Luckers... Official on Brandon

[reneyan]

I am positive it would've taken alot more than three books to fix the timeline pre-tGS, then people would be bitching about Brandon taking too long.

Different matter, Presumably RJ was a fan of his own books, does that mean all of WOT is fanfiction. Authors create their own ideas, THEY AREN'T HANDED DOWN FROM GOD, If brandons WOT writing is fanfiction than all books are fanfiction and therefore fifty shades of gray is equivalent to the Wheel of Time.

[dhazeghi]

I am positive it would've taken alot more than three books to fix the timeline pre-tGS, then people would be bitching about Brandon taking too long.

 

Agreed.  I think they had a choice between trying to conclude the series in a satisfactory manner, and trying to retain Jordan's distinctive voice.  The latter would not only have required a great deal more work and time, but many plots would simply have had to be left hanging.

[Suttree]

Nah, from day one Brandon said he wasn't going to try an imitate RJ's voice, it had little to do with not having enough space. This is evidenced by the large amount of filler in TGS and ToM. It's not as if those two books are lean and only contain must have scenes.

[meeker]

I have read these forums for years, though I rarely post.  I just wanted to put in my 2 cents that Luckers and his crew have been ruining the experience for me to that point I have started visiting less and less.  I do not care that you do not like Brandon's work, although I disagree with you.  It is the constant barrage of whining in multiple posts.  You seem to be crying that if only they had listened to you then you could have saved everything.  Really wish all the negativity could be contained to relevant threads rather than spewed all over the forums. 

 

I have thoroughly enjoyed Brandon's work so far and while there may be mistakes, as you love pointing out, but they do not detracted from the overall experience for me.  In fact the only chapter I truly did not like is one that many people have mentioned as one of their favorite in the entire series, Veins of Gold.  I thought that was the worst written chapter in the entire series, would rather read about Elayne's dresses. 

 

There is plenty of valid criticism but it is the vitriol and self promotion coming from a few people that really grinds my gears.

[ArveduiEreinion]

 

It is valid to think that the BS written books are the best in the WoT.  It is just as valid an opinion to think that Brandon Sanderson has written these books terribly.  What isn't valid is to say that because you think one way or the other you are not a fan of the WoT, or that you are somehow "stupid, dumb, uneducated, etc.".  In the Brandon Sanderson criticism debate, both sides have at times made the error of attacking the person, not the opinion.

 

I can't agree with this point. It is simply not valid to think that either TGS or ToM are the best written books in the WoT. You could argue that these books contain the most plot gratification. However, I fail to understand how anyone could argue that these books contain solid prose. Moreover, I find it hard to believe anyone could find the plot of ToM anything but frustrating. Another WH or TPoD. A completely unnecessary book, in other words, that should have been folded into perhaps two final books (e.g. TGS and AMoL). 

 

I'm honestly asking for your follow-up thoughts on this. If someone were to argue that the earth is flat, I wouldn't consider their argument valid. I would simply dismiss their argument. 

 

 

 

@ArveduiErenion:

 

How can someone say that tGS or ToM are their favorite books?  Simple, if they enjoyed reading those books more so than any other book in WoT.  I'm not talking literary criticism, but people's opinions on the books.  You are more than allowed to disagree with them, but if they enjoyed these books the most of the series, that is their opinion, and they are entitled to feel that way.  And for them, those books truly are the best in the series.  That doesn't mean you have to feel the same way.  Only that them feeling that way doesn't make them "stupid, dumb, etc."

 

Don't get me wrong, in my mind tGS & ToM are ranked dead last in the WoT series due to some issues I had with BS's writing, especially his character voicing for Mat.  But if someone loves these books the most, I ask them what it was that they liked about these books, and what their thoughts are on what I didn't like about the books, not call them an idiot, mean, ungrateful, un-educated, or anything else.

 

I'm sure we have all heard the words "Beauty if in the eye of the beholder."  Well, that holds true as much with books as it does with paintings, romantic attraction, scenery, clothes, you name it.  If someone finds something beautiful that you find ugly, you shouldn't be calling them "stupid" for seeing that beauty, but rather discussing why you two feel differently about this thing, so that possibly both people's horizons may expand.  If both sides can't agree, you can still discuss why you disagree, but that shouldn't include demeaning the person for feeling differently than you.

