Repeating that again, now, is little better than trolling. You're the one who suggested other people were there and so it's your job to provide some evidence of that. I've already pointed out who the book says was there, and the lack of anything in the text to suggest anyone else was. So I've done my job already, thank you very much.
I have never suggested that other people were there.
Your evidence is unconvincing, so if that is all you have, then you are done.
Edit: by the way. The rule you quoted was “what you assert, you must prove”, not “what you suggest, you must prove”, so even if your lie were true, I would have nothing to prove.
Last edited by RKL; May 26 2012 at 02:56 PM.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Which certainly looks to me like you were suggesting someone else was there. Guess you forgot that bit, right?
The narrative in the book is couched in terms of who Frodo saw there. He sees those people he knows and a bunch of strangers; Elrond introduces him to those he doesn't know. That's clear evidence of who was there: it's plainly written, unambiguous, fully inclusive.
If a clearly written passage like that isn't enough to satisfy you then nothing will which is hardly surprising because by bringing this up yet again and refusing to accept anything, you're quite obviously trolling.
Which certainly looks to me like you were suggesting someone else was there. Guess you forgot that bit, right?
The narrative in the book is couched in terms of who Frodo saw there. He sees those people he knows and a bunch of strangers; Elrond introduces him to those he doesn't know. That's clear evidence of who was there: it's plainly written, unambiguous, fully inclusive.
If a clearly written passage like that isn't enough to satisfy you then nothing will which is hardly surprising because by bringing this up yet again and refusing to accept anything, you're quite obviously trolling.
My position is that I do not know if there was a Galadhrim at the Council meeting or not. I have simply stated my opinion, which by definition could be right or wrong. The question for you is: When you say that there could not have been any Galadhrim at the council meeting, are you stating an opinion, that by definition could be right or wrong, or are you asserting that what you say is true?
By the way; your evidence for there not being a Galadhrim at the Council Meeting is unconvincing. So, if that is all you have, then you are done.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
My position is that I do not know if there was a Galadhrim at the Council meeting or not. I have simply stated my opinion, which by definition could be right or wrong. The question for you is: When you say that there could not have been any Galadhrim at the council meeting, are you stating an opinion, that by definition could be right or wrong, or are you asserting that what you say is true?
By the way; your evidence for there not being a Galadhrim at the Council Meeting is unconvincing. So, if that is all you have, then you are done.
There's a very simple counter-argument to that: besides how Elrond does that round of introductions, Tolkien was using that as a mechanism to describe the scene for our sake. It does not make sense to suggest he'd leave people out: it's illogical, because if the author left them out then they're not there at all. Just not part of that imagined scene, as he wrote it. Just like you thought there ought to be scribes there, not realising that as Tolkien had it, Elves wouldn't need them.
There's a very simple counter-argument to that: besides how Elrond does that round of introductions, Tolkien was using that as a mechanism to describe the scene for our sake. It does not make sense to suggest he'd leave people out: it's illogical, because if the author left them out then they're not there at all. Just not part of that imagined scene, as he wrote it. Just like you thought there ought to be scribes there, not realising that as Tolkien had it, Elves wouldn't need them.
Pure speculation, this line of argument makes no sense.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Pure speculation, this line of argument makes no sense.
I knew as soon as I posted that you'd just deny it rather than try to deal with it. What's the matter, too subtle for you?
The thing is, it's a closely described scene. It's not like the feast, where there were said to be loads of Elves hanging about; they could have been anybody, in principle at least (however vanishingly unlikely it would be for any of them to be Galadhrim). In this case, however, it's a secret council and only specific people have been invited to attend. If while describing a scene that closely, the author only mentions certain people then it is only reasonable to assume that that's who's there.
I knew as soon as I posted that you'd just deny it rather than try to deal with it. What's the matter, too subtle for you?
The thing is, it's a closely described scene. It's not like the feast, where there were said to be loads of Elves hanging about; they could have been anybody, in principle at least (however vanishingly unlikely it would be for any of them to be Galadhrim). In this case, however, it's a secret council and only specific people have been invited to attend. If while describing a scene that closely, the author only mentions certain people then it is only reasonable to assume that that's who's there.
