Active Users:1143 Time:22/11/2024 01:54:21 PM
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 1428 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 818 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1387 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 833 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 717 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 695 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 709 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 700 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 723 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 751 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 651 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 623 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 654 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 798 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 672 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 608 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 601 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 713 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 610 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 687 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 615 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 633 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 636 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 629 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1300 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 880 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 683 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 575 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1323 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 840 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 640 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 578 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 660 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 751 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 346 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 669 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 628 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 642 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 690 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 707 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 734 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 779 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 722 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 763 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 378 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 686 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 618 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 738 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 568 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1227 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 669 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 669 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 623 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 807 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 739 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 740 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 652 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 934 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 747 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 639 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 765 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 799 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 732 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 725 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 750 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 713 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 728 Views

Reply to Message