Just an observation...

[LyrnaSnowBunnyAvenger]

17 hours ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

You should direct this to the R + L = J believers.  They need to open their minds to other possibilities.  Possibilities that are more likely, in my opinion, to be correct.

You could say the same to the R+L=J detractors.  I think it is very hard to disbelieve, but I respect what someone thinks.  However, some of them can be down right rude about those of us who believe that is what happened. 

However, that doesn't compare to some of the tin foil hattery that I've seen.  Rheagar being somehow Coldhands, Daario and Mance at the same time?  Except when he is moonlighting as Euron?  There being a hidden and secret Targaryen behind every single bush? Hotpie as another secret Baratheon bastard?  Jaime and Cersei are identical twins?  

I fully support remaining civil to each other.  An other thread going on about if Arthur Dayne is alive, which I think is crazy, but I'll read what people have to think.  

That said, if someone is being outright crazy (i.e., Jaime and Cersei being identical), then they should be called out.  Just be polite when doing so. 

[Lady Rhodes]

@LyrnaSnowBunnyAvenger  I invite all discussion and thoughts that have textual support, tinfoil or no.  My rationale is this: tin foil theories are from people who are looking at things from a different lense, a different pov.  They look at a text and say, "Is there more to this? Are we being led to believe one thing when the converse is true?" By bashing tin foil theories outright, which has been wont to happen, we are discouraging the type of detailed analysis that makes these texts such engaging reads.  I would argue that some tin foil theories come to the wrong conclusion, but the outset - hey, this looks funny to me - is in fact worthy of examination. 

And this goes for the people promoting their tin foil - don't be so defensive of your theory that you shoot down everyone who brings up something to the contrary. 

But yes, you have the right of it. Disagree, be passionate in your disagreement, but we can be good forum citizens and be polite when doing so.

[HexMachina]

Think it is important to point out though that some “tinfoil” theories are just not at all text based but “wouldn’t it be cool if X?”

[Legitimate_Bastard]

On 12/13/2018 at 9:28 AM, Lady Rhodes said:

I went back and reread some of the pre-dance with dragons threads.  I think we all should because it made me realize a) how tinfoil we all can be at times, b) how wrong we can all be at times, which is why c) we should all be respectful, politely discuss and not outright dismiss other people's thoughts because...GASP! they could be right.

Just a friendly thought and reminder  

 

An excellent observation. I agree 100%

[Clegane'sPup]

On 12/13/2018 at 9:28 AM, Lady Rhodes said:

I went back and reread some of the pre-dance with dragons threads.  I think we all should because it made me realize a) how tinfoil we all can be at times, b) how wrong we can all be at times, which is why c) we should all be respectful, politely discuss and not outright dismiss other people's thoughts because...GASP! they could be right.

Just a friendly thought and reminder  

 

Rudeness is subjective.

Words typed on a page have no tone or inflection. As in :    a change in the form of a word (typically the ending) to express a grammatical function or attribute such as tense, mood, person, number, case, and gender.   synonyms:    stress, cadence, rhythm, accent, intonation, pitch, emphasis, modulation, lilt, tone

There is also crass. Again subjective.

lacking sensitivity, refinement, or intelligence.    synonyms:    stupid, insensitive, mindless, thoughtless, ignorant, witless, oafish, boorish, asinine, coarse, gross, graceless, tasteless, tactless

Or how about vulgar:

lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined.  synonyms:    tasteless, crass, tawdry, ostentatious, flamboyant, overdone, showy, gaudy, garish, brassy, kitsch, kitschy, tinselly, loud;     impolite, ill-mannered, unmannerly, rude, indecorous, unseemly, ill-bred, boorish, uncouth, crude, rough;    unsophisticated, unrefined, common, low-minded;   unladylike, ungentlemanly.

If a person puts out a theory on the internet, tinfoil, or otherwise, a person needs to understand that there will be negative and positive feedback. If a person blatantly tries to stir up controversy -- flame on.

If a person makes an innocent mistake of remembering material written in the saga incorrectly --- a person needs to accept that the person will be corrected not patted on the head and fawned over.

Given that their are occasionally new readers coming to the board who have no idea about martin's Dunk & Egg stories, WOIAF, App information, and F & B ---- I would suggest tolerance and open mindedness.

When it comes to the willful misrepresentation of martin's saga --- weeeeeeel now, a person needs to accept that there will be push back.