 

 

You're responding to an argument that I didn't make. I carefully chose my words and I said no one could rationally call TGS or ToM the "best written books" in the series. They are not and the prose in both books is cringe-worthy far too often. I won't appeal to authority here nor fill this response with detailed examples. If you would like, however, I could respond with some of the more egregious examples.

 

Moreover, I disagree with your point to a certain extent. You note that people are entitled to their personal opinions. I agree: people are entitled to their own beliefs. A person could say, without objection, that they like TGS or ToM the most out of the WoT. They could say they like their child's finger painting better than a Picasso. If pushed for a justification that person could even say "well, just because." Fine. That doesn't make their thought particularly intelligent but they are entitled to it. There's no need to belittle the person but neither would I feel compelled to engage in further discussion.

 

Where I disagree with you is if this hypothetical someone then tries to argue their point from a position of belief. There is no argument at that point. No rational discourse. I find the latter example troublesome when an appeal could be made to valid arguments (e.g. technical literary critique, originality of idea, etc.) People use words phrases like "well, I just feel like x is great" or "I liked x just....because" in order to avoid a rational argument in favor of their position. You like a particular book/painting/drink/etc? Great. Why? Is it the composition of the piece? The subject matter chosen? The perfect mixing technique used? The quality of the ingredients? And so on ad nauseum. Make an argument or have the decency to acknowledge the lack of one.

 

Finally, criticizing someone for the lack of a cogent argument is not the same thing as being mean to them. The impulse to avoid argument (which I clearly don't view in a pejorative sense) is disturbing.

[ArveduiEreinion]

I have read these forums for years, though I rarely post.  I just wanted to put in my 2 cents that Luckers and his crew have been ruining the experience for me to that point I have started visiting less and less.  I do not care that you do not like Brandon's work, although I disagree with you.  It is the constant barrage of whining in multiple posts.  You seem to be crying that if only they had listened to you then you could have saved everything.  Really wish all the negativity could be contained to relevant threads rather than spewed all over the forums. 

 

I have thoroughly enjoyed Brandon's work so far and while there may be mistakes, as you love pointing out, but they do not detracted from the overall experience for me.  In fact the only chapter I truly did not like is one that many people have mentioned as one of their favorite in the entire series, Veins of Gold.  I thought that was the worst written chapter in the entire series, would rather read about Elayne's dresses. 

 

There is plenty of valid criticism but it is the vitriol and self promotion coming from a few people that really grinds my gears.

 

Cheers on the Veins of Gold criticism (a man after my own heart) but I have to ask: why bother posting in this thread? Do what I do: skip over material that you find redundant/dull/etc.

 

On a side-note, I also agree with your general point about fan input. I understand how that might have addressed certain continuity errors but I would weigh those against OpSec concerns. Moreover, isn't that what Maria was concerned with? (looking for clarification here)

[NetSlider]

I was gonna respond at length  but than thought...nhaaaa. One thing I want to say is that even though I agree with most of Drakkor said, I have to say I completely disagree about the statements concerning Fisher. If anything, Fisher, from what I saw, was always moderating and actually trying to defuse situations (as usually he does). So, unless I miss something huge in the past week or so (I too find it less and less appealing to show up to DM b/c of the atmosphere), I say let the Fisher fish. 

As to Luckers - I don't think of you any lesser than before (for what it's worth). And I don't think this whole mass is of your exclusive making. I think that individuals that picked up your opinions and then ran with them are the true problem. This whole attitude of passive-aggressive "discussion" on so called valid criticisms is not your doing. You actually for the most part stayed out from any extensive discussions and didn't beat the dead horse until the second coming. IMO, I think your name and reputation was a bit hijacked (be it with your consent or not) and though there might be some damage to it, I say time is a wise healer. At this point, and again IMO, the time simply needs to do his magic work (and yes, time is a "he" so bite me).

[DaoineSidhe]

@ArveduiEreinion:

 

I agree with you on some points and disagree with others in your most recent post. When someone stops giving their reasoning for an opinion, and turn to the “just because” line, then discussion stops and argument beings. I concur with you that that is unhelpful, and while its OK to feel that way, not really helpful in a discussion with other people about the books.

