.

Except overweight nerdy pacifist martin found a use for Sam.

[kissdbyfire]

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is why Mormont should have ignored this ridiculous request and should have decided to tell Tarly to get his fat ass out of his Night's Watch. The Watch isn't a place for men who cannot do the job. And in the end this is a job for soldiers.

Are you sure? The way I see it, there's more than one job to be had... for instance, right now is short even on men who can read and write. Satin, who can "after a fashion", stands out. Remember what Jon says to Aemon about his maester's chain, and all the different metals in it? 

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

When the wildlings, wights, or Others come for Sam he would he to fight. But he can't. He is physically and mentally incapable of doing the job. He proves that time and time again. He is even unwilling to try.

Repeating myself here, but... are you sure? Five novels in and Sam is the only character who has ever killed a WW - on page anyway. Remember that line about a man only being able to be brave when he is afraid? Yeah. Almost like Martin is making a point. 

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Ugh quoter, your text is gone. Regardless, if if if, it would be a different story. 

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And literally anyone could have killed the Other with the dagger as Sam himself points out. This was an accident.

Again, it's the story Martin is telling. So, it's not an accident, but it's there for a reason. 

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Are you sure? The way I see it, there's more than one job to be had... for instance, right now is short even on men who can read and write. Satin, who can "after a fashion", stands out. Remember what Jon says to Aemon about his maester's chain, and all the different metals in it? 

Why aren't Jon, Mormont, you name it training other men to read? Reading and writing can be learned as easily as fighting, no?

I guess you are also suggesting that every man can become a maester and serve at the Citadel? Even lackwits and morons who cannot comprehend a single sentence/complex thought?

There might be a place for every man somewhere in the world. But the NW isn't the world. Pretending it is is a lie. And Jon actually knows he is not making sense there. 

Quote

Repeating myself here, but... are you sure? Five novels in and Sam is the only character who has ever killed a WW - on page anyway. Remember that line about a man only being able to be brave when he is afraid? Yeah. Almost like Martin is making a point.

Being brave isn't enough. Sam can be brave in dangerous situations. But if you are also clumsy, slow, and incompetent then your 'bravery' is worth nothing.

Quote

Again, it's the story Martin is telling. So, it's not an accident, but it's there for a reason. 

Sure, it is an accident. Because Samwell Tarly had no idea that the dragonglass dagger would kill the Other. If I accidentally discover the weakness of something or somebody I didn't do something special. And when all I did was using a weapon anybody else in my situation would have used, too, then I did not do anything remarkable.

As Samwell Tarly - no moron - himself points out. The dagger did the trick, not he. He did pretty much nothing of note. And pretending he did something special is blatant dishonesty as he himself would tell you.

If George had wanted this to be meaningful he would have made Sam discover how an Other could actually be killed before he actually did it. Then he would have special knowledge and a plan to execute once he saw the Other. He would have known what he was doing and could then later tell everyone 'I told you I knew how to kill the Others. Look at me, Sam the Slayer, Sam the Bane of Monsters!'

[Minsc]

2 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

 

Mormont removes Thorne after he goads Jon into the assault. 

Frankly, Thorne didn't goad Jon into doing anything. He wasn't even talking to Jon when he called him a traitor's bastard.  Jeor is just frankly a push over when it comes to Jon. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

9 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Did they?  They did not "sabotage" Sam's training, they saved him from being bullied and beaten into a breakdown.  The scene with Rast is analogous to Jon being set on by some of the other boys earlier on for making himself unpopular.  Donal Noye dismissed his complaints and told him to change his ways.  Same advice could and should be given to Rast.

Yes they did. Jon did not sabotage Sam's traing; more Jon made it so that Sam did not have to do basic training in general through threating,cajoling and shaming his peers. At the very least threatening to murder someone to get them to commit insubordinatioion at the very least warrants reprimand no? Or is that something you think should be excused totally by Watch's command? Seriously what Jon did to Rast wasn't just giving "advice" like Noyle did; it was a very explicit death threat one made by Jon to Rast. If not for Jon odds are no one else would care to do any of his peers harm over Sam getting hurt in training. 

9 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Surely you see the problem with trying to make arguments to defend or excuse Rast? 

10 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

My point was that Rast probably wasn't the only trainiee who wasn't buying the argument of Sam should get some slack because he was a coward given threats against others had to be made aswell-Rast's was probably the most extreme but it's not a given every trainies besides with Rast agreed with Jon that Sam needs to be eased up on because the guy is weak.

