Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
SinisterDeath

House Resolution #1 (2019)

Recommended Posts

In Minnesota?  I figured you'd be drowning in it given the heavy Scandinavian presence.  It's pretty good.  Very sweet.  Who knew the vikings liked "girly" drinks 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WWWwombat said:

Honey wine is prob close enough though

 

Isn't that just mead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WWWwombat said:

In Minnesota?  I figured you'd be drowning in it given the heavy Scandinavian presence.  It's pretty good.  Very sweet.  Who knew the vikings liked "girly" drinks 😛

Exactly. You'd think that but at least up here there isn't. In the cities? Maybe.

This is Beer/Whiskey/Vodka country. They love their beer and hard liqueur up here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WWWwombat said:

Honey wine is prob close enough though

3 minutes ago, Tyzack said:

 

Isn't that just mead?

Kinda? Mead is supposed to be Honey Wine. Specifically fermented Honey. I have no idea if that honey wine I had, was actually fermented honey, or just wine with honey flavoring.

 

Also: It's kind of like if you've never had Sushi Before. 

Does Gas Station Sushi count as real sushi, or do you have to go to a reasonably high quality Sushi restaurant to really say you've had it?

 

I've had Shrimp/Lobster/Crab. But have I really had it, if I haven't eaten it, at a restaurant on the east/west that got it freshly caught that morning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is you haven't had any good saltwater seafood if you've never eaten it on the coasts.  Basically if it smells fishy, it's already too old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WWWwombat said:

My guess is you haven't had any good saltwater seafood if you've never eaten it on the coasts.  Basically if it smells fishy, it's already too old.

Closest I've had to seafood on the coast, was a random pasta dish with crab meat in it. Nothing spectacular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you ever make it out to a coast, you should try some real seafood.  Just don't get Manhattan clam chowder whatever you do; it's an abomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WWWwombat said:

Well, if you ever make it out to a coast, you should try some real seafood.  Just don't get Manhattan clam chowder whatever you do; it's an abomination.

 

QFT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WWWwombat said:

Well, if you ever make it out to a coast, you should try some real seafood.  Just don't get Manhattan clam chowder whatever you do; it's an abomination.

This reminds me.

If I ever go to New York, I fully plan to eat a slice of Pizza with a Fork and Knife, just to screw with native New Yorkers.

Similar thing with Chicago and Hot Dogs, but not loading it up, and eating it sideways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:


Similar thing with Chicago and Hot Dogs, but not loading it up, and eating it sideways.

 

I don't understand. How do you eat hot dog sideways? Like, bite it in half first? Eat down one half of the bun, then eat up the hot dog, then eat back down the other bun?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tyzack said:

 

I don't understand. How do you eat hot dog sideways? Like, bite it in half first? Eat down one half of the bun, then eat up the hot dog, then eat back down the other bun?

 

Like a corn on the cob.

 

*Note*

There is a part of me, jumping for joy that I made you take time out of your day trying to figure this out.

🤣

Edited by SinisterDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

Like a corn on the cob.

 

*Note*

There is a part of me, jumping for joy that I made you take time out of your day trying to figure this out.

🤣

 

That still doesn’t make sense.

you don’t eat the cob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This is Beer/Whiskey/Vodka country. They love their beer and hard liqueur up here."

 

That's the German/Scandinavian influence in the upper midwest. Plus it's so far north and so damn cold most of the year that like the Fins and Russians the population is etrnally depressed and alcohalic. 😱

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CUBAREY said:

"This is Beer/Whiskey/Vodka country. They love their beer and hard liqueur up here."

 

That's the German/Scandinavian influence in the upper midwest. Plus it's so far north and so damn cold most of the year that like the Fins and Russians the population is etrnally depressed and alcohalic. 😱

Eternally depressed? Nah. That's Russians your thinking of. For many, you don't feel depressed if you're to drunk to feel your feet.

 

11 hours ago, Tyzack said:

That still doesn’t make sense.

you don’t eat the cob.

Sure you can. Never had baby corn?

/thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

Eternally depressed? Nah. That's Russians your thinking of. For many, you don't feel depressed if you're to drunk to feel your feet

 

 

Or if you just jumped in the snow after a sauna xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Vox listed these as goals of the bill.

