|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 13, 2011 19:17:14 GMT
I'm not arguing... I was just asking for a link to a comic.
I think by now, its safe to assume there just isn't one and the idea that mediums are supposed to be neutral or objective is as true as Rey being Annie's father.
The people on the forum say it often enough but it really isn't in the comic.
|
|
|
|
Post by hifranc on Jan 13, 2011 20:06:02 GMT
Epiphany!!! is annie gonna stay with aly and parents? please be right i NEED that cookie There is some evidence to support that (words in the final frame). |
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jan 14, 2011 3:00:17 GMT
I think the thread has reached a heated agreement, since as far as I can tell everybody is arguing for pretty close to the same thing. Thi.. this is why I am so confused by that strange talking squirrel. We agree! Hold me, Hal. I'm scared.  I'm not arguing... I was just asking for a link to a comic. I think by now, its safe to assume there just isn't one and the idea that mediums are supposed to be neutral or objective is as true as Rey being Annie's father. The people on the forum say it often enough but it really isn't in the comic. It was linked by someone else. Pay attention. |
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 3:14:53 GMT
I think the thread has reached a heated agreement, since as far as I can tell everybody is arguing for pretty close to the same thing. Thi.. this is why I am so confused by that strange talking squirrel. We agree! Hold me, Hal. I'm scared. I'm not arguing... I was just asking for a link to a comic. I think by now, its safe to assume there just isn't one and the idea that mediums are supposed to be neutral or objective is as true as Rey being Annie's father. The people on the forum say it often enough but it really isn't in the comic. It was linked by someone else. Pay attention. This nonexistent link was posted by someone else? How do you pay attention to something that doesn't exist... I posted this. If by "someone else" you mean me... this one does not support what you know to be true. Annie is unbiased and objective regarding nature and technology but her position is a representative of the court. |
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jan 14, 2011 3:17:35 GMT
This page?Interesting. I never paid attention to the "usually" in Jones' first statment before. I suspect Jones is describing the ideal... which, apparently, neither side is trying very hard to live up to. |
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 3:24:35 GMT
This page?Interesting. I never paid attention to the "usually" in Jones' first statment before. I suspect Jones is describing the ideal... which, apparently, neither side is trying very hard to live up to. Yeah, I posted the page before it.. it says "nature and technology" Annie is unbiased and objective toward nature and technology. She does not view creatures of the forest as less important than creatures of the court, she does not see robots as superior to fairies. Because of this, she can WORK FOR THE COURT... which means she must act in interest of the court.... as their employee... |
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jan 14, 2011 3:29:28 GMT
Then I don't get what your problem is. Is your problem the specific terminology being used? As Hal said, we already agree. You have no reason to continue to try to prove me wrong.
I feel like you're just interested in fighting to fight.
|
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 3:30:49 GMT
Then I don't get what your problem is. Is your problem the specific terminology being used? As Hal said, we already agree. You have no reason to continue to try to prove me wrong. I feel like you're just interested in fighting to fight. No, I just don't think you understand the difference... she does not represent both the forest and the court equally as a neutral party. And I'm not interested in proving anyone wrong. Honest. Heck, I don't mind proving myself wrong! |
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 3:52:31 GMT
So as not to present this in the form of an argument, let me restate the problem.
Some people interpret this to mean the role of a medium is to be unbiased and objective between the forest and the court.
I'm interpreting it to mean, people who are unbiased and objective between nature and technology are eligible for the job of negotiator, but the job is not neutral itself. The job is to represent the court which must be bias towards the court.
Now, if that's a wacky, off the wall interpretation, please tell me.
I don't mean to prove anyone wrong... I'm just asking if I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jan 14, 2011 4:32:01 GMT
So this is about a difference in terms.