His initial case was if left alone Sam  would get seriously hurt if not die.   Showing until this  meeting Jon never really seriously thought of how Sam could be adequately used for the watch-his concern was strictly in making sure the boy wasn't hurt, all Jon's actions prior to protect Sam wasn't to secure a valueble asset to the watch but merely save a traumatized and nice guy from getting hurt during training because he won't bring himself to fully participate.

9 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Mormont removes Thorne after he goads Jon into the assault.  Given his comments to Tyrion (much earlier), his decision to overrule Thorne and pass Sam and his later comments about Thorne's unfitness for command it's fairly clear he has a low opinion of Thorne.  Sending him to KL is relieving him of his position without making the demotion a humiliation.

Jon's murder attempt(I cannot describe someone trying to stab someone through the eyes with a dagger as anything but ) on Alliser had nothing to do with Mormont's decision to send the man as an envoy. Jeor did not care about sparring an overly prideful man from having his pride pricked(if that was his reasoning he's a fool), and sending Alliser as an envoy wouldn't even do that because the guy would still have to come back and pressumbly resume his position-in which case would still have to deny him his position. Jeor didn't send Alliser as an envoy because of his treatment of Sam(that would be bizarre given the boy wasn't treated especially cruelly by Alliser) or because of mocking Jon. Hell the man was reassigned as Maester at arms east watch upon his return ; there clearly was never any intent to demote the man. 

 

The context of Jon's actions really don't necessitate to grant him a complete pardon for his actions; we're talking about a military order in a medeval society, relatively new recruits openly, committing insubordinatioion, does the watch harm; men need to know their are consequences to disrespecting the chain of command even if your  superior is doing something that you may not like, or find dumb; Jon if he had went to Aemon from the start would have done nothing as far as I can see deserving reprimand.  

[Bowen Marsh]

On 7/31/2018 at 8:55 PM, Jedi Exile said:

Pro-tip: It wasn't. The execution of Janos Slynt was personal and it was not justice. 

Mormont cut Jon some slack for his desertion of the watch and for breaking his vows.   Jon could have shown the same mercy to Janos Slynt, whose offense was a lot less than his own.  His execution of Janos Slynt was personal and made a mockery of justice when he later allowed the most insubordinate Night's Watch brother of them all in Mance Rayder walk away unpunished.   That is not proper conduct for a leader and a disgrace for a lord commander.  The appropriate punishment and wisest decision would have been to lock Slynt in one of the cells.  Jon was thinking of Ned when he killed Slynt.  It was personal.  Jon was not objective when he passed judgment on Janos Slynt.  Whatever Slynt may have done during his life before the took the black is no longer important.  Any brother who takes the black get their past crimes forgiven.  

[Bowen Marsh]

26 minutes ago, Minsc said:

Frankly, Thorne didn't goad Jon into doing anything. He wasn't even talking to Jon when he called him a traitor's bastard.  Jeor is just frankly a push over when it comes to Jon. 

Maybe Jeor was trying to suck up to the Starks to get leniency for Jorah.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

On ‎7‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 8:55 PM, Jedi Exile said:

Pro-tip: It wasn't. The execution of Janos Slynt was personal and it was not justice. 

Mormont cut Jon some slack for his desertion of the watch and for breaking his vows.   Jon could have shown the same mercy to Janos Slynt, whose offense was a lot less than his own.  His execution of Janos Slynt was personal and made a mockery of justice when he later allowed the most insubordinate Night's Watch brother of them all in Mance Rayder walk away unpunished.   That is not proper conduct for a leader and a disgrace for a lord commander.  The appropriate punishment and wisest decision would have been to lock Slynt in one of the cells.  Jon was thinking of Ned when he killed Slynt.  It was personal.  Jon was not objective when he passed judgment on Janos Slynt.  Whatever Slynt may have done during his life before the took the black is no longer important.  Any brother who takes the black get their past crimes forgiven.  

Janos Slynt was poison . If allowed to continue his disrespect for the boy commander would spread especially among those of Janos supporters and new recruits . Kill the boy and let the man be born . Jon had to set an example that he was going to be obeyed , unfortunately for Janos , it was to be him . If you read the text following Janos arrest ,Jon would have preferred that it was Alester Thorne . And I serious doubt that Jon did desert , as a free man he has certain rights . both Benjen and Alester  left the watch but both came back . The 93 , Mance ,Daeron , Gared ,and the mutineers did not .

