Jaenara Belarys Posted June 3, 2021 Share Posted June 3, 2021 10 hours ago, SeanF said: Perhaps they're on bad terms with their sisters. Sure, I might be on bad terms with my sister, but there ain't no goddamn way I'm leaving them for a sadistic **** to use as a toy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moiraine Sedai Posted June 4, 2021 Share Posted June 4, 2021 On 5/20/2021 at 4:24 AM, The Lord of the Crossing said: Going forward, if the Night's Watch survives, they will set up an impeachment process to remove a dysfunctional leader. That or set a term limit to the position of lord commander. Henceforth, this sad affair will be known as Jongate. The new law which allows for the orderly removal of a lord commander will forever be associated with the scandal known as Jongate. I like term limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lord of the Crossing Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 On 6/4/2021 at 1:35 PM, Moiraine Sedai said: I like term limits. Jongate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 Oh ffs another Jon Snow murdered apologist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoth the raven, Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 On 6/3/2021 at 4:03 AM, Pontius Pilate said: Jon could have been removed for improper conduct for killing Janos Slynt and definitely should have been removed for his preferential treatment of Mance Rayder. Jon was at fault all the way. Impeachment is the right treatment for a reasonable commander. Which Jon was not. Jon is not going to get demoted without a fight because he was using the resources of the watch to continue his family fight with the enemies. Daggers were the only way to stop Jon. Which is what Bowen Marsh had to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 "This," Qyburn said. "For years now, the Night's Watch has begged for men. Lord Stannis has answered their plea. Can King Tommen do less? His Grace should send the Wall a hundred men. To take the black, ostensibly, but in truth . . ." ". . . to remove Jon Snow from the command," Cersei finished, delighted. I knew I was right to want him on my council. "That is just what we shall do." She laughed. If this bastard boy is truly his father's son, he will not suspect a thing. Perhaps he will even thank me, before the blade slides between his ribs. "It will need to be done carefully, to be sure. Leave the rest to me, my lords." This was how an enemy should be dealt with: with a dagger, not a declaration. "We have done good work today, my lords. I thank you. Is there aught else?" Yeah, Jon Snow REALLY messed up by adding wildlings to the men south of the wall and siding with Stannis. /s Night's Watch neutrality has always been bullshit. They've always been more loyal to the Starks because they were the ones who actually gave two shites who came over the wall. Jon made the right choice with Stannis, though his initial choice wasn't one at all. Stannis saved the NW's ass at the wall, they owe him. Ramsay Bolton and others were coming to unseat him anyways, and then the NW would just be a shell and would fall to the others due to incompetence and corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commentator Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Jon was a very poor choice for commander. His priorities were wrong. He valued the Starks more than he valued his job and his duties. On 6/4/2021 at 1:35 PM, Moiraine Sedai said: I like term limits. Term limits for the LC is more feasible but Jon would not honor it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted June 26, 2021 Share Posted June 26, 2021 On 6/23/2021 at 1:45 PM, Widowmaker 811 said: Jon was a very poor choice for commander. His priorities were wrong. He valued the Starks more than he valued his job and his duties. Term limits for the LC is more feasible but Jon would not honor it. Without the Starks the NW ain't shit. Starks have been propping them up for the last century and all but carrying them the last decades; without their support there would be no one to hold the wall, and the Boltons were already gunning for them as a means to secure power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lord of the Crossing Posted July 2, 2021 Share Posted July 2, 2021 On 6/26/2021 at 6:24 AM, Leonardo said: Without the Starks the NW ain't shit. Starks have been propping them up for the last century and all but carrying them the last decades; without their support there would be no one to hold the wall, and the Boltons were already gunning for them as a means to secure power. Jon Stark couldn't control his emotions over Arya and got the watch involved in a quarrel with the Boltons. Starks may have helped the NW in the past but it's a Stark, Jon Snow (Stark), who destroyed them when he sent wildlings to take his sister away from Ramsay. Jon had no right to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Fenimore Cooper XXII Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 The order of the night watch modeled their structure