You are rehashing your old argument. This has been discussed ad-nauseum earlier in the thread. You have come up with nothing new. It is the same argument as; ‘Tolkien would have told us everyone that Frodo interacted with the previous evening’. I didn’t buy that and I am not buying this. I don’t know who all was at the council. I definitely know at least some of the beings there. That is all that I can be sure of.
Your reasoning is suspect. You say ‘reasonable to assume’! Quite a different thing from “prove” as your “what you assert, you must prove” quote says.
Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU
"what you assert, you must prove"
Last edited by RKL; May 26 2012 at 06:00 PM.
Reason: spelling
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
You are rehashing your old argument. This has been discussed ad-naseum earlier in the thread. You have come up with nothing new. It is the same argument as; ‘Tolkien would have told us everyone that Frodo interacted with the previous evening’. I didn’t buy that and I am not buying this. I don’t know who all was at the council. I definitely know at least some of the beings there. That is all that I can be sure of.
Your reasoning is suspect. You say ‘reasonable to assume’! Quite a different thing from “prove” as your “what you assert, you must prove” quote says.
Reasonable to assume because we do that all the time. Descriptive narrative is there to enable people to picture the scene. Every time there's a scene with only a limited number of people there, when we're told who they are, then we picture what's described and it makes no sense to suggest Tolkien would simply omit to mention people in such an important scene given that the description already includes inconsequential 'extras', Elrond's unnamed counsellors. This is a case where Occam's Razor can be applied: the simplest explanation for someone not appearing anywhere in the narrative is that they're not there.
Reasonable to assume because we do that all the time. Descriptive narrative is there to enable people to picture the scene. Every time there's a scene with only a limited number of people there, when we're told who they are, then we picture what's described and it makes no sense to suggest Tolkien would simply omit to mention people in such an important scene given that the description already includes inconsequential 'extras', Elrond's unnamed counsellors. This is a case where Occam's Razor can be applied: the simplest explanation for someone not appearing anywhere in the narrative is that they're not there.
assume
verb (used with object)
1.
to take for granted or without proof: to assume that everyone wants peace. Synonyms: suppose, presuppose; postulate, posit.
prove
verb (used with object)
1.
to establish the truth or genuineness of, as by evidence or argument: to prove one's claim.
Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU
"what you assert, you must prove"
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Pure speculation, this line of argument makes no sense.
It does seem like you're trolling. The passage that I quoted, and has been refered to by yourself umpteen times, doesn't leave room for more people - least of all note-worthy people - to be at the Council. Elsewhere in Rivendell during Frodo's stay? Maybe. Not at the Council though. That's what the text states. Simple denial isn't sufficient to make it otherwise.
"'Ai! ai!' wailed Legolas. 'A Rune-Keeper! A Rune-Keeper is come!'
Gimli stared with wide eyes. 'Tolkien's Bane!' he cried, and letting his axe fall he covered his face."
It does seem like you're trolling. The passage that I quoted, and has been refered to by yourself umpteen times, doesn't leave room for more people - least of all note-worthy people - to be at the Council. Elsewhere in Rivendell during Frodo's stay? Maybe. Not at the Council though. That's what the text states. Simple denial isn't sufficient to make it otherwise.
My opinion is that it does. Opinions by definition can be right or wrong. Are you stating an opinion in your post or are you stating a fact?
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
assume
verb (used with object)
1.
to take for granted or without proof: to assume that everyone wants peace. Synonyms: suppose, presuppose; postulate, posit.
prove
verb (used with object)
1.
to establish the truth or genuineness of, as by evidence or argument: to prove one's claim.
Still trying to pretend you're making no assumptions of your own?
As the narrative has it, Elrond '...pointed out and named those who Frodo had not met before.' There is no particular reason to suppose that anyone would be left out of that, and just prior to that we were told (from Frodo's point of view) those who he'd already recognised. You're assuming that someone might be left out, but on what evidence? What concrete reason is there to doubt the narrative?