 

On the whole whether you could say that BS's books are the “best written” books in the series, of course an argument could be made. It might not be an argument coming from a academic literary criticism perspective, but that doesn't make it invalid. For example, one could say that the pacing of these last two books was a significant improvement over RJ's pacing, especially his most recent books. For another, I think it could also be argued that BS's writing of “Darth Rand” was very impressive, and was much better than much of RJ's portrayal of Rand in his last books. While you saw Rand slowly sliding down into madness, with a few eerie events, I always felt like RJ liked Rand Al'Thor the person too much to take him down some of the darker aspects of the character. BS's “Darth Rand” was really the first time that I had any trepidation towards Rand's evolving character. And I have read some valid arguments about why people thought BS's WoT books were better than RJ's (meaning they have reasons behind their opinions, not just belief).

 

Now, I can't really argue very well for thinking that these books are the “best written” of WoT, because, well, I don't happen to think that myself. And that wasn't my intention in my post from the start. However, I also don't think that someone who believes the other way is objectively wrong, either. In addition, let's say that a person is arguing from a position of belief. What does it serve in the discussion to attack them personally for their argument? Does it advance the topic that is being discussed? Or, is it at that point becoming a part of the problem and derailing the thread topic even more? I should also be very clear in that this behavior is rampant on both sides of the Brandon Sanderson Debate.

 

I enjoy Academic Literary Criticism. But that is not the only way to approach judgment on a piece of literature. Not does coming from an Academic Literary Criticism approach mean that your opinion or judgment of that piece of literature is more valid. What Academic Literary Criticism DOES provide is an acknowledged framework to judge a piece of literature upon, along with the vocabulary to frame that judgment in. As such, it is a tool that can be used when judging literature, but only one of many tools that can be used. Heck, RJ himself was widely derided by many Academic Literary Critics when it came to his Wheel of Time series. Although he brought High Fantasy back into popularity for many, and was the first of a new generation of Fantasy Writer's to top NY Times best-selling list, he never won any Literary Awards for it. No Hugos, no Locuses, no Nebulas.

 

In fact, ArveduiEreinion, I probably agree with you on the whole about BS's writing in WoT. I just find it disturbing when any one person begins to think that their opinion on a deeply subjective matter is the only “right” way to think of it. It is this thinking, on both sides of the debate, coupled with a propensity to personally attack those who disagree with others, that is dragging DM down at the moment. Because I don't think that the BS written WoT books are the best written, I am curious to hear why others really do enjoy them so much. I am also curious as to what those same people think about the issues I have with BS's writings. If they have no interest in hearing my opinions, and only wish to say that BS's books are the best “because”, well, then I choose to ignore that poster and reply to someone else's post that I think has substance.

 

What I see instead on DM is that when the Brandon Sanderson Debate rears it head in a thread, is more of the following:

-People weigh in on both sides of the argument, some with rational explanations, some with irrational explanations

-Once the debates really get going, opponent's of both sides ignore the rational arguments that are made by some of their opponents, and instead focus on those that are irrational. They then proceed to attack those irrational ideas instead of responding to the rational ones.

 

I ask myself, why? If you have the choice to respond to someone who is making rational points, and instead call out someone for making irrational arguments, what is the point? You have only derailed the discussion onto an argument about “feelings” about the book rather than reasoned opinions. If one responds instead to the rational arguments, then the discussion would continue, and well, you could ignore the irrational.

 

I understand that passions run hot when it comes to feelings about the Wheel of Time, but come on, can't we be civil about this? Both sides of the Brandon Sanderson Debate are running the very real possibility of destroying the integrity of DM, and chasing away those who have come here to join in a sense of community about a wonderful fantasy series that we all love. And that one side or another of this debate started with the personal attacks first is not a valid defense. I mean, come on, that sounds like a 2^nd grader. That is no way no win a discussion. We are all conscious, (somewhat) rational, beings. Before anyone posts something to a thread, you should ask yourself the question: Am I adding something positive to this thread that furthers the topic of the thread? Because if you're not, then you are just a troll, regardless of who threw the first punch.

