N + W = J

[Jaenara Belarys]

6 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

If Jon's mother is wylla ned is not lying at all. You are the one who can't accept anything other than r + l = j despite it never having been stated with canon. If you wanted to disagree you would provide actual points against n+w = j instead of just bashing people because you don't agree with them. That's very immature. 

The fact that you always fall back on calling people immature, shows your own immaturity. You're the one, along with @Mister Smikes condemn @Daeron the Daring for being "disrespectful" but isn't callling people immature "disrespectful"? Also, you're the one who can't accept anything beyond your own tinfoil crackpot theories. Plus, N+W=J hasn't ever been stated in canon, so you can't exactly attack me for that. 

6 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

Actually the points have canon evidence in them, undeniable canon evidence which you can't accept. 

Actually, R+L=J  has canon evidence in them, undeniable canon evidence which you can't accept. 

[Daenerysthegreat]

11 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

The fact that you always fall back on calling people immature, shows your own immaturity. You're the one, along with @Mister Smikes condemn @Daeron the Daring for being "disrespectful" but isn't callling people immature "disrespectful"? Also, you're the one who can't accept anything beyond your own tinfoil crackpot theories. Plus, N+W=J hasn't ever been stated in canon, so you can't exactly attack me for that. 

 

 

It has actually been stated in the first book l see it for yourself. If I'm being disrespectful who started it? Please tell me? Is not agreeing with you a crime? 

R + l = j has never been stated in canon. No character mentioned it. 

 

[Jaenara Belarys]

1 minute ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

R + l = j has never been stated in canon. No character mentioned it. 

 

If you check the Theory page for Jon Snow's mother, there's more evidence against N+W=J than for it. However, there's a massive list of evidence for R+L=J. And furthermore, characters such as Daenerys have stated things such as this:

Quote

 Prince Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna, and thousands died for it.

Quote

 Her brother Rhaegar had died for the woman he loved.

Stated other times as well, but you can see that the notion that "Rhaegar loved her" is planted multiple times. Wylla and Ned, is only stated once or twice and never in the context of love which they would have to be if Ned broke his vows for her. 

 

[Daenerysthegreat]

14 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

If you check the Theory page for Jon Snow's mother, there's more evidence against N+W=J than for it. However, there's a massive list of evidence for R+L=J. And furthermore, characters such as Daenerys have stated things such as this:

 

 

How many threads are there of r + l= j, that's why there is a massive evidence. Plus theory started in 2007 and the majority participants in the thread didn't spend hundreds of posts trashing the theory without giving a sound point. 

Daenerys and all state that rhaegar loved lyanna, that is true but they don't say that there was a child or that the child is ned stark's bastard. 

 

[Jaenara Belarys]

3 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

Daenerys and all state that rhaegar loved lyanna, that is true but they don't say that there was a child or that the child is ned stark's bastard. 

 

How are they supposed to know about Jon? Daenerys wouldn't, Barristan would probably think that he simply had the child on some woman on campaign. By this point, you're scrambling for a handhold on the cliff, trying to find a way to keep being stubborn. 

4 minutes ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

How many threads are there of r + l= j, that's why there is a massive evidence. Plus theory started in 2007 and the majority participants in the thread didn't spend hundreds of posts trashing the theory without giving a sound point. 

 

I'm not talking about goddamn threads, I'm talking about the page from the Wiki of Ice and Fire. Read. The. Fucking. Post. Please. 

[Daenerysthegreat]

1 minute ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

How are they supposed to know about Jon? Daenerys wouldn't, Barristan would probably think that he simply had the child on some woman on campaign. By this point, you're scrambling for a handhold on the cliff, trying to find a way to keep being stubborn. 

 

No barristan doesn't think that he had a child. And I was asking about everyone who saw rhaegar as the perfect prince and believed he loved lyanna. No one in westeros believes in r+l=j.

Actually I'm firmly in the ground, far away from a cliff since you're going to personal insults because you can't counter it fully. 