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Ah, yes, great, so it is okay when somebody acts against the interests/orders of a superior officer in a military setting and uses the same shady and ugly methods as 'the villains' to get what he wants?

 

Yes. Apparently Jon can try his earnest to drive a dagger in Alliser's eye sockets and the response should be "big fucking deal the guy said something that really Jon's feelings, people fight ok it's not that serious " and Jon does not even have to bear any punishment over itwhile Slynt can commit brazen insubordinatioion, which the only punishment is death. 

[Ygrain]

19 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Dude, Jon's threat to Rast's life involved holding him and his friends holding him down and allowing Ghost take a nibble on the guy's neck

Forgive me if I am unphased by a scratch on someone who was perfectly willing to beat a weaker boy bloody.

19 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

-someone was harmed to get Sam excused from basic training.

First, while Rast was "harmed" to prevent harm to another, the recruits' disobedience of Thorne's sadistic orders did NOT harm anyone. Second, Sam was not excused from the basic training, the training was simply carried out in a way that didn't cause him harm:

From that day forth, neither Rast nor any of the others would hurt Samwell Tarly. When Ser Alliser matched them against him, they would stand their ground and swat aside his slow, clumsy strokes. If the master-at-arms screamed for an attack, they would dance in and tap Sam lightly on breastplate or helm or leg.

19 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

seemingly not trying to adjust himself to it-Jon has no right to threaten(especially with death), cajole or shame his peers to disobey Alliser in this. 

Are you seriously suggesting that Sam should have been beaten bloody because of who he was and the way he was? Is this supposed to mean that in this hypothetical situation, you would carry out the order?

 

19 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 If Jon killed(as he implied he would do should he obey Alliser's orders),  or seriously injured him and was found out do you think anyone in command would anyone really care he did it because he wanted to protect Sam. Not likely. 

IF he seriously injured or killed. Which he didn't and wouldn't, because he's not a raging psycho. A mute point.

4 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Except overweight nerdy pacifist martin found a use for Sam.

 

2 hours ago, Bowen Marsh said:

Maybe Jeor was trying to suck up to the Starks to get leniency for Jorah.

Utter and complete bullshit.

[Ygrain]

4 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Apparently Jon can try his earnest to drive a dagger in Alliser's eye sockets and the response should be "big fucking deal the guy said something that really Jon's feelings, people fight ok it's not that serious " and Jon does not even have to bear any punishment over itwhile Slynt can commit brazen insubordinatioion, which the only punishment is death. 

No-one ever claimed that Jon's attack on Thorne didn't warrant a punishment. What is being pointed out is that Thorne wasn't an innocent victim here, he knew pretty damn well that Jon was there and that the remark was bound to provoke a reaction. If not for the wight attack, Jon would have been punished somehow, and given how Mormont was disappointed by his failure to control his emotions, it would have been more than some tongue-lashing. Only, the wights happened and Jon saved Mormont's life, for which he earned his gratitude. Had Slynt saved Jon's life somehow, it wouldn't have been chopping time, either.

[Lord Varys]

Jon and his buddies were obliged to follow the commands of the master-at-arms. They had no right not to beat up Ser Piggy because the Watch is (supposedly) a military setting where people don't get to choose which orders they want to follow.

Ser Alliser Thorne is the duly appointed master-at-arms at Castle Black, the man chosen for this command by Lord Commander Mormont. He is the drill sergeant. You don't go behind the drill sergeant's back and talk to the general about training methods if you are a recruit.

Nothing warrants that Samwell Tarly - who could leave the Watch any day if he so chose - get special treatment in his training in a military setting.

And nothing warrants that Jon Snow going behind a superior officer's back is actually rewarded and not punished for this kind of behavior.

All that shows that those 'military parallels' people draw between the Watch and modern military are nonsense. In a modern military nobody is grooming 14-year-old boys for command. Nobody is (hopefully) sucking up to the sons of rich men. Nobody would allow Jon Snow to get away with anything he did, starting with the Samwell thing.

And all that means that Jon was in no way obliged to execute Slynt. He could have done something differently.

[The Sunland Lord]

11 hours ago, Bowen Marsh said:

Maybe Jeor was trying to suck up to the Starks to get leniency for Jorah.

