Active Users:1462 Time:17/12/2025 05:59:45 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 1624 Views
Re: The Bell Curve revisited - 29/10/2012 10:21:27 AM 996 Views
That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:26:49 AM 1585 Views
Re: That's incorrect... - 29/10/2012 10:36:32 AM 973 Views
RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:11:19 PM 918 Views
Response to a few of your poorly researched points... - 29/10/2012 02:31:17 PM 860 Views
Re: RJ the physicist didn't know math, so that Shannow could be right... - 29/10/2012 02:37:33 PM 858 Views
Exactly... - 29/10/2012 02:39:30 PM 856 Views
there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 08:18:18 PM 874 Views
Excellent point. - 29/10/2012 08:24:37 PM 907 Views
Re: there are dozens of reasons for this - 29/10/2012 09:07:35 PM 821 Views
Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 01:57:24 AM 799 Views
Re: Again I don't argue that genetics play no role - 30/10/2012 07:07:17 AM 806 Views
I don't think it plays much role in the plot - 30/10/2012 03:17:55 PM 960 Views
Once again just so,we are clear on my stance with Genetics and Strength - 30/10/2012 03:27:11 PM 818 Views
That the 1000 Novices aren't a random sample of the population? - 29/10/2012 08:23:47 PM 760 Views
And why would it be biased towards those with lower strength? - 29/10/2012 09:11:25 PM 775 Views
Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 01:35:35 AM 864 Views
Re: Absolutely no reason... - 30/10/2012 06:43:54 AM 774 Views
Only if it was a random sampling. Which this is not. - 30/10/2012 01:58:34 PM 860 Views
That's exactly the point. I want you to explain why it wasn't random. - 30/10/2012 02:14:59 PM 787 Views
It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:43:03 PM 792 Views
Re: It wasn't random because it was a self-selected sample! - 30/10/2012 02:47:30 PM 793 Views
Go read a stats text will you? - 30/10/2012 02:54:16 PM 783 Views
Done - 31/10/2012 09:34:11 AM 1553 Views
You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 10/11/2012 10:14:19 PM 1066 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 11:37:16 AM 891 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 07:14:48 PM 742 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:33:59 PM 1561 Views
Re: You seem to have perfected whining to a Talent... - 11/11/2012 08:43:19 PM 1129 Views
Still nothing? - 10/11/2012 03:33:15 PM 895 Views
Still doesn't explain the difference - 30/10/2012 07:01:53 PM 729 Views
Re: Still doesn't explain the difference - 10/11/2012 10:21:00 PM 811 Views
Yes that totally makes sense - 30/10/2012 08:07:16 AM 905 Views
Thank you! *NM* - 30/10/2012 10:19:15 AM 420 Views
That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:01:52 PM 850 Views
Re: That's not what happened... - 30/10/2012 02:15:57 PM 783 Views
Who said it would? - 30/10/2012 02:44:17 PM 803 Views
let's not mix up "random" and "representative" - 30/10/2012 05:28:09 PM 860 Views
Doesn't mean RJ applied it to his series - 30/10/2012 08:23:29 AM 871 Views
But of course he did.. - 30/10/2012 02:13:07 PM 906 Views
I hate to get into these things - 29/10/2012 05:45:50 PM 942 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 926 Views
In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 08:20:52 PM 933 Views
Overwhelm Lanfear, not match her. *NM* - 29/10/2012 08:26:09 PM 489 Views
Truth is, Moiraine was being overly optimistic... - 29/10/2012 08:39:17 PM 843 Views
You're pathetic... - 30/10/2012 01:20:01 AM 773 Views
The quote isn't specific - 30/10/2012 08:32:36 AM 890 Views
Its highly specific... - 30/10/2012 02:15:38 PM 736 Views
Yet neither of them are at full potential and at least equal a Forsaken - 30/10/2012 03:45:24 PM 1393 Views
Honestly! - 30/10/2012 02:07:37 AM 832 Views
Re: In the truest sense, you are probably right that it is skewed - 29/10/2012 09:10:27 PM 844 Views
Lots of people mean perfectly normal distribution when they say it - 30/10/2012 05:25:35 PM 793 Views
Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 12:04:01 AM 973 Views
Re: Couldn't the Towers method of obtaining Aes Sedai be to blame? - 30/10/2012 09:33:44 AM 904 Views
Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:03:43 PM 896 Views
Re: Are you sure about that? - 30/10/2012 12:19:34 PM 811 Views
That doesn't seem a coherent narrative to me - 30/10/2012 04:26:25 PM 1137 Views
Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:16:40 PM 914 Views
Re: Sharina did not have the Spark, nor did Nicola - 30/10/2012 05:54:41 PM 788 Views
We do not know if Cadsuane or any of the Forsaken are Sparkers - 30/10/2012 10:33:55 PM 924 Views
you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 04:27:32 AM 1061 Views
+1 *NM* - 30/10/2012 09:17:07 AM 933 Views
Re: you're confusing 2 things - 30/10/2012 09:21:39 AM 918 Views
Not true... - 30/10/2012 11:49:57 AM 894 Views
One thing - 30/10/2012 05:23:17 PM 879 Views
That's the problem. The BC RJ has "built" has a minimum and a maximum value - 30/10/2012 05:48:55 PM 889 Views

Reply to Message