OK, my response to the 3 episodes...  First off I would like to say after 25 years since reading EotW, this totally held up to anything I could have hoped for.  With that said, there will always be things that even when you expect differences, that some are too much.  So let's go there:

First off, and most importantly, Matt!  Watching the first episode they right away put the bad parents theme in.  This is what makes Matt a degenerate, etc.  I gave this a few scenes to consider, but I think it was a terrible decision.  He's a gambler, ok.  Barely a scene in the Winespring of him being charming.  Rand and Perrin are giving him money to help feed his sisters.  Added darkness.. necessary?  Let's get back to Matt in a bit.

Perrin having a wife... ummm OK.  Killing her with an axe... Maybe they avoid the Perrin and Egwene meeting the Whitecloaks.  Therefore that's what caused his hate of the axe.   If he also kills Whitecloaks with the axe then, well seems kind of redundant.  So far, really like Perrin.

Rand... for the most part I've been like "Yup! There's Rand".   The relationship with Egwene is more evolved and I'm fine with that.  It even lends more to his reactions to Egwene's development.  I don't like that when he is with Matt that he is the one that is making jokes.   Back to that again soon...

The 4 Ta'Veren thing... making Egwene a potential Dragon.  First, I'll say was Egwene not a Ta'Veren,  apparently not.  But....  Throwing her into the dragon mix is troublesome...   First off, Egwene is one of if not the most bad ass character by the end.  I really dislike the idea that one needs to increase her early revelance with this potential.  

Second, the whole Saidin/ Saidar thing.  If the new Dragon is a female she channels Saidar... no taint, no problem.  

Lan... when the two river boys (Rand) are talking shit to Moirane, Lan just keeps saddling the horses and doesn't call down the sheep hearder (easy book tie in... and week Lan).

Moirane, almost no complaints.  I think all acceptable by turning book into TV.  

Introducing Thom when they did instead of the start.  Seems really weird.  Introducing Aiel I get.  I just wonder what other stories they are shrinking.

Lastly... Matt!  We all know the season 1 actor will not be back for season 2.  I have a really big question.  Was the actor cut because he couldn't bring the levity to the character?  Or did the actor quit because the character was written no where near to what he signed up for?

Matt is supposed to be the goof, the person that doesn't understand women and men dynamics.  He's irresponsible, he's reckless, he makes you cringe at times.  He definitely makes you laugh at times.  He learns.  Right now he has tragic background,  zero personality, limited grounds for growth.

After 3 episodes

Hey everybody, first time poster (I think, though I may have had an account in a previous age).  I just read through this entire thread and am very intrigued by some of the ideas.  Obviously transitioning this work of fiction that we love so much to the screen is quite the undertaking, and there is no way that Rafe and crew are going to please everyone.

There are two conversations that I have found the most interesting.  The first is cutting out Min, or if not cutting her out then it being impossible for her to be part of the love quartet.  I keep reading that the viewers wouldn't accept it... I ask as readers, when you knew where the story was going, did you see it working?  Did the narrative make it work for you? Because it did for me... so if the book could do it, is it impossible the show could pull it off?  Do we want our deliverer of the story to change major plot lines to protect certain sensibilities? Oh and in this case we are saying 2 girls is passable,  3 not so.

This brings me to the next point... SEXUALITY! So scary!  First off I will recognize that there have been people that have out in the research and they apparently know more about how things will play out.  So with that said what I say here is in no way a prediction or a "should do", it's more a response to comments read.

Pause for effect...

Ok, to start, stop comparing the sex content of GoT to tWoT.  I at no point watching GoT thought to myself "wow they really sexed this up for tv".  I didn't think this because all of it was in the books, if not worse!  The HBO series explicit material followed the content of the source material.  If tWoT follows the source material then it will be nowhere near as raunchy.

That being said, if the source material is to be followed, there is PLENTY of sexuality in Mr. Jordan's work.  To start, I'm pretty sure the description of every single female character involves an accounting of the shapeliness of their breasts.  The imagery of each outfit is sure to include how it shapes their chest, or how sheer it is, or at least how it shapes their bottom.

As to pillow friends... this isn't something that needs to be created or enhanced in the show.  I say this because it is already there and it is discussed frequently.  How they incorporate that is up to the show runners but I think there is enough source material that it can be done tastefully.  On that note, I get very uncomfortable with discussions of which character you can just "turn gay".  A character is a character almost as much as a person is a person.  You don't turn people gay.

Lastly, I find it interesting talking about cultures in fiction like the Aiel, that go to their sweat tents male and female together.  I take this as a comment on inhibitions and improprieties, etc.  Egwene as a fish out of water is personified by the description of the nudity of the tents.  Do you think an back of shoulder camera angle that shows some upper collar bone will give you that full image? Or will it feel like something you watched on Friday nights after Family Matters on ABC in the 90's?

So yah, that's my nickle.  Can't wait to be torn apart ?