And how would that work?

[Minsc]

11 hours ago, Ygrain said:

No-one ever claimed that Jon's attack on Thorne didn't warrant a punishment. What is being pointed out is that Thorne wasn't an innocent victim here, he knew pretty damn well that Jon was there and that the remark was bound to provoke a reaction. If not for the wight attack, Jon would have been punished somehow, and given how Mormont was disappointed by his failure to control his emotions, it would have been more than some tongue-lashing.

So Thorne deserved to be attacked by a crazed Jon because Jon cannot controll himself?  The fact that Thorne wasn't even talking to Jon makes that excuse even more absurd. Why should Thorne be barred from saying anything unpleasant about Jon or Jon's father simply because Jon is in the room and Jon cannot control himself?

There is zero reason that Jeor should have had to send anytime to wait on Jon's punishment. Moreover, even if Jeor was going to be a pushover and not immediately punish Jon the immediate penalties should have been vastly harsher. Rather being just sent to his room and given special privileges of being accompanied by Ghost Jon should have been thrown in an Ice Cell for the night. 

 

[Targaryen Restoration]

17 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Talking about woulda shoulda coulda can be fun and enjoyable.

Except overweight nerdy pacifist martin found a use for Sam.

George is far from a complete pacifist.  He's a realist.  Maybe Sam sails to Slaver's Bay and becomes ballast for the boat.  

16 hours ago, Bowen Marsh said:

Maybe Jeor was trying to suck up to the Starks to get leniency for Jorah.

Jeor was partial to Jon and let him get away with a lot of bad behavior.   I don't know if he was trying to gain favors with the Starks but it is rather odd to let Jon get away with attacking Thorne.  

[the trees have eyes]

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is established that a man who isn't at the Wall because he decided to take the black because he committed a crime can leave the place while he hasn't yet said his vows. Had Sam already said his vows while he was training with Ser Alliser Thorne? No he did not. He was free to take his leave at any time.

You are being as exasperatingly obtuse as usual.  The fact that both Aemon and Mormont decide to pass Sam into the NW rather than sit him down and say you have not got what it takes, bugger off, shows they think they have a use for him and that beating him bloody or trying to break him in the practice yard is both fruitless and wrongheaded.  If they and Jon can see this, why can't Thorne?  That's the question you should be asking.

Now, I fully understand you like to make up your own rules and tell GRRM how you would have written the story in his place but he established beyond any doubt that Sam is not and cannot be made a warrior and that an order like the NW that needs stewards and builders as well as rangers can obviously make use of anyone as long as they are not narrow-minded sadistic jerks like Thorne (and neither Aemon nor Mormont are).

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Only because a recruit ignored the chain of command and went Aegon behind Thorne's back. 

You mean he did Thorne's job for him by telling Aemon exactly how to make use of Sam?  And Aemon and Mormont agreed.

I hope you understand that's an indictment of Thorne not of Jon.  

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And they were wrong about this 'use' of Samwell Tarly. Sam could not fulfill his duties as a man of the Night's Watch during the great ranging.

Mormont led nearly 300 men to their deaths.  Since he failed perhaps he wasn't fit to be a man of the NW either?

A lot of the men Mormont relied on during his ranging failed to deliver, including the mutineers.  If you want to talk about men not suitable for the NW you might start with them.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If he had come as a maester - fine. Then he might have been of some use. But in this way? No.

That is why Mormont should have ignored this ridiculous request and should have decided to tell Tarly to get his fat ass out of his Night's Watch. The Watch isn't a place for men who cannot do the job. And in the end this is a job for soldiers. When the wildlings, wights, or Others come for Sam he would he to fight. But he can't. He is physically and mentally incapable of doing the job. He proves that time and time again. He is even unwilling to try.

'Sam the Slayer' is a joke. If Small Paul hadn't carried Sam as long as he did Sam himself would have long been a wight by the time the Other showed up - and perhaps he might have been able to deal with the Other/not die if Sam hadn't cost him so much strength.

Well you like the sound of your own voice but there's nothing new or surprising there.  Sam is not a model soldier but if the old, the senile and the lame fill the ranks of the NW you should not be surprised if fat kid is allowed to help the blind maester with his duties.

Small Paul?  You understand he has a child's IQ, right?  And he was one of the mutineers (though mentally incapable in our terms) and wanted to keep Mormont's raven after they killed him.  And here you are parading him as the real deal of who a brother of the NW should be rather than a "fraud" like Sam.  You would be funny if you were not in earnest with this bullcrap.