from what they know. Lords do not serve a term and then step down. It doesn't quite work that way. A person of authority will usually stay in that job until deposed or dies. The order votes in its leader so at some point in a progressive future the concept of term limits may gain support. But not during the period of Jon's time. Jon would have murdered them if they had tried to talk him down. There were no steps from where Bowen Marsh and the crows could stand on to make such a demand but it was still critical for the good of the kingdom and the watch to remove the unstable Jon from power. It was a very sad ending all around that was brought about by Jon's bad moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackLightning Posted July 7, 2021 Share Posted July 7, 2021 On 5/8/2021 at 12:47 PM, Nathan Stark said: It's like calling a politician you oppose a Nazi. Hilariously, this is acutally the world we live in now. No but seriously, I think the whole mandated neutrality of the Night's Watch is nonsense. Not to say that what Jon did was completely excusable and good but hey...the Night's Watch can't afford to be neutral. Nor do I think it ever truly was. On 5/8/2021 at 4:19 PM, Rondo said: Did Mance leave for Winterfell before or after Slynt was killed? If they left before then removing Jon after he killed Slynt was too late. Mance left after Slynt was executed. And speaking of it, there is no reason for Bowen Marsh and his merry band of mutineers to assassinate Jon Snow. They could've taken him into custody and arranged something with Ramsay Bolton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Here's Looking At You, Kid Posted July 12, 2021 Share Posted July 12, 2021 On 5/8/2021 at 11:09 AM, H Wadsey Longfellow said: A procedure should have been in place for the removal of incompetent and destructive leaders like Aerys Targaryen and Jon Snow. Further tragedy might have been prevented if Bowen Marsh and the watch had impeached Jon Snow before he sent Mance Rayder on his mission to get Arya. The best time to impeach Jon was right after he killed Janos Slynt. Removing Jon from office at that time would have prevented most of the damage that he created for the watch. There is a method in place. The watch is a savage democracy. The leaders are elected and can be removed by vote. Impeachment is not needed. Failing that, use a knife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 On 6/1/2021 at 10:23 AM, Jaenara Belarys said: Who the **** says that son of ***** Ramsay is ever right? Indeed. Sweet summer child phase is over. On 6/2/2021 at 12:16 AM, SeanF said: Oh, sweet summer child. Comparing Jon to Aerys is nuts, to start off. Aerys wanted to burn a city containing half a million people to a fiery green hell. Jon wanted to save fArya who he thinks is his sister (which is indeed breaking NW vows of neutrality, but nothing compared to going postal on KL). And before you say that he put the world at risk, do recall that the Wall is a). seven hundred feet tall, b). magical, thanks to the CotF, and c). fire kills wights, so if you loose enough fire arrows you'll at least do something. Second, this is feudal system. Mentioning impeachment would earn you quite a few strange looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rondo Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 On 7/7/2021 at 9:57 AM, BlackLightning said: Hilariously, this is acutally the world we live in now. No but seriously, I think the whole mandated neutrality of the Night's Watch is nonsense. Not to say that what Jon did was completely excusable and good but hey...the Night's Watch can't afford to be neutral. Nor do I think it ever truly was. Mance left after Slynt was executed. And speaking of it, there is no reason for Bowen Marsh and his merry band of mutineers to assassinate Jon Snow. They could've taken him into custody and arranged something with Ramsay Bolton. The Night's Watch cannot take sides if it expects to serve the people. It has to stay above the quarrels and the politics of the families. That is the only way it can serve and protect them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skahaz mo Kandaq Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 13 hours ago, Jaenara Belarys said: Indeed. Sweet summer child phase is over. Comparing Jon to Aerys is nuts, to start off. Aerys wanted to burn a city containing half a million people to a fiery green hell. Jon wanted to save fArya who he thinks is his sister (which is indeed breaking NW vows of neutrality, but nothing compared to going postal on KL). And before you say that he put the world at risk, do recall that the Wall is a). seven hundred feet tall, b). magical, thanks to the CotF, and c). fire kills wights, so if you loose enough fire arrows you'll at least do something. Second, this is feudal system. Mentioning impeachment would earn you quite a few strange looks. It's a fair comparison. They were both in lead positions and created a disaster. Aerys, to destroy his enemies. Jon, to take his sister away from a political