Would the bill accomplish these goals? Democrats have a bad habit of wanting to do something good when in reality it either doesn't work or actually makes things worse.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Public financing of campaigns, powered by small donations. Under Sarbanes’s vision, the federal government would provide a voluntary 6-1 match for candidates for president and Congress, which means for every dollar a candidate raises from small donations, the federal government would match it six times over. “If you give $100 to a candidate that’s meeting those requirements, then that candidate would get another $600 coming in behind them,” Sarbanes told Vox this summer. “The evidence and the modeling is that most candidates can do as well or better in terms of the dollars they raise if they step into this new system.”

I don't know how I feel about the Federal Government using money to fund campaigns. What if I don't want my tax dollars to go to someone's campaign?

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Passing the DISCLOSE Act, pushed by Rep. David Cicilline (RI) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), both Democrats from Rhode Island. This would require Super PACs and “dark money” political organizations to make their donors public.

This feels like a double edged sword. On the one hand I do feel like the public has an interest in knowing who is funding a campaign. On the other hand I also feel like you should be able to fund something without it being known for a variety of reasons. Again I'm not sure how I feel about this.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Passing the Honest Ads Act, championed by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Mark Warner (VA), which would require Facebook and Twitter to disclose the source of money of political ads on their platforms, and share how much money was spent.

Kind of weird to target them and NOT Google at the same time but eh ok I think I'm fine with this one although it does feel a little too specific for my tastes.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Requiring the president to disclose his or her tax returns.

Why? I'm not even talking about Trump here (although that's obviously who it's targeted towards). I don't really see the point of this even in the future.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Stopping members of Congress from using taxpayer money to settle sexual harassment cases or buy first-class plane tickets.

100% support.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Giving the Office of Government Ethics the power to do more oversight and enforcement and put in stricter lobbying registration requirements.

Very vague. What does this entail?

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Create a new ethical code for the US Supreme Court, ensuring all branches of government are impacted by the new law.

Again, vague. Also if it's targeted at SCOTUS why would all branches of government be impacted?

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Creating new national automatic voter registration that asks voters to opt out, rather than opt in, ensuring more people will be signed up to vote. Early voting and online voter registration would also be promoted.

Nope.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Restoring the Voting Rights Act, part of which was dismantled by a US Supreme Court decision in 2013. Ending partisan gerrymandering in federal elections and prohibiting voter roll purging.

Not sure about the gerrymandering thing but that's a big no and prohibiting voter roll purging.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Beefing up elections security, including requiring the Director of National Intelligence to do regular checks on foreign threats.

LOL sure why not. Does that mean we can use voting machines not made by private companies from other nations please? If our elections are going to be cheated and corrupted I at least prefer our own government to be doing it, thanks.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

I love this from a 3rd party perspective. Those guys need as much money as they can get to even hope to compete with the big boys.

Maybe they don't deserve to compete?

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Yea... how about we just take that out of this bill if you want to give it a chance to pass?

 

I don't really care much either way but yeah probably want to take it out as most will see it as an attack on Trump and it would polarize the entire thing to a degree that it wont be able to pass.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 12:29 PM, Tyzack said:

How.. are they going to stop this?

As I understand it there is a "secret fund" for this sort of thing. I assume the fund just wouldn't be funded anymore.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

What if First Class is the only seat available and they have to take that flight?

 

Good point. They might want to just drop this aspect of it. Yeah it's kind of scummy and bullshit that they just get taxpayer first class flights but the alternative is to make a new very messy law that has all these exceptions and whatifs and all that. Just consider it another perk of being in congress and overlook it.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

That is... very vague

 

JINX!

 

No seriously though there must be more to it than that. No one could think someone is going to read this and just nod and say it's a good idea right? Then again that NPC meme ain't a meme for no reason...

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Well, redistricting has to happen, so how do we do it in a way that is unbiased?

 

And voter roll purging needs to happen from time to time.

Are they really just trying to get republicans mad and claim dead-voters again?

Mmmmhmmm.

 

On 12/5/2018 at 8:20 AM, SinisterDeath said:

You tack on voter-ID laws, and you'll get a ton of republican support for just this.

If you nail people from both sides with this, you'll get the support of the American People... specially if both Clinton & Trump get nailed hard.

This actually does have a chance to pass. Just clean it up a little bit, maybe add some voter ID law like you suggested. A little give and a little take and a little trimming and this congress might actually get something done when no one was expecting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Would the bill accomplish these goals? Democrats have a bad habit of wanting to do something good when in reality it either doesn't work or actually makes things worse.

Think of a Bill these days as a giant list of negotiations, or a Christmas list.

You throw in something completely insane and expensive, just on the off chance someone actually agrees to it, if not, it's one of the first things thrown out so they can bargain

 

Like I said, some goals are decent, some are just no-goes right from the start.