It's really boring having to hear you make up your own rules and tell us all how GRRM should write his story all the time.  You may think GRRM or Mormont should have sent Sam packing because that's what you would have done but frankly no one cares.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Ah, yes, great, so it is okay when somebody acts against the interests/orders of a superior officer in a military setting and uses the same shady and ugly methods as 'the villains' to get what he wants? Why is it then not also okay that Janos Slynt tells this traitor's bastard and turncloak Lord Commander whose election was rigged to go fuck himself? The man has a right to his views, does he not? And just as Jon Snow he should be allowed to do as he pleases and also to get away with everything he does.

This is tendentious nonsense.  Jon moves to protect a fellow recruit against malicious bullying.  The rest of the recruits agree with him and support him in this with one notable exception (Rast).  Jon never challenges or mocks Alliser Thorne or refuses a command.

Comparing this beneficial action with Slynt's open contempt and mutiny is plain nonsense.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

You cannot outright condemn one behavior and then idealize the other.

It depends on what those behaviors are, now doesn't it....

Your attempt to equate them is really rather silly.

16 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And this has nothing to do with being there for a friend - Jon could give Sam comfort and help, etc. - but not by breaking the rules. In a military setting that kind of thing should not be tolerated, no?

There's these concepts like context, intent, reasonableness of conduct, ramifications of actions and proportionality that you might want to consider when you couch an argument or a rebuttal but you seem to find them inconvenient to your line of reasoning and try and deal only in absolutes (arbitrarily decided upon by you) and in false equivalences.  It makes for a really poor and repetitive conversation......

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes they did. Jon did not sabotage Sam's traing; more Jon made it so that Sam did not have to do basic training in general through threating,cajoling and shaming his peers.

Jesus wept.  At what point are you prepared to acknowledge that the author spells out for us that Randyl Tarly spent years trying to make Sam into a warrior and failed.  That he also spelled out Jon's realisation that Thorne would fail also and that a different course of action was required.  That he took this to Aemon (who took it to Mormont) AND THEY AGREED WITH HIM!  Just wrap your noodle around that will ya.

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

At the very least threatening to murder someone to get them to commit insubordinatioion at the very least warrants reprimand no? Or is that something you think should be excused totally by Watch's command? Seriously what Jon did to Rast wasn't just giving "advice" like Noyle did; it was a very explicit death threat one made by Jon to Rast.

If it was insubordination you can be sure Thorne would have had Jon punished immediately and any other boy who followed his example.  The whole point is they are obeying the order to spar with Sam but refuse to beat the crap out of him after he yields so Thorne cannot punish them, merely vent his frustration that the boys won't mindlessly bludgeon Sam for his entertainment.

The point I made about Noye seems lost on you.  The point was that Jon made himself unpopular with the other boys so they roughed him up (which is what Jon and his friends later do to Rast for similar reasons).  Noye's advice to Jon was not to complain about how unfair it was but to change his ways.  Rast might well complain about how unfair it was having a face to face with Ghost but the advice he would best be served by is to change his ways.

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

If not for Jon odds are no one else would care to do any of his peers harm over Sam getting hurt in training.

Yes.  This is commonly regarded as a leadership.  It is also offering a degree of protection to Sam that Thorne should have been providing himself.  Again the conclusion that Tyrion and later Mormont reach is that Thorne is not suitable for the position, something the reader is made well aware of by the author.

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

My point was that Rast probably wasn't the only trainiee who wasn't buying the argument of Sam should get some slack because he was a coward given threats against others had to be made aswell-Rast's was probably the most extreme but it's not a given every trainies besides with Rast agreed with Jon that Sam needs to be eased up on because the guy is weak.

Undoubtedly.  Rast is the last holdout, the final one to be persuaded or warned into leaving Sam alone.  Unfortunately for you that puts you in the position of speaking up for the most brutal and callous individual who was only doing what he was told to (and getting a huge amount of enjoyment out of it).  If your argument forces you into this position it's worth examining the merits of your argument and whether it's one worth making.

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

His initial case was if left alone Sam  would get seriously hurt if not die.   Showing until this  meeting Jon never really seriously thought of how Sam could be adequately used for the watch-his concern was strictly in making sure the boy wasn't hurt, all Jon's actions prior to protect Sam wasn't to secure a valueble asset to the watch but merely save a traumatized and nice guy from getting hurt during training because he won't bring himself to fully participate.