 

[Mister Smikes]

1 hour ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

So tell that to @Daenerysthegreat, not us. She's the one not making any actual points. 

She made actual points.  In particular, she pointed to a textual indication that N+W=J. 

Quote

If Jon's mother is Wylla then there's no point to lying to protect Jon from Robert. However, if Jon is half Targaryen then there is a point to it. 

There is no point discussing whether Ned might have lied, until you first acknowledge what he and Robert actually said. 

[Mister Smikes]

7 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

I'm not talking about goddamn threads, I'm talking about the page from the Wiki of Ice and Fire. Read. The. Fucking. Post. Please. 

Stop.  Talking.  Like.  That.   Please.  You.  Are.  Not.  Her.  Mother.

[Daeron the Daring]

5 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Dude.  You were a participant.  You were one of the pirhanna.  You were part of the feeding frenzy.

There is no such thing. When you put yourself into a conversation, you accept to face what others might want to say. Sayin that "your idea is crackpot" isn't gaslighting. That the given person might have felt disrespected is another thing. Everyone does as wishes, I don't mind. But let me have the right to tell my subjective opinion without being canceled. That's what I did. 

And you may as well just stop gaslighting me. 

And to be honest, the sole reason you pick up someone else's case (which is debatable at least) is that I'm the one who you can confront and maybe cancel is disgusting, by any standards. But keep up the good work, I'm sure this is what'll make your Lemongate, Willam Dustin, fDaario and fQuentyn theories more credible. 

[Mister Smikes]

1 minute ago, Daeron the Daring said:

When you put yourself into a conversation, you accept to face what others might want to say.

That does not contradict anything I said.  It merely justifies anything you do.

1 minute ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Sayin that "your idea is crackpot" isn't gaslighting.

Never said it was.

1 minute ago, Daeron the Daring said:

That the given person might have felt disrespected is another thing.

The given person was disrespected. 

1 minute ago, Daeron the Daring said:

But let me have the right to tell my subjective opinion without being canceled.

I did not call for you to be canceled.   I never claimed you should not have the right to be disrepectful.  I did not summon the mods.

[Lord Lannister]

1 hour ago, Mister Smikes said:

Stop.  Talking.  Like.  That.   Please.  You.  Are.  Not.  Her.  Mother.

 

8 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

That does not contradict anything I said.  It merely justifies anything you do.

Never said it was.

The given person was disrespected. 

I did not call for you to be canceled.   I never claimed you should not have the right to be disrepectful.  I did not summon the mods.

I guess i find it odd you're so keen on people being disrespectful(even when it is coincidentally people who don't agree with you that are disrespectful) but seem to have no problem being disrespectful towards others. You've made more posts than anyone on this thread talking about other posters. Maybe it's just time to take a deep breath and take a step back from it. 

[Mister Smikes]

4 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said:

I guess i find it odd you're so keen on people being disrespectful

I'm not.  Be as disrespectful as you like.  I just object to gaslighting.  Or at least, I see no reason I should not point it out when I see it. 

[Daeron the Daring]

31 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

Never said it was

You must feel so smart now that you're playing games instead of giving complete answers. First learn the meaning of gaslighting, then maybe google up how peoductive conversations work. I'm more than sure that's something people are taught in school. 

32 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

That does not contradict anything I said.  It merely justifies anything you do.

I'm comfortable with that. I'm comfortable with being disrespectful ad well if that's what being disrespectful means. (on a level you have to object about it) 

37 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

The given person was disrespected

I was as well. At least I feel like that. How come no freedomfighters like you showed up to back me up? 

38 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

I did not call for you to be canceled.   I never claimed you should not have the right to be disrepectful.  I did not summon the mods.

I didn't connect being canceled with mods, but you do you I guess. 

[Mister Smikes]

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

You must feel so smart now that you're playing games instead of giving complete answers. First learn the meaning of gaslighting, then maybe google up how productive conversations work. I'm more than sure that's something people are taught in school. 

Thanks Teacher.  