 

Personally, I'd rather they break a bill up into individual parts, to get the individual (good) sections of reform unilaterally  passed through congress, while the weaker ones just sit on the sidelines until all the good reform sections are passed, then they can slog through that mess later.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

I don't know how I feel about the Federal Government using money to fund campaigns. What if I don't want my tax dollars to go to someone's campaign?

There's quite a few people in my state alone that don't want any federal money going to California for any reason, whats-so-ever. Often federal money is used to fund a lot of things, a lot of people don't want it to. So.. the government doesn't really care what you think it should be spent on.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

This feels like a double edged sword. On the one hand I do feel like the public has an interest in knowing who is funding a campaign. On the other hand I also feel like you should be able to fund something without it being known for a variety of reasons. Again I'm not sure how I feel about this.

This comes out of the whole Russian shit & Facebook/Twitter/etc. 

One of the biggest attack ads against politicians, on both sides is corporate sponsors.

Super-pacs, and other methods of hiding donors during the current election, prevents you from attacking them for getting paid off by Banks, Oil Companies, Anti-Semite organizations, etc.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Kind of weird to target them and NOT Google at the same time but eh ok I think I'm fine with this one although it does feel a little too specific for my tastes.

Maybe they'll flesh it out?

 

Facebook/Twitter though, have had some weird dealings with Russian twitter bots. I don't know that, that has anything to do with googles adsense? (Plus, Facebook has been getting a LOT of shit recently for what they've done. Maybe it can finally be put on it's death bed?)

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Why? I'm not even talking about Trump here (although that's obviously who it's targeted towards). I don't really see the point of this even in the future.

It's all about Trump not disclosing it. Every other president has done so when asked? 

Part of it is related to the above who's funding your campaign thing?

 

Imagine if Trump was just given $50,000,000 to win the election by a known Russian government official?

Imagine if Trump was given $25,000,000 by the Koch Brothers?

Or even worse.

Imagine if Trump was given $10,000,000 by Bill Clinton.

 

But yea, the bill will never pass the president if this is in it. So this is clearly fodder for being thrown out.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

100% support.

Pretty much the consensus here on that.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Very vague. What does this entail?

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Again, vague. Also if it's targeted at SCOTUS why would all branches of government be impacted?

Yep its all very vague atm.

 

Maybe we'll actually get the written specifics of all of these, as this is just a list of what the goals are.. The goals in this case are just.. vague as hell.

Maybe they think this happens?

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

LOL sure why not. Does that mean we can use voting machines not made by private companies from other nations please? If our elections are going to be cheated and corrupted I at least prefer our own government to be doing it, thanks.

lol, well that's one way to look at it.

 

I still say we just send everyone absentee ballots that they can just bring in if they don't mail it. 

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Maybe they don't deserve to compete?

Why not? You'd probably fit in a lot better with certain 3rd parties than a straight republican party. :wink:

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

Good point. They might want to just drop this aspect of it. Yeah it's kind of scummy and bullshit that they just get taxpayer first class flights but the alternative is to make a new very messy law that has all these exceptions and whatifs and all that. Just consider it another perk of being in congress and overlook it.

I just don't know enough on how they classify what flights are required, where this money comes from, and as Cubarey mentioned, is there salary also considered public money? If so, that kind of shits on non-rich people running for office.

 

4 hours ago, Nolder said:

This actually does have a chance to pass. Just clean it up a little bit, maybe add some voter ID law like you suggested. A little give and a little take and a little trimming and this congress might actually get something done when no one was expecting it.

Possibly.

It just really depends on how much each side is willing to give/take. 

Some reason I have a hunch that Pelosi isn't going to rest about the tax returns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

There's quite a few people in my state alone that don't want any federal money going to California for any reason, whats-so-ever. Often federal money is used to fund a lot of things, a lot of people don't want it to. So.. the government doesn't really care what you think it should be spent on.

It should though, shouldn't it?

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

This comes out of the whole Russian shit & Facebook/Twitter/etc. 

One of the biggest attack ads against politicians, on both sides is corporate sponsors.

Super-pacs, and other methods of hiding donors during the current election, prevents you from attacking them for getting paid off by Banks, Oil Companies, Anti-Semite organizations, etc.

I have nothing to say about what you said except that it doesn't sway me one way or another.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Maybe they'll flesh it out?

 

Facebook/Twitter though, have had some weird dealings with Russian twitter bots. I don't know that, that has anything to do with googles adsense? (Plus, Facebook has been getting a LOT of shit recently for what they've done. Maybe it can finally be put on it's death bed?)

