Active Users:1088 Time:19/04/2026 09:02:21 AM
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? Tor Send a noteboard - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM
I was always under the impression that they relied on people who came to the tower, they did very little active recruitment and relied on people coming to the Tower, very few of these will be wilders (who are supposed to be stronger?). That way most modern Aes Sedai representation is below what would be "average".


If weaker women are more likely to want to become Aes Sedai, that would explain everything. The question is how would that mechanism work, given that most people don't know if they can channel when they go to the Tower.

Removing wilders from the population of potential Aes Sedai would possibly reduce the average a little, but not enough to explain the 20% of the 1000 novices.
Fram kamerater!
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 1059 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 963 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 902 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 895 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 954 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 868 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 853 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 850 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 1007 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 862 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 808 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 824 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 919 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 820 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 916 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 840 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 839 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 836 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 827 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1607 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1121 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 942 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 799 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 1180 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 960 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 777 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 958 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 902 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 832 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 905 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 924 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 965 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 987 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 987 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 981 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 511 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 775 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1438 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 878 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 889 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 838 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 1026 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 950 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 946 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 858 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1196 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 965 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 980 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1120 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 988 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 979 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 942 Views

Reply to Message