 

@Luckers:

I didn't say it in any previous posts, but I have had, and continue to have a great deal of respect for you Luckers.  For expressing your views, you have become a lightning rod in the WoT community, and yet have tried to remain civil and above much of the baser parts of the argument.  Could you have possibly handled the situation better at points?  Probably.  But the issues over Brandon Sanderson's writing of the WoT (quality, right of criticism, etc) where going to be there regardless of your actions.  It isn't like you expressed your views, and all of a sudden a bunch of people decided that they didn't quite like BS's handling of the WoT.  They were there, and had been there for awhile.  So had those who really love BS's WoT, along with those who feel it isn't right to criticize BS's WoT work.  This coupled with the HUGE anticipation for the FINAL LAST BOOK EVER OF THE WHEEL OF TIME, meant that a lot of this argument was inevitable.  You may have assassinated the Arch-Duke (a bit of stretch, I know), but you aren't responsible for the Great War that followed.

[Terez]

Wanted to comment on a few more things.

 

First, the way some of you feel about the "insider" distinction. I tend not to think of it in those terms because the term itself is pretty relative. In a sense, anyone who follows the forums is an insider relative to a fan who doesn't make much use of the internet, whether you like it or not. And I'm sure Jason, probably the most insiderish of the fans, has days when he feels like an outsider. Hell, even Brandon might have days like that. I'm sure most fans who are bothered by it are those who would like for their fourth wall to remain intact. For some fans, the fourth wall disappeared when RJ died. For most of us, I think it's somewhere in between. I don't like to talk about this kind of thing in your normal WoT discussion, unless you count things like the Twitter conversations we've had with Brandon; I don't think I would have started a thread about it, but what's done is done, and if there's an appropriate place to talk about it then this thread seems like a good place for it. I know that Luckers sometimes mentions insider things in his arguments, particular his critiques, but I find that I can usually make those same arguments with things that have been said in public. But it's my job to keep up with those things.

 

I don't know if self-promotion is a fair criticism either. Luckers has a bully pulpit at Dragonmount, and while it's been fraying at the edges a bit lately, there were years of dedication that went into building that pulpit, and he had a fan base on these forums before Brandon was a twinkle in Harriet's eye. I know, because it annoyed the hell out of me when I first started posting here during slow times at Theoryland. I couldn't debate anything with him because he always had groupies to drown me out. DaoineSidhe came along while I was posting and said some of the things I was going to say about it, though. While it's true that all this negativity is in part due to Luckers' influence here, it's not true that he created it. And while it's true that it ruins the experience for many, it's also true that it's cathartic for others who have been holding in their frustrations for some time. However, it's also true that many fans who were able to enjoy TGS and TOM without much reservation have had their attention drawn to all the weaknesses of Brandon's books, and that their AMOL experience will be diminished for it. This often happens when people reread those books, but I have seen evidence that some readers would never have noticed those weaknesses without our influence.

[Dreggs Morlock]

I think there was a reason that, when Jordan announced his illness and was asked if someone else might finish the series, he said in essence, "I'll burn my notes first."  He knew his beloved characters would be changed forever if he could not finish it...and they were. 

 

I've been here a long time; I have pages of posts in the "Who killed Asmodaen" files, which seemed to be the proving grounds here once upon an arguement.  I have been here long enough to disappear, and when I came back 5 years ago, I had lost the original email account I used to sign up with, and that meant my old name here was also lost forever (I had forgotten my password).  Everytime I "rediscovered" Dragonmount, it made me very happy.  But in the last year or so, little by little that has changed.

 

When Brandon Sanderson was chosen to finish this series, his work ceased to be "FanFic" and became the official story.  We know Jordan didn't want anyone to do this, but his love for his fans stopped him from burning those notes, and allowed us an ending.  Now, as I read all the "inside information", what is being left unsaid (but if you read between the lines, its there) is either Sanderson mailed it in, or Harriet didn't not allow him to do the things OGs here felt was neccesary to "get it right". 

 

Either way, I have a problem with it-- and so I can walk away from Dragonmount (which I have been doing) or I can get into it with some of the players (which I did more recently).   PLEASE NOTE: This is what I feel disheartened by, others disagree with me and have different reasons, but the root of all this...disappointment?... is the same.