Quote

I'm comfortable with that. I'm comfortable with being disrespectful as well if that's what being disrespectful means.

Then why are you still arguing about it?   We seem to be in happy agreement.

Quote

I was as well. At least I feel like that. How come no freedomfighters like you showed up to back me up? 

LOL.  You poor dear thing.  You're right.  Obviously, I should have rushed to your aid, when I saw everyone ganging up on you.  How unchivalrous of me.  

Quote

I didn't connect being canceled with mods, but you do you I guess. 

No.  "Cancel" was your word.  And I have no idea what you meant when you complained I was trying to cancel you.

[Ran]

Folks, a warning: more of this uncivil nonsense and accounts will be suspended.

[Brynden"Bloodraven" Rivers]

this is pretty late but I do believe @Daenerysthegreatis invalidating a lot of points made by @Daeron the Daring and @Jaenara Belarys. R+L=J has a lot of evidence and it’s not just speculative there are several in-text references. Check out the pinned R+L=J thread for all of it. It definitely convinced me. Also, the matter on Ned saying Wylla is Jon’s mother is easily invalidated when we know Ned has lied before. He tells Arya that lies are not without honor and his last words are a lie to protect Sansa. People citing that Ned would never lie is false. Ned has lied before and will lie to protect his family especially the child of the sister he loved the most from Robert. Another frequently cited reason is that he would have no reason to lie to Catelyn. I believe Ned swore an oath to tell no one of Jon’s parentage. Also, if N+W=J, how is the Tower of Joy relevant in any way? George R. R. Martin has explicitly stated that Howland would not be a POV character because he knows too much. What does Howland know if nothing about the Tower of Joy?

[corbon]

 

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

No.  Because then the correct answer would be "What girl?"

Of course not. They both know exactly what girl Robert is talking about. 

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Sure.  Robert is talking about the common girl who is the mother of Ned's bastard.  And if Ned understands this, then the answer includes the unstated assumption in the question.

No, it does not. Just because one person asking a question makes an assumption does not obligate the other person to correct that assumption, or even address it at all.

If you ask me "What's the capital of Italy? You know, the one with all the canals and stuff?"
I may answer "The capital of Italy is Rome" and thats the precise correct answer to the question you asked.
I also may answer "Rome. You are thinking of Venice, thats not Italy's capital" but that my personal choice to provide you bonus information and correct your faulty assumptions. I don't have to do that.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

 That's nonsense.  If the extras are not accurate, he might as well say "Her name is Cindy."  Or "Her name is Rumplestiltskin."  Or "Her name is Jenny Fonebone."

The truthful answer would be "There is no such girl;" unless Wylla really is Jon's mother.  

Simply wrong, as demonstrated in the Rome/Venice example above. 

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

If I don't, the question and answer are meaningless. 

No, the answer provides the exact requirement of the question., no more, no less.
And its flat, cool and precise, which is exactly how one speaks if your King is meandering on a topic that you don't want to talk about and you are trying to shut him down without being disrespectful. And exactly how Ned is.

Replace "the capital of Italy' with "her name" and you have Ned's precise answer (and Robert's actual question+extra).

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Who's name was Wylla?   This is meaningless if it does not refer to the common girl who was the mother of Ned's bastard and who Robert seems to know nothing else about.

It is not meaningless if it is the correct name for the girl Robert is thinking of - regardless of her status.

12 hours ago, frenin said:

Robert is adding qualifiers over the question because Ned had already told him once and he's actually trying to be specific.

He's already been specific enough -"that one time". That completely narrows it down already.
Robert is adding qualifiers because he's meandering all over the conversation, not because he needs to narrow things down for Ned. This is clearly indicated by trying to answer his own question multiple times and even getting sidetracked into 'one of mine' with 'sweet big eyes you could drown in'.

This isn't Robert asking direct questions in order to get information. This is Robert meandering through a casual conversation with his friend, trying to remember old fun times from their past.

12 hours ago, frenin said:

It was at any rate, info Robert had already received from Ned.