As the narrative has it, Elrond '...pointed out and named those who Frodo had not met before.' There is no particular reason to suppose that anyone would be left out of that, and just prior to that we were told (from Frodo's point of view) those who he'd already recognised.
Yes, you have stated this ad-nauseun, ad-infinitum. I disagree.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Yes, you have stated this ad-nauseun, ad-infinitum. I disagree.
It's not enough to simply say you disagree. You're simply assuming that the narrative can be ignored, because it suits you to. An unreasoning opinion like that is worthless.
It's not enough to simply say you disagree. You're simply assuming that the narrative can be ignored, because it suits you to. An unreasoning opinion like that is worthless.
Your argument has been discussed ad-nauseum earlier in the tread. There is nothing you can do to make me say the same things over and over and over. Sorry, not gonna happen. So, unless you have something new to posit; you are done.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Your argument has been discussed ad-nauseum earlier in the tread. There is nothing you can do to make me say the same things over and over and over. Sorry, not gonna happen. So, unless you have something new to posit; you are done.
That's 'ad nauseam'
I have, in fact, just said something new: I questioned the assumption you've been making that it's okay to ignore the specifics of a closely described scene without good reason. And lo and behold, it turns out that you've never had any real reason, it was baseless.
So no, I wouldn't want you to repeat that same nonsense again, given that it's based on nothing more than "because I say so". I'm just here to call shenanigans on it, once and for all.
I have, in fact, just said something new: I questioned the assumption you've been making that it's okay to ignore the specifics of a closely described scene without good reason. And lo and behold, it turns out that you've never had any real reason, it was baseless.
So no, I wouldn't want you to repeat that same nonsense again, given that it's based on nothing more than "because I say so". I'm just here to call shenanigans on it, once and for all.
If that is your opinion, then you have my permission to think that way.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
My opinion is that it does. Opinions by definition can be right or wrong. Are you stating an opinion in your post or are you stating a fact?
This isn't a matter for either your opinion nor mine, but what the text says. If the text said: "and among those whom Frodo had not met before were...." then that's different. But it doesn't leave room for any others. It states that Frodo knew xxx in the Council and those he did not know it names. "He then pointed out and named those whom Frodo had not met before."
"'Ai! ai!' wailed Legolas. 'A Rune-Keeper! A Rune-Keeper is come!'
Gimli stared with wide eyes. 'Tolkien's Bane!' he cried, and letting his axe fall he covered his face."
This isn't a matter for either your opinion nor mine, but what the text says. If the text said: "and among those whom Frodo had not met before were...." then that's different. But it doesn't leave room for any others. It states that Frodo knew xxx in the Council and those he did not know it names. "He then pointed out and named those whom Frodo had not met before."
We have already discussed this to death. Read back through the thread. Your exact points have already been argued by Rad; over and over and over and over and over again, and answered by me; over and over and over and over and over again. You were late to the weapontake. If you wanted to discuss this, you should have joined in 3 days ago. We are done arguing this moot point. By the way, do you think Merry and Pippin have been romancing any Elf maids?
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Your exact points have already been argued by Rad; over and over and over and over and over again, and answered by me; over and over and over and over and over again.
All I saw was utter denial on your part with regards to the Council. A complete refusal to acknowledge the text. Your idea of putting this "debate" to rest seems to have been to blindly troll until people got fed up, refuse to acknowledge you don't have a leg to stand on and then try and divert people away from your nonsense by bringing up an entirely unrelated trifle of an issue.
"'Ai! ai!' wailed Legolas. 'A Rune-Keeper! A Rune-Keeper is come!'
Gimli stared with wide eyes. 'Tolkien's Bane!' he cried, and letting his axe fall he covered his face."
All I saw was utter denial on your part with regards to the Council. A complete refusal to acknowledge the text. Your idea of putting this "debate" to rest seems to have been to blindly troll until people got fed up, refuse to acknowledge you don't have a leg to stand on and then try and divert people away from your nonsense by bringing up an entirely unrelated trifle of an issue.