 

But here is the sad SAD truth: right before the last book is to come out, there is a divide growing at the largest online community that supports MoL and the rest of the series as a whole. 

 

WTF?! 

 

There is a very good chance this is the last foray into the forums of this site for me, and for every person who takes the time to say something similar, there might be 5 who just walk.  At a time where Dragonmount should be growing to the largest it will ever be, bubbling with the euphoria of the completion of a series that has meant sooo much to so many of us, Dragonmount might very well be contracting due to a few people who just can't let their problems with the Sanderson era of WoT slide. 

 

A year from now, these critiques would be appropriate, especially when we will know if MoL has solved some of these problems or if its the same ol' schtick.  Now, on the eve of the the last book being released... its sheer stupidity.

 

That makes me sad.  It should not have been this way.

 

Luckers, this thread started with you saying, in essence, "I know I hurt people, perhaps I didn't make myself clear.  Here is a little salt and lemon juice."  It is very unlike you...or maybe it is, and I am mistaken.  I don't know anymore.  I do know that I am enjoying the end of my favorite fantasy series, despite Dragonmount.

[Suttree]

@Daoine

 

One problem with your opinion above is the number of people who have given rational explanations for why they think TGS and ToM are done well are extremely few and far between. In fact until sleeping & sam j posted excellent takes a short time ago in the thisguy thread I had almost given up on it happening again(I humbly request you  point me in the direction of these "valid arguments" for Brandon's work being the best two in the series because I have never even seen someone attempt to make that case here or at Theoryland).  In the end I think that is all anyone can ask for. When a reasoned critique is brought up instead of focusing on the poster and deriding their opinion as "ruining DM" why not give an example of what you like or cite quotes to refute what they are saying?

 

As for literary criticism I totally agree it is not the only way to approach judging a novel. I have long argued that you do not need a degree to do so. As someone who has their BA in Literature however I can tell you it is beyond frustrating to have your views attacked by people that can't(or refuse) to properly communicate why they think you are wrong aside from labeling it "hate".  I also would like to point out the few times people have admitted to not understanding critique or things like what makes "strong prose", there have been some of the best conversations I have ever seen here at DM with both sides attempting to help people learn and grow. I want to be very clear as well, RJ was a great fantasy writer but no one is holding him up as perfect. I have argued many times here that his work doesn't hold up outside of genre when you start bringing names like McCarthy, DeLillo, or Pynchon into the equation. In the end there is a huge opportunity on both sides of the debate as we near AMoL for people to have a positive discourse. I can only hope that we all can come together to make that happen. I understand that some people have taken exception to things I have said on the topic. While I will always defend my right to say them and very strongly hold to my opinion concerning Brandon's workm I will try and make an effort to only respond to the "rational posters". Although I don't agree with all of it you make some excellent points in your post above. Thank you for being a voice of reason.

 

Edit: As an aside this "self promotion" talk in relation to Luckers is nonsense. If anything he has risked his standing within the fandom to do what he thought was right in relation to the WoT. Also Terez is absolutely correct about not needing "insider info"as you can make just about all of the same arguments with public information. Luckers did not cause this mess, anyone who has spent time here knows the critique had been slowly growing over the years as regulars finished rereads and started studying the work more closely. To my mind many people blame him for making them more aware of the faults and that is an "ignorance is bliss" way of looking at things. This is a forum for the discussion of books with all of the insights, ideas, likes and dislikes involved. The faults already existed, no one can say Luckers has made it worse by making them more aware.

[Crael123]

You have my full support, he who comes with a bong!!

 

 

 

Fish

I am pleased to say I also got a warning point one time. No clue what it was for. But it must have been great.

 

I'm just curious, but why do grammar errors matter to so many people? I mean, who cares? This is a book! A story! Each book is over 1000 pages long, some errors will seep in! Just give the people the benefit of the doubt and stop being so hateful. We all need to just take a step back and realize this is a story. A good one yes, but a story. Just read and enjoy it. If you don't enjoy it stop reading. Pretty simple. But there is no need to fight eachother and be hurtful and say mean things. That is uncalled for.