AND what you failed to mention is during the pre dance boards discussions occasionally got so rowdy people were placed in time out and sometimes banished. Some right fully so --- others not so much --- because the cliques would gang up on the unbeliever/disagreer.

When WoW is eventually released you will see how "rude" posters can be. There were a few moderators who could get right testy and few posters who would not tolerate BS.

 

[The Mother of The Others]

Why the hell would anyone be satisfied with a theory that's likely?  And therefore mundane, not groundbreaking, low in revelatory value, and basically an assertion of what the author appears to be doing already.... which is more like a refocussed synopsis than a theory.  Why bother with that?   And why this prejudice against headgear?    Hats aren't for the insane.   Hats are a blessing for the bald community, the construction worker, the limited athlete (baseball), the cool people with their brims pointed at 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 o'clock, the revolutionaries, the revered sailor- authors among us, the Hassidic, the cowboy, the skier- bankrobbers one sees in movies and at the gas station.   Hats are not to be defamed, people.   Wearing them is what separates us from the apes and zebras, the platypusses and anteaters, the chinchillas and mechagodzillas.   So put your damn hats back on if that's the only way you kids have of referring to theories that are interesting enough to read.

[Clegane'sPup]

28 minutes ago, The Mother of The Others said:

Why the hell would anyone be satisfied with a theory that's likely?  And therefore mundane, not groundbreaking, low in revelatory value, and basically an assertion of what the author appears to be doing already.... which is more like a refocussed synopsis than a theory.  Why bother with that?   And why this prejudice against headgear?    Hats aren't for the insane.   Hats are a blessing for the bald community, the construction worker, the limited athlete (baseball), the cool people with their brims pointed at 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 o'clock, the revolutionaries, the revered sailor- authors among us, the Hassidic, the cowboy, the skier- bankrobbers one sees in movies and at the gas station.   Hats are not to be defamed, people.   Wearing them is what separates us from the apes and zebras, the platypusses and anteaters, the chinchillas and mechagodzillas.   So put your damn hats back on if that's the only way you kids have of referring to theories that are interesting enough to read.

Har! Dats all cool and stuff --- long as hat wearers dunna complain when shyte starts flying. The hat wearers have to have the tits and balls to roll up witout crying.

[Lady Rhodes]

@Clegane'sPup Certainly. Discuss, discuss passionately, disagree fervently.  But no one has to be rude.  And while you are correct, rudeness, vulgarity, and crassness are subjective, I think most people know where the line is, but some choose to cross it.

 

[Clegane'sPup]

2 minutes ago, Lady Rhodes said:

@Clegane'sPup Certainly. Discuss, discuss passionately, disagree fervently.  But no one has to be rude.  And while you are correct, rudeness, vulgarity, and crassness are subjective, I think most people know where the line is, but some choose to cross it.

 

not everyone on the forum is as tolerant and accepting as the crow in heresy

 

[Lady Rhodes]

Just now, Clegane'sPup said:

not everyone on the forum is as tolerant and accepting as the crow in heresy

 

I think you misjudge my sentiments.  Disagree, call people out.  If someone says to me "I think this is totally off base for reasons X,Y, and Z"  I am going to listen to them.  If someone says to me, "your fact is incorrect"  I will look it up and immediately own up to it. I think we all should.

But there is a difference between calling someone out and belittling. The ability to discuss and disagree without resorting to personal attacks is not revolutionary.

[Clegane'sPup]

1 minute ago, Lady Rhodes said:

But there is a difference between calling someone out and belittling.

I'm not trying to be difficult.

Did someone call you out?

Did someone belittle you?

Are your hackles up because you disagree with how a poster treated another poster?

If a person throws out a theory or thought or idea people can and will disagree.

Martin has an incomplete work. Theories abound.

As a reader it is my responsibility to ascertain the who, what, when, how and why.

Yes, martin's tale is ambiguous.

[John Suburbs]

22 hours ago, Ran said:

Earlier iterations of this forum, such as the Eesite and EzBoard, existed. There's a partial archive of Eesite as it was abandoned here, and in fact there's part of a thread about Jon Arryn's killer. You'll get a sense of the tenor of our discussions there.

Thanks Ran, that was an interesting read. I'll have to bookmark that site.

[Lady Rhodes]

@Clegane'sPupI was not referring to you but was speaking in general, and I do not think you are being difficult.

3 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

If a person throws out a theory or thought or idea people can and will disagree

Certainly. Glad we can agree!

 

3 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Thanks Ran, that was an interesting read. I'll have to bookmark that site

I did as well. Fascinating link.