enemy of his family and to avenge the Starks. Jaime killed the king to save the lives of many. Bowen Marsh is that Praetorian Guard equivalent who had to take out his erratic commander in order to limit further damage and harm. Aerys was mad. Jon was not really mad but he was overcome with emotion and could no longer function as a commander. His love for Arya was the death of his duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackLightning Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 On 12/13/2021 at 6:08 PM, Rondo said: The Night's Watch cannot take sides if it expects to serve the people. It has to stay above the quarrels and the politics of the families. That is the only way it can serve and protect them. How is allowing the Boltons to betray their overlord in the most heinous way after laying waste to the North serving the people? Make it make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 1 hour ago, BlackLightning said: How is allowing the Boltons to betray their overlord in the most heinous way after laying waste to the North serving the people? Make it make sense. Sense for this stuff and the ISH group don't mix. You'll most likely get an answer blabbing about Robb, and horrible!Starks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 On 6/21/2021 at 10:08 PM, Leonardo said: "This," Qyburn said. "For years now, the Night's Watch has begged for men. Lord Stannis has answered their plea. Can King Tommen do less? His Grace should send the Wall a hundred men. To take the black, ostensibly, but in truth . . ." ". . . to remove Jon Snow from the command," Cersei finished, delighted. I knew I was right to want him on my council. "That is just what we shall do." She laughed. If this bastard boy is truly his father's son, he will not suspect a thing. Perhaps he will even thank me, before the blade slides between his ribs. "It will need to be done carefully, to be sure. Leave the rest to me, my lords." This was how an enemy should be dealt with: with a dagger, not a declaration. "We have done good work today, my lords. I thank you. Is there aught else?" Yeah, Jon Snow REALLY messed up by adding wildlings to the men south of the wall and siding with Stannis. /s Night's Watch neutrality has always been bullshit. They've always been more loyal to the Starks because they were the ones who actually gave two shites who came over the wall. Jon made the right choice with Stannis, though his initial choice wasn't one at all. Stannis saved the NW's ass at the wall, they owe him. Ramsay Bolton and others were coming to unseat him anyways, and then the NW would just be a shell and would fall to the others due to incompetence and corruption. Speaking of the Night's Watch neutrality BS, it reminds me of Bowen Marsh always talking to Jon about its supposed neutrality even if he actually supported Janos Slynt becoming Lord Commander at some point in order to please the Lannisters even while knowing about Slynt's cowardice, lack of honor and incompetence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Since we're bringing up modern politics, you really see it in how Jon is being attacked by some fans. You cherry-pick some facts, often out of context to use to support the predetermined conclusion that Jon is unfit. Not only do you ignore any other facts, you actively attack anyone who denies that predetermined conclusion in an attempt to silence them. Just like modern politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRANDON GREYSTARK Posted December 27, 2021 Share Posted December 27, 2021 On 5/8/2021 at 11:09 AM, H Wadsey Longfellow said: A procedure should have been in place for the removal of incompetent and destructive leaders like Aerys Targaryen and Jon Snow. Further tragedy might have been prevented if Bowen Marsh and the watch had impeached Jon Snow before he sent Mance Rayder on his mission to get Arya. The best time to impeach Jon was right after he killed Janos Slynt. Removing Jon from office at that time would have prevented most of the damage that he created for the watch. Why would you want to remove Aerys or Jon ? Both were well in their right to do the things they done . First let's look at the Watch without Jon . A Thorne/Slynt admin. would quickly lead to the destruction of the Watch neither possess the charisma to generate loyalty . While Marsh a Slynt flunky may control the stewards that is all he would control . Jon Snow did have the appearance of siding with Stannis , Janos Slynt would have sided with the Lannisters forcing Stannis to attack the Watch .And now Aerys . The only thing Aerys is guilty of is cleaning up Rhaegar's mess . It was Rhaegar who kidnapped Lyanna , because he was under the delusion that he was going to bring back the dragons and save the world . When Brandon rode to Red Keep in order to pull Rhaegar from his hole kicking and screaming , it was Aerys who dealt with it , because Aerys knew that Rhaegar did not stand a chance . Being that Aerys was in the war of the Nine Penny Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.