[Terez]

I have three warning points. And I have been banned twice.

[Suttree]

I have three warning points. And I have been banned twice.

THREE?!?!? Good God I thought I had f'd up with one. Wonder if I can guess which posters you called out to earn them?

[Terez]

lol, it has been three ever since those warning points became visible to us, I think. I don't remember what they're for. I think one of them was for a fight with finnss. (He probably got one too.) And I think one of them might have been for a fight with Ares?

[DaoineSidhe]

I don't know how I have become the one that is tasked with giving rational arguments for BS's writing being the “best”, because that certainly isn't how I feel. And on the whole, I've found many of those who critique BS's writing to be fairly rational and civil in their points. A lot of my posts are directed at those who feel that “we should be grateful for having any WoT, and as a result, not critique it.” However, when someone voices doubt that those who are on the other side will have rational points in their favor, it not only needlessly rouses enmity, but ends up discouraging those with rational points from posting.

 

@Suttree:

I understand your desire for rational discussion on this topic, Suttree. It is the same desire I have. We can't make others respond respectfully to the opinions we make, or that their opinions will always be rational. But we can control how we respond to them. And I'm not saying that you respond irrationally or in a mean way either; from what I've seen you've tried to keep things civil between everyone. But people on both sides of this argument have been responsible for the nature of this DM War, if you will. Have most of the personal attacks been leveled against those who critique BS's work? Indeed and how. But once someone responds in kind by deriding their opinion as dumb, stupid, or baseless, you are making that which you desire even less likely to happen. I'm not blaming those who critique BS or those who love him solely. I'm only asking for all to not attack others personally, and that if you are attacked personally, to try and not respond in kind, regardless of how justified you may be (or feel) in doing so, especially if what you are seeking is rational discussion on the topic.

 

Outside of that fine point, I pretty much agree with everything else you are saying. It'd be pretty sweet if someone on the pro-BS side commented on my ideas for this, because then I wouldn't have to be seemingly Championing a cause that I don't believe in, only in its right to exist as an opinion.

 

As far as warning points, do you automatically receive them if the Admins receive a certain amount of complaints, or solely at the Admin's discretion? (Wait a minute, why am I even asking this.  Admins = LOVE control, so of course it going to be solely at their discretion is is my guess!)

[Terez]

It has to be at their discretion. I didn't get any more points when I got banned, and I've been given talkings-to by Luckers several times without getting another one.

[Terez]

Oh, I just realized you can click on them!

 

Personal attacks are not permitted on the forum--including attacks on peoples spelling and grammar. If you can't be nice about responding, walk away from the thread.

Your successive posts in the Demandred thread belittling and attacking your opponent exceed our code of conduct. They have been removed.

If you're getting this, you spoke up in the Androl thread after you were all asked to move on.

 

All from 2011.

[DaoineSidhe]

The closest I've come is Luckers threatening to chop me with his axe, but as he's in Australia and I'm in the US, I'm only slightly worried.  (It is an axe, after all...)

[Terez]

I'm trying to talk him into coming to JordanCon...

[DaoineSidhe]

Well considering I haven't been to a JordonCon, and probably wouldn't be able to make it to one, that doesn't worry me too much.  On the other hand, my contrary nature makes me want to go there and if Luckers is there, see how worried I should be about Luckers and his axe.  Just went to the JordonCon 2013 site, and looked at past panels & activities, and am intrigued.  Now I have something to contemplate on what to use my vacation time on this year...

[meeker]

If anyone is saying that BS has been better than RJ than I have not seen it and would obviously disagree.  However, I believe that given the circumstances and time frame that BS produced 2(hopefully 3) books that have done justice to the series.  A lot of this has to do with the perspective to which I approach reading books.  When I read a book I care about the people and their motivations and how they interact with each other.  I care about what they are doing and if it is compelling or not.  Unless it is really bad I couldn't care less about prose and writing styles.  When I am reading a book for the first time I scan the words really fast, to the point where while I am seeing each word I am not fully processing it until something is actually happening, whether that be dialogue, action, ect.  Descriptions and so forth and pretty much completely lost initially.  If the book is a good enough I will do a second, much slower, read where I pick up on more. 

