Jon was right in executing Janos Slynt

[Alyn Oakenfist]

So I know there are a lot of people peddling the "Jon was wrong in executing poor loyal Janos" thing. But think about it, whichever way you take it, Jon was 100% in the right

- From a legalism standpoint Jon was 100% right, Janos was committing insubordination and openly questioning Jon's authority. Jon was in his right to execute him.

- From a moral point of view, do I even need to argue this, given everything from Janos screwing over Ned to him actively trying to get Jon killed on several occasions.

- From a pragmatic point of view he was snuffing out resistance. Janos had been his main opponent int he elections and was putting himself up as a loud mouth counter to Jon. He was a living focal point of anti Jon potential conspiracies. Executing him removed one of the 2 most dangerous men for Jon and proved a point that Jon was not messing around.

So it was a good decision on Jon's behalf. It was pragmatic, removing an active threat and he was in the right, morally as Janos had been and probably was seeking Jon's death as well as legally as Jon was completely in the right to execute him for refusing to obey his orders several times in a row. All military orders including the army had death as a potential punishment for insubordination.

[James Steller]

Wait, is this really a contested point? Janos Slynt was openly treasonous and seditious, and he tried to threaten his opponents with punishment and death from his friends in King’s Landing. Jon is the Lord Commander by elected assembly, he’s the most democratic figure in the entire series, and he has all kinds of precedent to execute a man who was already banished to the Wall as a prisoner. And his crime was murdering children.

Stannis Baratheon himself nods in approval. It’s the sign that Jon is a true leader, just like his father before him.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

6 minutes ago, James Steller said:

Wait, is this really a contested point?

I've read countless people saying that Jon had no right to execute him that he was no longer guilty of all his past transgressions and that Jon was setting him up all of which somehow justifies Janos being openly seditious

[SeanF]

The punishment for mutiny, in the face of the enemy, is death.

Of course, Jon was correct to execute him.

[Lord Lannister]

The Janos Slynt defenders are trolling you. Don't feed the trolls.

[kissdbyfire]

14 minutes ago, James Steller said:

Wait, is this really a contested point? Janos Slynt was openly treasonous and seditious, and he tried to threaten his opponents with punishment and death from his friends in King’s Landing. Jon is the Lord Commander by elected assembly, he’s the most democratic figure in the entire series, and he has all kinds of precedent to execute a man who was already banished to the Wall as a prisoner. And his crime was murdering children.

Stannis Baratheon himself nods in approval. It’s the sign that Jon is a true leader, just like his father before him.

Last year there were 4 full threads about it. Most people agree, yes, Slynt should have been executed. But give it a couple of minutes, and you’ll see the arguments pouring in from the Jon/Stark haters. It’s actually quite entertaining. 

[Floki of the Ironborn]

Just now, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I've read countless people saying that Jon had no right to execute him that he was no longer guilty of all his past transgressions and that Jon was setting him up all of which somehow justifies Janos being openly seditious

Oh yeah, really setting Janos up for execution; giving him command of his own castle and a garrison to boot? Janos was an incompetent idiot who only wanted authority if he could delegate the real work to other people. He wasn't interested in actually being a leader, or else he'd have grabbed that opportunity as soon as Jon offered it. And even if he didn't want to be a leader and just wanted to build power for himself, he could have done that too. He could have played the long game and built up a loyal base for himself (we already know that he was gaining ground in the election before Mallister and Pyke got their supporters to vote strategically). Instead, he makes the stupidest decisions possible so that Jon has literally no reason NOT to execute that dickhead. He might as well have openly attacked Jon Snow with a weapon after telling everyone that he was going to try and kill the Lord Commander in a coup. 

[Arthur Peres]

Only Jon haters take the side of Slynt, the guy was a waste of space and the wall is better without him, at least is one less mounth to feed.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

Just now, Arthur Peres said:

at least is one less mounth to feed.

Bowen Marsh, is that you?

[Floki of the Ironborn]

2 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Last year there were 4 full threads about it. Most people agree, yes, Slynt should have been executed. But give it a couple of minutes, and you’ll see that arguments pouring in from the Jon/Stark haters. It’s actually quite entertaining. 

Is it that entertaining? Watching a bunch of people hate on Jon Snow so much that they prefer a literal child killer? Just seems gratuitously contrarian to me.

[El Guapo]

I hare Jon as much as anybody and even I admit that he was right to execute Janos.

[Ser Leftwich]

18 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Is it that entertaining? Watching a bunch of people hate on Jon Snow so much that they prefer a literal child killer? Just seems gratuitously contrarian to me.

A good portion of the nutters/trolls around here are here only to be gratuitously contrarian.

[SeanF]

39 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Is it that entertaining? Watching a bunch of people hate on Jon Snow so much that they prefer a literal child killer? Just seems gratuitously contrarian to me.

It's the same element who will argue that Walder Frey was right, or Bowen Marsh was right.

[Hugorfonics]

37 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Last year there were 4 full threads about it. 

Is it that time already?

