Active Users:1815 Time:19/04/2026 05:27:03 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 1698 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 1057 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1637 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 1021 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 962 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 913 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 901 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 894 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 920 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 952 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 867 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 851 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 848 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 1005 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 860 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 807 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 823 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 917 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 818 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 914 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 839 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 837 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 835 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 825 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1605 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1119 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 940 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 797 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1612 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 1179 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 958 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 776 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 866 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 955 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 441 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 900 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 830 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 858 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 903 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 923 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 962 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 985 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 985 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 979 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 510 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 889 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 826 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 936 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 773 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1436 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 877 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 888 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 836 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 1024 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 948 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 944 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 856 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1194 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 963 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 837 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 978 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1120 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 987 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 977 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 946 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 927 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 940 Views

Reply to Message