TBH I don't believe the whole spiel about Russian bots. Or, rather, I know that there are bots on both platforms (I have encountered them) but in my experience they seem to be paid for by large companies such as NYT to boost their morning story into the trending section every morning. When people say that there are Russian bots posing as Trump supporters...it sounds really crazy and like a conspiracy theory. Especially when you see the IRL support he has at his rallies. Like, the guy is popular stop trying to excuse his popularity as just Russian bots it just makes you look crazy and desperate. 

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

It's all about Trump not disclosing it. Every other president has done so when asked? 

Just modern presidents. 

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Part of it is related to the above who's funding your campaign thing?

How would tax returns tell you that?

Would you be able to tell the difference between a legitimate business deal and a "campaign donation"?

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Imagine if Trump was just given $50,000,000 to win the election by a known Russian government official?

Didn't the Clinton Foundation take millions in foreign donations? Oh...but it's a "charity" so nevermind. And when they pay millions to hear Bill or Hillary speak for an hour that's totally legitimate and above the board...right?

 

This is why I don't really care even if the Russian mumbo jumbo was even true.

No one cared about all this foreign interest in our political leaders before Trump won.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Imagine if Trump was given $25,000,000 by the Koch Brothers?

Koch brothers hate Trump they are just Globalist traitors.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Or even worse.

Imagine if Trump was given $10,000,000 by Bill Clinton.

I don't care about any of these examples anymore.

I just accept it as part of the system.

Our leaders are all on the take, the question is what will they do for me?

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

I still say we just send everyone absentee ballots that they can just bring in if they don't mail it. 

Vote by mail shouldn't be a thing. All of these vote by method other than in person on election day shouldn't be things.

It's all room for exploitation.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Why not? You'd probably fit in a lot better with certain 3rd parties than a straight republican party. :wink:

That's probably true but they just aren't popular enough.

This is why Trump flirted with the Reform Party and then came back later as a Republican.

All the aparatus is there you just have to mold it to your beliefs.

Building from the ground up is nearly impossible without widespread support and the fact is the Dems and Republicans cast a net wide enough that no third party really has a chance of getting big enough even IF there is widespread support.
 

For example there is a Green party which primarily focuses on environmental issues (among other things) but most people who consider themselves environmentalists just join the Democratic party and try to force their agenda as the primary agenda.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

I just don't know enough on how they classify what flights are required, where this money comes from, and as Cubarey mentioned, is there salary also considered public money? If so, that kind of shits on non-rich people running for office.

I don't think it matters tbh. This is such a tiny tiny thing compared to so many other issues.

 

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

Possibly.

It just really depends on how much each side is willing to give/take. 

Some reason I have a hunch that Pelosi isn't going to rest about the tax returns.

I'm not sure what Pelosi is going to do. People tend to talk a big game until they're in office and then...things change.

Look at Trump in one debate he told Hillary he was going to appoint a special council to investigate and "lock her up" and it just never happened.

Pelosi might be talking tax returns and impeachment and whatever right now but when the new congress comes in we'll see what she does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Nolder said:

It should though, shouldn't it?

nah.

Because then we'd spend nothing on nothing, and have no need for government.

 

51 minutes ago, Nolder said:

I have nothing to say about what you said except that it doesn't sway me one way or another.

Understandable.

 

52 minutes ago, Nolder said:

TBH I don't believe the whole spiel about Russian bots. Or, rather, I know that there are bots on both platforms (I have encountered them) but in my experience they seem to be paid for by large companies such as NYT to boost their morning story into the trending section every morning. When people say that there are Russian bots posing as Trump supporters...it sounds really crazy and like a conspiracy theory. Especially when you see the IRL support he has at his rallies. Like, the guy is popular stop trying to excuse his popularity as just Russian bots it just makes you look crazy and desperate. 

I'm sure there's bots on both sides. But I also think that the Russian bots out there, are playing both sides. They make up crazy liberals to stir up conservatives, and they create crazy conservatives to stir up liberals.

 

Bernie was arguably more popular at rallies than Trump. Definitely more so than Hillary. so IRL support doesn't mean as much as the actual voter turnout.

 

Of course Trump is popular among his base. But what the Russian bots have done is far more insidious than simply adding numbers to his supporters.

 

56 minutes ago, Nolder said:

Just modern presidents. 

 

Because there was either no federal taxes as we know them today for the earliest presidents, or the kind of money and donors to presidents wasn't is like it is today. So Modern being from what, Kennedy and up? (I'm pretty sure republicans were always asking if his money came from the mob).