 

So before going any farther I can tell you that I am already at odds with most of the people leading the criticism.  The things that BS supposedly does the worst are the things I care about the least.  This probably has a lot to do with the fact that I was a History major, not literature.  I was trained to read into people and their actions above anything else.  It is what interests me and prose mostly bores me.  Brandon is good enough that his writing does not get in the way of itself and that is all I care about.

 

One of the main criticisms that I hear a lot are that the books are enjoyable the first time but don't hold up after that.  This is something that I just can't agree with.  I have read each book cover to cover three times and have re-read many of the chapters as many as 20 times.  I keep the books in a place where I happen to be inconvenienced each day for about the amount of time it takes to read a chapter.  So almost every day I either pick a chapter I have been thinking about or open one at random and I am still enjoying them.

 

I will admit there have been a couple lines that made me cringe when I read them.  For example the scene where Rand introduces Min to his dad was written so awkwardly that it bothered even me and I think Veins of Gold is the worst chapter in the book(though I feel that had to be mostly RJ).  I also agree Mat was a bit off in Hinterstrap.  However, that is somewhat balanced by the fact that Brandon's Perrin was better than anything RJ ever had for him.  It does not completely balance itself out but it is better than I ever thought it could be without RJ. 

 

If there are any other specific areas you want my opinion on as to why I have been very happy with Brandon's work I would be more than happy to answer them.  I realize that a lot of the difference in our opinions has to do with the fact that we are very different priorities.  I don't begrudge anyone that has been disappointed with voicing their opinions.  In fact it would be plain boring if we all agreed on everything, there would be nothing to talk about.  What bothers me is certain people ruining every thread they can get their hands on with criticism about the writing to the point where it feels you can not have a conversation about anything else.  What really bothers is certain people that feel they know better than everyone else and that they could have personally "saved" the books if only Brandon and Harriet did everything they said.  The thread that prompted me to come here once a week instead of many times a day was the "Who is Androl thread" where certain admins came in and absolutely crapped on a thread that had nothing to do with writing style.  It feels like you can not discuss anything without it becoming about why BS sucks.  When your admins are the ones lighting torches for the mob instead of keeping threads on target then the experience is ruined.

[Barid Bel Medar]

I see a lot of throwing stones here, a lot of complaints and assignation of blame. Proclamations of disgust, outrage disagreement and discontent. From both sides you have the rational and irrational. 

 

While there are many on both sides are reasonable, the problem - and yes, it has been acknowledged there has been a problem - stems from both sides. 

 

None of us are humble crusaders pursuing some misguided notion of justice and righteousness. None of us have the right to assign blame and condemn others for ruining anything. This is a difference of opinion - a difference that has gotten out of hand. Nobody is right, and nobody is wrong. 

 

This is an open forum, anyone may express their opinion as long as they follow the CoC - if we were to censor things that people don't like, well, there wouldn't even be a forum. 

 

Truth is, everyone is to blame for this situation. Nobody is without fault here. The situation has developed because everyone LET IT HAPPEN. I include myself in this as well. You say you didn't do anything - that's the problem. If you actually care about Dragonmount, if you actually want to restore the forums to "tolerable" standards. DO SOMETHING. 

 

So, instead of blame or trying to say who is accountable for what - get over it. It has happened, nothing can take that fact away. Complaining about it does nothing to help and only serves to further degrade the integrity of the discussion. 

 

So be pro-active. Sure, some people here have more influence than others, but every single poster makes up the forums, and every single posters actions - or inactions - have contributed to the situation. Everyone has the power to make SOME difference. It may not be much in the grand scheme of things, but the tiniest contribution is 1000-fold more useful than the longest and largest complaint. 

 

As for how :

 

1. Everyone can help elevate the mood here just by the content and tone of their posts. Instead of bitterness or defensiveness - be open and more positively active. We are all fans - we all like the series enough - regardless of the opinion on Brandon's work - we are all still invested in the books enough to post here. We all enjoyed tGS and ToM enough to stick around. Those that have hated these and Brandon's work have left because it was intolerable. So be open to ideas, open to opinions. 