I dunno, dude, you make it sound like the bolded is a bad thing.  The obvious point is that Jon has, or rather develops, an interest in Sam's well-being, something that should be a  concern of Thorne's but quite obviously never is.  Jon takes the time to get to know and understand Sam, Thorne only ever despises and brutalizes him.  Jon points out to the Officers how Sam could be useful, Thorne just sees a target to be mocked and savaged.  The author cannot make it any clearer who is in the right. 

It's like you watched Full Metal Jacket and thought Joker and the others were right to turn on Private Pyle (a train of events that breaks him and leads him to murder the drill instructor and commit suicide).  Or you watched A Few Good Men and thought the marines were right to haze Santiago for being sub-standard and making the rest of them look bad (a train of events that leads to his death).  GRRM gives you the same scenario.  That is has a different outcome is down to Jon.

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Jon's murder attempt(I cannot describe someone trying to stab someone through the eyes with a dagger as anything but ) on Alliser 

I would call trying to stab someone through the eye with a dagger attempted murder as well.  Unfortunately for your argument that is not what Jon does and as I assume you must have read the books and know this you must be distorting the text to bolster your argument.  Jon slashes at his face, i.e. he uses the blade to try and cut, rather than stabbing, i.e. using the point to try and penetrate the skull and kill.

There's no doubt there is a risk Thorne could have been badly scarred or seriously injured but it's not attempted murder it's attempted wounding.  If you rewrite Jon's actions into whatever is convenient for you then you look like you will say anything to try and stick to your guns.  Maybe stick to the text instead

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Jon's murder attempt(I cannot describe someone trying to stab someone through the eyes with a dagger as anything but ) on Alliser had nothing to do with Mormont's decision to send the man as an envoy.  Jeor did not care about sparring an overly prideful man from having his pride pricked(if that was his reasoning he's a fool), and sending Alliser as an envoy wouldn't even do that because the guy would still have to come back and pressumbly resume his position-in which case would still have to deny him his position. 

Ok, seems maybe I was wrong and you have not read the books.  In the books Mormont tells Jon 

A Game of Thrones - Jon VIII

Ser Alliser Thorne left yestermorn for Eastwatch-by-the-Sea."

Jon lowered the sword. "Why?" he said, stupidly.

Mormont snorted. "Because I sent him, why do you think? He's bringing the hand your Ghost tore off the end of Jafer Flowers's wrist. I have commanded him to take ship to King's Landing and lay it before this boy king. That should get young Joffrey's attention, I'd think … and Ser Alliser's a knight, highborn, anointed, with old friends at court, altogether harder to ignore than a glorified crow."

"Crow." Jon thought the raven sounded faintly indignant.

"As well," the Lord Commander continued, ignoring the bird's protest, "it puts a thousand leagues twixt him and you without it seeming a rebuke." He jabbed a finger up at Jon's face. "And don't think this means I approve of that nonsense in the common hall. Valor makes up for a fair amount of folly, but you're not a boy anymore, however many years you've seen. That's a man's sword you have there, and it will take a man to wield her. I'll expect you to act the part, henceforth."

"Yes, my lord." Jon slid the sword back into the silver-banded scabbard. If not the blade he would have chosen, it was nonetheless a noble gift, and freeing him from Alliser Thorne's malignance was nobler still.

What reason might Mormont have to rebuke Thorne do you think?  Perhaps for his past in the nonsense in the Common Hall, hey? Jon recognizes the gift for what it is.  You seem awfully certain Mormont would not demote Thorne by degrees and by giving him a sideways move on a special project only to find there was no return to his previous job when the project was finished when that is exactly what he appears to be doing.  You also seem awfully sure that he would not spare Thorne by doing this in a humiliating manner but his words to Jon (unfortunately for you) refute this.

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Hell the man was reassigned as Maester at arms east watch upon his return ; there clearly was never any intent to demote the man. 

Say what now?  You tell us he is removed as master at arms at Castle Black and shunted off to Eastwatch.  It's an actual and clear demotion.  Does he have responsibility for training any recruits any more or is it a title?