My apologies, but I do not have any interest in quibbling over minor differences.
|
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 12:07:36 GMT
So this is about a difference in terms. My apologies, but I do not have any interest in quibbling over minor differences. Terms? I'm trying to understand the story! I don't care what terms you use. I'm discussing what the court medium does, not what terms you use. If you don't see the difference, does anyone else here feel like chiming in on this? People keep saying how the medium is not treating the forest equally to how they treat the court, that they're being biased towards the court and that they shouldn't do that. I think they must be biased towards the court if they work for them. How would the courts interests be met otherwise? Example: the court needs some specific kind of wood that grows in the forest. The medium would go into the forest to present the idea to their medium. Ysengrin does not want to let them in to cut trees. So, if the medium respects the forests wishes equally to how they respect the courts, they'll leave at that point. One side wants one thing, the other side wants another. Instead, the medium continues to work towards the courts wishes and presents a counter offer of some services they can give the forest like teaching fairies. If Ysengrin doesn't like that, they try yet another counter offer. Do you see now? The point of a negotiator is to represent the courts wishes. |
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 14:13:09 GMT
And what is with you people? I asked for help and somehow this is viewed as "arguing for the sake of arguing" and "quibbling over terms" This was even called "a heated argument" WTH?
Um... how am I supposed to discuss these things? Is there some secret code so you know when I ask a question, I'm just asking a question?
|
|
|
|
Post by paxjax123 on Jan 14, 2011 14:28:34 GMT
And what is with you people? I asked for help and somehow this is viewed as "arguing for the sake of arguing" and "quibbling over terms" This was even called "a heated argument" WTH? Um... how am I supposed to discuss these things? Is there some secret code so you know when I ask a question, I'm just asking a question? You're supposed to say it in all caps so people know you're joking. |
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 14, 2011 14:32:29 GMT
And what is with you people? I asked for help and somehow this is viewed as "arguing for the sake of arguing" and "quibbling over terms" This was even called "a heated argument" WTH? Um... how am I supposed to discuss these things? Is there some secret code so you know when I ask a question, I'm just asking a question? You're supposed to say it in all caps so people know you're joking. *snicker* Yeah.... "SO WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF A COYOTE BINDING BRACELET??" *Not a real question and on the wrong thread anyway! |
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff-Cookie on Jan 15, 2011 7:25:59 GMT
So this is about a difference in terms. My apologies, but I do not have any interest in quibbling over minor differences. Terms? I'm trying to understand the story! I don't care what terms you use. I'm discussing what the court medium does, not what terms you use. If you don't see the difference, does anyone else here feel like chiming in on this? People keep saying how the medium is not treating the forest equally to how they treat the court, that they're being biased towards the court and that they shouldn't do that. I think they must be biased towards the court if they work for them. How would the courts interests be met otherwise? Example: the court needs some specific kind of wood that grows in the forest. The medium would go into the forest to present the idea to their medium. Ysengrin does not want to let them in to cut trees. So, if the medium respects the forests wishes equally to how they respect the courts, they'll leave at that point. One side wants one thing, the other side wants another. Instead, the medium continues to work towards the courts wishes and presents a counter offer of some services they can give the forest like teaching fairies. If Ysengrin doesn't like that, they try yet another counter offer. Do you see now? The point of a negotiator is to represent the courts wishes. Think of it like this. Jones herself has said some things regarding her position and opinion on the court. Yet, despite this, she still works for the court in some capacity. She works for them, but she's not necessarily on their side. Yeah, the mediums work for their respective sides, but they are still supposed to honestly consider the position of the other. Their personal opinion and interests aren't supposed to get in the way. At the very least they need to appear that way. Otherwise you get a breakdown in communication. Why do you even grant audience to a diplomat that is just going to take a huge dump on your lawn and leave? I'll admit that "neutral" and "neutrality" were probably bad choices to describe what I meant. |
|
|
|
Post by hal9000 on Jan 15, 2011 8:36:47 GMT
And what is with you people? I asked for help and somehow this is viewed as "arguing for the sake of arguing" and "quibbling over terms" This was even called "a heated argument" WTH? Um... how am I supposed to discuss these things? Is there some secret code so you know when I ask a question, I'm just asking a question? No no, not 'heated argument', heated agreement. It is a technical term, you see.  |
|
|
|
Post by TBeholder on Jan 15, 2011 9:05:51 GMT
Then it is settled!
|
|
|
|
Post by jayne on Jan 15, 2011 14:31:48 GMT
I cannot wait to find out what the heck Jones actually is, but she seems to be an observer. I think she's not supposed to act on anyone's behalf ("I'm not beholden to anyone"*), simply observe what's going on. Since she works at the court, she reports what she observes. The court benefits from her observations alone. When we first see her, Tom says: "Why that lady be all starin'?" So the author makes a point that she's just watching intently! But yes, it is settled! Time to move on to another thread!  *Of course, this could just be in response to Rey asking if she's dating anyone. |
|