 

2. Attacking posters only makes the situation worse. No matter how noble the intentions, this will only make things worse. Disagreement does not mean dislike. Be civil and friendly when debating. 

 

3. If you do not want to read or discuss something - do not read the topic, and more importantly, don't post. Of course, you have the freedom to do so, but it achieves nothing. Posting on how much you don't like the topic benefits no-one and serves only to further aggravate the situation. 

 

Now here are some more active things you can do to help improve the situation. That there is a problem, everyone has acknowledged. What could or should have been done is in the past - it didn't happen. But we can improve it now. 

 

4. You have an idea on how to improve the situation - PM ONE OF THE MODS. Do not start threads about it or post about what should or shouldn't be done. That is our responsibility as mods - correct decisions or not. Individual ideas on what should be done are always subject to debate. It falls to the mods in the end - we don't need debates about how things should be handled. However, that does not mean blame falls on the mods shoulders either. We are human as well - we can't always come up with every idea that 20 people could make. We have slowly been trying to improve the situation, but even our influence is limited. Unless we crack down very, very hard and censor everything [something we are unwilling to do] - it will take some time. Ideas are welcome and appreciated. I can't guarantee they will be agreed with and used - some will, some won't - but if you don't give the ideas, they won't even be heard. At least at that point you can say you tried. 

 

5. We have recently been trying to contain certain arguments to specific threads. The most evident is the Brandon debate - which has been cut down (although still not perfectly, it is getting there). Others include the Egwene debate, or the Seals debate. Something I have recently trialled is specific threads. With Chapter 2 I created a [Plot Specific] thread, which was not derailed and worked perfectly well. Similarly, while creating threads, perhaps try that. A few suggestions: 

 

a) if you don't want any critical analysis of the text, but rather a thread focused on the plot, use [Plot Specific] in the title. Don't be snarky or a smartass and aggrivate things by having titles like "No BS haters" or crap like that. [Plot Specific] is a perfectly sufficient name that is self-evident. Then there can be no mistakes and derailments can be treated as such. 

 

b) if you want to analyse the text critically, you can give a heads up for the people who aren't interested in such things, or draw people who are interested into that topic. My advice would be a simple [Critical Analysis] inclusion in the title, which again, speaks for itself. 

 

c) Not feeling like a serious debate and just want a relatively relaxed and playful thread, try something along the lines of [Casual Discussion] or if you want to dedicate it to something that's crazy - like we have the crazy theories thread - put  [Crazy Theory/ies] in the title. 

 

d) While everything that doesn't state otherwise is - by common sense - inviting a serious discussion, if you feel the need to state that you want a serious discussion feel free to put [serious Discussion] in the title. Communication is key. Tell people what you want. 

 

Now, most of these are ideas - things that I am not forcing anyone to do. Some of these things people have the right to disregard, if it does not violate the CoC. I can't force people to do these things. But these are suggestions if people want to regain the atmosphere at Dragonmount. 

 

Again, PM myself or one of the other discussion mods with any ideas. I can't guarantee anything but being taken into account - but at least you can have your say, if it is disregarded, you can know that at least you tried. 

 

Edit: Just to be clear again. These are NOT new rules or guidelines. These are just suggestions I have made. The other mods are not bound to what I have said. 

[Terez]

Well considering I haven't been to a JordonCon, and probably wouldn't be able to make it to one, that doesn't worry me too much.  On the other hand, my contrary nature makes me want to go there and if Luckers is there, see how worried I should be about Luckers and his axe.  Just went to the JordonCon 2013 site, and looked at past panels & activities, and am intrigued.  Now I have something to contemplate on what to use my vacation time on this year...

 

+1

[Finnssss22]

lol, it has been three ever since those warning points became visible to us, I think. I don't remember what they're for. I think one of them was for a fight with finnss. (He probably got one too.) And I think one of them might have been for a fight with Ares?

 

 

Nope, just a "verbal" warning for language, no points. As bad as it got, I never actually called you names or insulted you openly.

I have been warned two other times, both involving you. One of which was entirely my fault and I took full responsibilty for, even appologized for it.

 

All that aside, I think your views and posts on this subject are pretty bang on and level headed. Pretty close to mine own in fact.

(Which I'm sure will bother us both on some level ;) )