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The context of Jon's actions really don't necessitate to grant him a complete pardon for his actions; we're talking about a military order in a medeval society, relatively new recruits openly, committing insubordinatioion, does the watch harm; men need to know their are consequences to disrespecting the chain of command even if your  superior is doing something that you may not like, or find dumb; Jon if he had went to Aemon from the start would have done nothing as far as I can see deserving reprimand.  

Well this is your opinion.  With regard to Sam's training even Thorne does not seem to consider Jon insubordinate or he would surely have punished him for it.  With regards to bypassing the futile brutalizing of Sam and having him help Aemon the other officers seem to regard Jon as showing initiative, problem solving skills and leadership, a far cry from insubordination.

If you punished men for initiative (and for behaviour without countermanding or refusing orders) and rewarded officers for short-sighted and brutal commands you would have a second rate military pretty damn quick.  Now, that is exactly what the NW is but it doesn't mean they can't try and improve things.

[dmfn]

@Lord Varys

Sam wasn't exactly free to just leave the Watch. His father ordered him to take the black to eliminate him as heir. His own father would kill him if he didn't stay at the wall.

As far as being lucky with dragonglass... you don't imagine finding those weapons at the Fist, a probable historical Other battle sight, wrapped in a NW cloak was enough of a clue? I mean he might have been guessing when he used the dagger, but he's not quite the useless lump you make him out to be. 

 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

You are being as exasperatingly obtuse as usual.  The fact that both Aemon and Mormont decide to pass Sam into the NW rather than sit him down and say you have not got what it takes, bugger off, shows they think they have a use for him and that beating him bloody or trying to break him in the practice yard is both fruitless and wrongheaded. 

Well, they are wrong. Sam cannot do the single task that has been given to him - a very important and crucial task at that. Jon's intervention here leads directly to Sam fucking things up at the Fist and it also leads to Chett's cabal and the mutiny at Craster's.

The fact that Sam may have some use is actually pretty much irrelevant. The issue is that the chain of command isn't upheld and that a man undeserving of favorable treatment - Sam Tarly - gets away with 'I don't want to fight, I can't fight, I'm coward, please don't make me do what any other man has bring himself to do.'

And that's just counterproductive in a military environment.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

If they and Jon can see this, why can't Thorne?  That's the question you should be asking.

It is Thorne's call, not Jon Snow's. If Mormont doesn't see Sam's great qualities by himself then Jon should have accepted that.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Now, I fully understand you like to make up your own rules and tell GRRM how you would have written the story in his place but he established beyond any doubt that Sam is not and cannot be made a warrior and that an order like the NW that needs stewards and builders as well as rangers can obviously make use of anyone as long as they are not narrow-minded sadistic jerks like Thorne (and neither Aemon nor Mormont are).

Sam is far too clumsy and weak to be a builder and ends up being a steward in a favorable position for no other reason than having ties to the guys in charge.

Sam doesn't deserve this - as he himself later proves when he fucks things up.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

You mean he did Thorne's job for him by telling Aemon exactly how to make use of Sam?  And Aemon and Mormont agreed.

Which is the point. Jon had no right to do that - or would not have any such right in a proper military environment.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Mormont led nearly 300 men to their deaths.  Since he failed perhaps he wasn't fit to be a man of the NW either?

Mormont wasn't exactly the greatest Lord Commander of Westerosi history, yes.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

A lot of the men Mormont relied on during his ranging failed to deliver, including the mutineers.  If you want to talk about men not suitable for the NW you might start with them.

Newsflash: In the cases of the criminals the Watch has no other choice but to take them. They cannot send them away. Sam they could have sent away.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Well you like the sound of your own voice but there's nothing new or surprising there.  Sam is not a model soldier but if the old, the senile and the lame fill the ranks of the NW you should not be surprised if fat kid is allowed to help the blind maester with his duties.

I'm not surprised. I know how Jon subverted the chain of command to get Sam in - but that doesn't mean that's how things should be done, no?

Newsflash again: The black brothers serve for life. It is inevitable that its members grow old. They deal with that. It is not my fault that there is some sort of entrance exam and nobody throws old men out of the Watch. Complain to George about that.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Small Paul?  You understand he has a child's IQ, right?  And he was one of the mutineers (though mentally incapable in our terms) and wanted to keep Mormont's raven after they killed him.  And here you are parading him as the real deal of who a brother of the NW should be rather than a "fraud" like Sam.  You would be funny if you were not in earnest with this bullcrap.