The only thing we know Ned told Robert was her name. 

Quote

"You were never the boy you were," Robert grumbled. "More's the pity. And yet there was that one time … what was her name, that common girl of yours? Becca? No, she was one of mine, gods love her, black hair and these sweet big eyes, you could drown in them. Yours was … Aleena? No. You told me once.

 

12 hours ago, frenin said:

Ned only answers until the extra info is given... How can you know that??

Its right there in black and white. Robert is talking about one specific woman right from the start - Ned's 'one time'. Robert meanders all over the question of her name, repeatedly coming up with wrong names from his memory, and Ned only answers when Robert finishes his little run down memory lane and actually gives Ned space to answer 

12 hours ago, frenin said:

His response is the answer to all of Robert's questions. Not a particular one, he himself doesn't even specify or even think about it.

And yet, his response is one answer. No negative or affirmative. So its clearly not an answer to all the questions (heck, Robert answered most of them himself).

12 hours ago, frenin said:

The assumption Ned himself has provided him.

That is an assumption itself. The only thing we know Ned provided Robert before was the name.

12 hours ago, frenin said:

It makes no sense for Neddy to change the tune now.

Agreed. Thats part of my argument.

12 hours ago, frenin said:

In their first discussion about the matter. Robert would bluntly ask him about his bastard and the mother. It's practically impossible that Robert comes out of that convo believing Wylla is Jon's mother if Ned doesn't lead him to believe it.

This is your assumption only and I've shown an entirely reasonable way that Robert can come out of that convo without Ned telling him Wylla was the mother.

If Robert goes into that conversation with prior 'knowledge' exactly as he went into the later conversation with prior knowledge, then he can come out of that conversation believing all sorts of things without Ned's input.

12 hours ago, frenin said:

Ned cannot get out of that without giving a name, at least, Robert is his best friend and now King. 

What Ned can and can't get out of that conversation without telling is entirely dependent on what Robert says to him.
What we know, is that Ned gave the name Wylla. And separately that Wylla was Jon's wetnurse that is believed by some people to be Jon's mother. 

An example: (do not try to pretend I'm saying this is how it actually went!)
Robert: "I hear you got a bastard on some serving woman and you've got her wetnursing the boy. Well, come on Ned, spill. Details man, details. Is she hot? she must be hot. She must be so so hot to make Ned Stark forget his honour! Big eyes? Titties to die for? Come on man!"
Ned: Her name is Wylla. And I don't want to talk about it. ... Robert, I found Lyanna. She's dead, she died in my arms. A fever. I'm sorry."

12 hours ago, frenin said:

Why would Robert drawn any conclusion about the bastard if it doesn't come from Ned?? 

Why would Robert ignore information from any other source? 

[Mister Smikes]

18 minutes ago, Brynden"Bloodraven" Rivers said:

Also, if N+W=J, how is the Tower of Joy relevant in any way?

There are a few theories.  

18 minutes ago, Brynden"Bloodraven" Rivers said:

George R. R. Martin has explicitly stated that Howland would not be a POV character because he knows too much. What does Howland know if nothing about the Tower of Joy?

This is a circular argument based on the assumption that Jon was the baby born in the "bed of blood" at the Tower of Joy

[Brynden"Bloodraven" Rivers]

4 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

There are a few theories.  

Ok shoot. I don’t really see any other plausible theory except for maybe dany=R+L which doesn’t fit timeline.

[corbon]

 

4 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

25 minutes ago, Brynden"Bloodraven" Rivers said:

George R. R. Martin has explicitly stated that Howland would not be a POV character because he knows too much. What does Howland know if nothing about the Tower of Joy?

This is a circular argument based on the assumption that Jon was the baby born in the "bed of blood" at the Tower of Joy

No it isn't. Quite the opposite. Its not relying on BoBat ToJ to ask what else is there!

Its a question. What does HR know about that means he can't be a POV character.
The only thing that has any importance that he has been involved with is Harrenhal Tourney (and we've heard his side of that) and ToJ. What else is there?