37 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

 But give it a couple of minutes, 

Howd i do?

37 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

It’s actually quite entertaining. 

I live to serve

37 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

the Jon/Stark haters

Ok, so, thats not me. I love Starks. Jons cool too.

1 hour ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

- From a pragmatic point of view he was snuffing out resistance. 

So! The resistance that Jon tried to snuff out, um, it wasn't. Jon was murdered by his brothers, who were also coincidentally Janos' brothers. 

1 hour ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Janos had been his main opponent int he elections

Most of Castle Black was behind Slynt in the election. So Janos' "many friends" actually existed. These friends watched Janos Slynt become a marty to Jons "tyranny".

Conclusion, I disagree. From a pragmatic/ not getting ides of marshed point of view Jon obviously fucked up

[Alexis-something-Rose]

I am still 100% puzzled as to when Janos Slynt was sworn in as a brother of the Night's Watch and which order he was even assigned to. 

I wish he more than one head, that way Jon could have beheaded him several times more. Honestly, fuck Janos Slynt and the horse he rode on (ship, horse, whatever).

[kissdbyfire]

5 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I am still 100% puzzled as to when Janos Slynt was sworn in as a brother of the Night's Watch and which order he was even assigned to. 

I wish he more than one head, that way Jon could have beheaded him several times more. Honestly, fuck Janos Slynt and the horse he rode on (ship, horse, whatever).

Preach. 
Well, except for the horse part.

@Hugorfonics, nope, I wasn’t talking about you and you know that! 
 

@Floki of the Ironborn, yes, I find it very entertaining that people would rather come across as not understanding the text at all rather than just conceding that Jon was, w/o a shred of doubt, 100% right in executing that PoS. And just to be perfectly clear, this PoS that wasn’t executed for being a PoS, but for gross and repeated insubordination. 

[Lord Lannister]

10 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I am still 100% puzzled as to when Janos Slynt was sworn in as a brother of the Night's Watch and which order he was even assigned to. 

He probably got sworn in upon his arrival. It's not like he was a green recruit so to say. In theory this is a person who proved himself, served as commander of the Gold Cloaks and was a Lord. Kind of. As such he was named a commander of some sort right away and some were penciling him in for the Lord Commander's open position. Ned would've almost certainly gotten the same treatment had he been sent to the Wall. Probably the only reason Jon was put through the recruit program like he was is because he was young. Otherwise, yeah.. bet he would've been fast tracked too. Even more than he already was.

For all the preachiness of the egalitarianism of the Watch, the knightly and noble classes seem to consistently be in charge. 

[argonak]

16 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

He probably got sworn in upon his arrival. It's not like he was a green recruit so to say. In theory this is a person who proved himself, served as commander of the Gold Cloaks and was a Lord. Kind of. As such he was named a commander of some sort right away and some were penciling him in for the Lord Commander's open position. Ned would've almost certainly gotten the same treatment had he been sent to the Wall. Probably the only reason Jon was put through the recruit program like he was is because he was young. Otherwise, yeah.. bet he would've been fast tracked too. Even more than he already was.

For all the preachiness of the egalitarianism of the Watch, the knightly and noble classes seem to consistently be in charge. 

It would be a very interesting alternate storyline for Ned to have been sent to the wall.  Ned would have been a top contender for LC.  And then Jon and him could have made up some lost time, right before Ned get's stabbed in the back by Cersei's assassins.

[Hugorfonics]

1 hour ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I am still 100% puzzled as to when Janos Slynt was sworn in as a brother of the Night's Watch and which order he was even assigned to. 

Sometime in clash id imagine. Maybe before Blackwater since Tywin might have pardoned.

Ranger, as he led the Eastwatch crows to CB and subsequently took command of the battle

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

@Hugorfonics, nope, I wasn’t talking about you and you know that!

So im not entertaining?

[Alexis-something-Rose]

30 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Ranger, as he led the Eastwatch crows to CB and subsequently took command of the battle

 

A ranger maybe, but Cotter Pyke was the one who led Stannis and the men of Eastwatch to the wildling camp. Janos Slynt and Alliser Thorne sent Jon to assassinate Mance Rayder right before the battle. So it's not like that bald dummy proved anything in battle.

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

For all the preachiness of the egalitarianism of the Watch, the knightly and noble classes seem to consistently be in charge. 

Absolutely. And that's the entire reason Mormont loses three men in the opening pages of the story. He gave Waymar Royce command of a ranging even though he was not ready for it. But he did not want to offend Waymar's powerful lord father. For as much preaching as Mormont is doing about the men of the NW putting their families aside, he sure as hell did not put his highborn men's families aside.

Jon does try to change things when he makes Satin his squire, and makes Leathers his master-at-arms. He gives command of castles to Giant and Iron Emmett (his previous master-at-arms). I don't know if Iron Emmett is highborn or not. Ulmer is the one in charge of training the archers because he is the best archer. These people are in the places they are in because they deserve to be, not because they come from influential families.

Anyway . . . Janos Slynt is trash.