I know that, but this isn't the issue. The issue is that Ser Piggy had to be carried by Small Paul (which the man did, showing that he was indeed in no way a plotter or even a bad person, because no one in his right mind would have bothered bearing Sam in that situation) and that this slowed Small Paul down to degree that they both fell further and further behind the men, leading to their encounter with the Other. If Paul hadn't been slowed down they might never have met the creature - or if they had Paul might have been strong/powerful enough to do something about it. We don't know yet whether can also kill them simply with brute strength.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

It's really boring having to hear you make up your own rules and tell us all how GRRM should write his story all the time.  You may think GRRM or Mormont should have sent Sam packing because that's what you would have done but frankly no one cares.

Frankly, you don't seem to understand what I'm writing here. I'm not really of the opinion that Sam should be gone - I just point out that he technically had no place at the Wall and should have never gotten in.

In fact, the whole 'Jon helps his best friend there' scenario is basically a non-issue. Sam hasn't said the words yet. He can go, just as Jon could go until he said the words. That Sam doesn't have the courage to go is his problem - not ours. The man could have been saved from 'evil Ser Alliser' and the other recruits simply by telling them 'Screw you, rapists, I'm out of here. Have fun freezing to death at the end of the world. I go see the world.'

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

This is tendentious nonsense.  Jon moves to protect a fellow recruit against malicious bullying.  The rest of the recruits agree with him and support him in this with one notable exception (Rast).  Jon never challenges or mocks Alliser Thorne or refuses a command.

LOL, no. Jon actually mocks Ser Alliser in the common hall. And he - and his fellow recruits - refuse to beat up Samwell Tarly the way Ser Alliser commanded them to do. In my book that constitutes mocking and refusing to follow an order.

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

Comparing this beneficial action with Slynt's open contempt and mutiny is plain nonsense.

You can compare it to make a point. Nobody is saying it is the same to disobey the Lord Commander and the master-at-arms - but one sees a pattern there in Jon Snow. On a smaller scale he did exactly the same thing he accuses Slynt in his mind of possibly doing in the future if he were continue to live - plot behind his back. Or would you deny that Jon plotted by Thorne's back in the entirety of the Sam affair? And wasn't Thorne Jon's superior officer, the man in charge of training the recruits?

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

There's these concepts like context, intent, reasonableness of conduct, ramifications of actions and proportionality that you might want to consider when you couch an argument or a rebuttal but you seem to find them inconvenient to your line of reasoning and try and deal only in absolutes (arbitrarily decided upon by you) and in false equivalences.  It makes for a really poor and repetitive conversation......

Were do I deal in absolutes? I never said Jon should have been executed for the Sam thing. And certainly not for the aborted desertion thing (although I think one could have executed him for that if one wanted to do that). But he sure as hell should have been punished most severely for the attempt on Thorne.

The false equivalence is creating a scenario where Jon nearly has a moral obligation to execute Slynt because this is 'a military setting' and then refusing to even consider what it means for a lot of Jon Snow's actions if this actually were 'a military setting' comparable to modern military institutions.

1 hour ago, dmfn said:

@Lord Varys

Sam wasn't exactly free to just leave the Watch. His father ordered him to take the black to eliminate him as heir. His own father would kill him if he didn't stay at the wall.

That would be Sam's problem, to be sure. But Randyll Tarly doesn't have the legal power to force his son to take the black, and he knows it. That's why he threatened to murder Sam in the first place.

However, nobody said Sam should return to Horn Hill. Why not go to Winterfell instead? Robb would have surely taken him in if Jon had given him a letter of recommendation. He could also have found his way to the Citadel or some septry where he could have become a decent septon.

If Randyll wanted to kill his son he would first have to find him, no?

1 hour ago, dmfn said:

As far as being lucky with dragonglass... you don't imagine finding those weapons at the Fist, a probable historical Other battle sight, wrapped in a NW cloak was enough of a clue? I mean he might have been guessing when he used the dagger, but he's not quite the useless lump you make him out to be. 

Since we have his POV of that scene and there is no indication that he thinks anything along those lines I doubt this. It was a huge surprise that dragonglass can kill Others.

I stand by my view that Sam is useless at the Wall in his primary capacity as a soldier. As a scholar and maester he might be of some use but he didn't come there as a maester.

The fact that Sam sucks doesn't mean others don't suck, too, but apparently all the other recruits who had a choice (however few that might have been) passed Thorne's training.