 

58 minutes ago, Nolder said:

How would tax returns tell you that?

Would you be able to tell the difference between a legitimate business deal and a "campaign donation"?

I think the hope is that said tax return would disclose where said money originated from.

 

59 minutes ago, Nolder said:

Didn't the Clinton Foundation take millions in foreign donations? Oh...but it's a "charity" so nevermind. And when they pay millions to hear Bill or Hillary speak for an hour that's totally legitimate and above the board...right?

 

This is why I don't really care even if the Russian mumbo jumbo was even true.

No one cared about all this foreign interest in our political leaders before Trump won.

Sure we did. It was even a running point among Conservatives for years.

 

What we didn't know is how many tendrils the Russians had going on. We were all to focused on the Middle East & China.

 

As for the Clinton foundation. I'm not making excuses for them.

However, public speaking is something both sides do.

 

1 hour ago, Nolder said:

Koch brothers hate Trump they are just Globalist traitors.

Debatable. They, like other's are mad at policies he's done, but on the other hand he helps them with others.

Sometimes it's like he does things that come off as a dick move just to see who's loyal to him.

 

1 hour ago, Nolder said:

Vote by mail shouldn't be a thing. All of these vote by method other than in person on election day shouldn't be things.

It's all room for exploitation.

Absentee voting is awesome dude.

And it also requires

A) Valid ID

B) A witness 

Which makes it a legally binding document that purgers yourself an the witness with fraud if the ballot is exploited/illegal. So double penalty.

 

1 hour ago, Nolder said:

All the aparatus is there you just have to mold it to your beliefs.

Building from the ground up is nearly impossible without widespread support and the fact is the Dems and Republicans cast a net wide enough that no third party really has a chance of getting big enough even IF there is widespread support.

See, I think there is room for them to grow, it's just getting people out of this mind-set of it's only D & R. We're playing into the Dems and Republicans hands by acting like they are the only option. They are the ones who stay in power as long as we allow that belief to run rampant.

 

1 hour ago, Nolder said:

I don't think it matters tbh. This is such a tiny tiny thing compared to so many other issues.

Definitely.

 

1 hour ago, Nolder said:

Pelosi might be talking tax returns and impeachment and whatever right now but when the new congress comes in we'll see what she does.

Pelosi always stuck me as someone who's going to make the tax return the whole issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Posts

    • I wish someone like Rod Miller would run for President.   I would even campaign for him.
    • Hey everyone. This is my first post and I figured this would be a good place to start. I've been chewing on this thread for well over a week, and as I am towards the end of book 5 in my first reread, I have a few things that I would potentially change.  These 3 things I feel are connected to some extent.    I should probably mention that I will probably not articulate this nearly as well here as I have in my head over the last week, but I will try.   1. Logain    Ever since we meet him in the Tower after being gentled and Min had her viewing of him, I was rooting really hard for him to have a major part or impact in the story. So obviously it follows that I was pretty disappointed in what became of him. I think he was severely underdeveloped and had so much potential .Maybe having him be the one to defeat Taim during the Last Battle. I really dont think his fulfillment of Min's viewing in AMoL fits with her description in FoH ( glory above all men). He does get a bit of redemption with his actions at the end.   2. A powerful male channeler as a sidekick to Rand   I understand that Mat and Perrin kind of fill this role( and maybe even Nynaeve to a certain extent) but I always wished Rand had a sidekick that he could confide in and share his experiences with.   This is where I think points 1 and 3 tie in.   3. One of the Forsaken flipping   In the first few books, its somewhat of a common theme that "No one is so lost that he cannot be brought to the Light" or some several iterations of that.  Naturally, Asmodean was a prime candidate for that.  I think Lanfear and Moridin were as well, but to a lesser extent and for different reasons.   It seemed like Jordan was leading towards Asmodean having a much bigger role before his thread was cut.   With the emphasis on redemption early on in the series, I think this would have been a great avenue to explore in regards to the Forsaken.   Even if Asmodean didnt survive until the end, I think having him eventually flip and maybe dying doing something heroic to save Rands' life or of Rands' companions would have had a nice touch. Having a former Forsaken at Rands side doing battle would have been epic.     To be fair, I am happy with WoT how it is and I dont necessarily think that these suggestions would make the series better.   They could very well break it for all I know.  These are are just things I remember wishing and hoping for when I first read through the series.    
    • i murder illian for needing other peoples approval
×