Do you know why we have been discussing whether or not a Galadhrim could have been at the council meeting? Have you followed the thread? It started some 3 or 400 posts ago with Rad’s insistence that the Galadhrim never left Lorien. This was proven wrong. He then switched to a number of other arguments that were all proven wrong, leading us to this point. So, do you really wish to argue about whether or not a Galadhrim waiter could have married a Rivendell elf maid, settled in Rivendell, and served refreshments at the council meeting?
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
I belive that this thread is as good as over. Derailed.
/endthread what people wanted to be said was finished within the first 4 pages. Now you two should stop before you get infractions.
Maybe someone should start a thread about whether or not the balrog had wings?
I read that part over and over and I think Tolkien could have been a bit more clear. I can totally see how people could take either view and state as fact and believe it.
For the three people at my keyboard, me, myself, and I, our imaginations place wings on the Balrog. Why? Because wings give it the "cool" factor. Never underestimate the cool factor in a story.
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
Civ II rules after all these years......
So, do you really wish to argue about whether or not a Galadhrim waiter could have married a Rivendell elf maid, settled in Rivendell, and served refreshments at the council meeting?
Since it seems you just can't leave my name out of this...
What I said, ages ago, was that there was evidently nobody from Lorien representing Galadriel at the Council. That indicates there can't have been anyone of any note from Lorien in Rivendell at that time. So, you can go on about hypothetical Galadhrim waiters if you like, but bringing in the refreshments and then going away again isn't attending a meeting and hence isn't in the least bit relevant. It's just you going off down the rabbithole again.
It's also pretty damned unlikely that a Silvan Elf from Lorien would get to marry an Elf from Rivendell. Elrond's lot were rather fancy-pants as Elves went, and which kindred an Elf belonged to made a lot of difference.
I have a solution, but I'm sure you'd rather argue amongst yourselves and a GM will never read this.
You SHOULD have to be acquaintance to enter the Golden Wood..... But the problem is that you need to do repeatables to get there. 1,200 rep per quest doesn't add up very fast. You should only have to do a small handful of rep quests before you're given permission to enter.
Otherwise, you can just skip EVERYTHING and go straight to Moria at lvl 45, fight off the Watcher in the water, and then you can go check out the end game content. Is that really what the devs wanted? That makes no sense. You shouldn't be rushing off to the next expansion, that is just dumb.
And you could get to Mirkwood anyway!! Just ask a hunter to teleport you!!! Do they really not think of these things
I have a solution, but I'm sure you'd rather argue amongst yourselves and a GM will never read this.
You SHOULD have to be acquaintance to enter the Golden Wood..... But the problem is that you need to do repeatables to get there. 1,200 rep per quest doesn't add up very fast. You should only have to do a small handful of rep quests before you're given permission to enter.
Otherwise, you can just skip EVERYTHING and go straight to Moria at lvl 45, fight off the Watcher in the water, and then you can go check out the end game content. Is that really what the devs wanted? That makes no sense. You shouldn't be rushing off to the next expansion, that is just dumb.
And you could get to Mirkwood anyway!! Just ask a hunter to teleport you!!! Do they really not think of these things
Personally, I would like to get the: short talk with the sentinel at the gate, travel to meet and be vouched for by Aragorn instance. We will see if Turbine makes some kind of change.
Turbine does not give out rewards based on the profit factor; because that would lead to less profit
Really...
- negav rep, to those responsible for this change in the game.
I cant believe how they take away, unique and wondefull aspects of the game, especially like this one, which was a nice detail of staying true (as much as it can be) to what Tolkien wrote, yes in a way it was. Lorien was guarded and you had to prove you are a friend before you could enter.
Its things like that, why LotRO is special and different from any other mmos
Grand Member Online status:
Reputation:
Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU
Grand Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Century Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Reputation:
Senior Member Online status:
The Balrog lives!! Oh, and give MECCG a try.
Poster of Note Online status:
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
