Active Users:335 Time:06/04/2025 12:52:58 AM
But of course he did.. fionwe1987 Send a noteboard - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM
He never gave us a glimpse of these details, and you're right that he kept things vague, but that doesn't change the fact that he did create this system which has a mathematical basis in which all the channelers her created fit. Did he bend it from time to time in the series? Sure. Did he have characters make ignorant or arrogant comments that contradicted the actual rules? Sure. But that doesn't mean he didn't know. Given what DomA said, he seemed to know to a very specific degree how strong a channeler was. And he also knew about their Talents, strengths in particular flows, etc. For Aes Sedai, he knew how long they were Novice and Accepted, how old they were, and other minor details most authors don't bother with.

Now, the discussion on strength is purely academic. But at the heart of it has to be the few specific points about strength that Jordan made outside the books. All characters can lie or be mistaken. But when Jordan says something, especially when its something others in Team Jordan have confirmed, you can't wish it away. That has to be the first principle on which you base your theoretical list. Every other quote is open to interpretation. I guarantee you if you took a quote from the books and RJ's quote on the bell curve and pointed the contradiction to him, he would say the character in question was mistaken, or that you're ignoring the implications of skill or knowledge.

And that's precisely the approach Darius and I take to coming up with a strength list. And that's why we were both right years ago to insist that gateway size can't be used to compare male and female strength (which is what Shannow was doing). We were also right to insist that you do have to consider effective strength, not raw strength. I can also remember Shannow insisting on wotmania that effective strength was irrelevant because RJ pulled that out of his hat. And now see how the later parts of the series have totally held that up?

You can continue insisting RJ was wrong or confused. But you have no evidence ot back it up. Darius and I, however, have a system that takes all the quotes into account AND fits with what RJ said. And that's got to be the way to do it.
Reply to message
The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 09:44:09 AM 1491 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 886 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1452 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 893 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 802 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 752 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 765 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 764 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 782 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 811 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 713 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 691 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 717 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 867 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 729 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 667 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 671 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 770 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 668 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 762 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 682 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 699 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 699 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 693 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1364 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 948 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 723 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 653 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1392 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 912 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 703 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 638 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 725 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 812 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 375 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 738 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 698 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 701 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 769 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 777 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 797 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 840 Views
I would love for you to be right, because it would solve all our problems, but 0 is the challenge... - 29/10/2012 07:56:34 PM 799 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 824 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 407 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 746 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 681 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 806 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 635 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1287 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 735 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 740 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 682 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 883 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 807 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 806 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 712 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1002 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 818 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 703 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 828 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 878 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 813 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 782 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 795 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 770 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 793 Views

Reply to Message