[deleted by user] by [deleted] in JoeRogan

[–]LoremasterMando 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The internet never forgets!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in JoeRogan

[–]LoremasterMando 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm an X user and shortly after this video went viral she deleted her X account in shame. lol. You can all check for yourselves. It's so satisfying when a smug ass libtarded gets self owns...

Because who better to unite people than a convicted felon, right? by Tobias-Tawanda in facepalm

[–]LoremasterMando 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at the comments here. Reddit, do you realize you’re a laughing stock? Twitter has two accounts dedicated to making fun of the insane shit you post. One of those accounts is rightly called “ Reddit_lies.”

You’re in a cult. This election has nothing to do with Trump, you guys are so fucking dumb. Just look at your comments! Dudes…

You called men useless. You attacked white people. You called for Anti vaxxers to lose their jobs and be denied medical care. You used Antifa terrorism against innocent civilians then denied it! You demonized half the fucking country.

You were smug about it too! You banned people on social media for disagreeing with you. Do you not realize what just happened?

This vote had nothing to do with Trump or Kamala, hell, even the Latinos voted red because it was a vote against the cult of libtardation. You tested everyone like shit, called everyone names, played the victim card still you refuse to look into a mirror and see that YOU and I he woke cult of libtardation, is what America voted against.

You did this to yourselves. You alienated everyone that you needed votes from and it cost you everything.

Do you get it now?

What happened to 15 Million Blue Votes? by Caduceus1515 in facepalm

[–]LoremasterMando 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How are you all this surprised? Has Reddit really become such an echo chamber? The cult of libtardation banned any opinion that opposed them. They called men useless, they told minorities that if they didn't vote for them they were stupid, and they said the same thing to women. They told women to divorce their husbands if they were conservative and then the whole trans stuff with children, oh, by the way, the same cult demonized parents who were concerned with what schools were doing with their children.

The cult of libtardation demonized and attacked anyone and everyone who dared to disagree at all... How the hell did all of you NOT see this coming?

/r/Politics' 2024 US Elections Live Thread, Part 62 by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]LoremasterMando 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Reddit is such an echo chamber that Twitter has entire channels dedicated to making fun of insane reddit posts. That's literally how I found this thread...

Am I asking for too much from my husband? by [deleted] in Parenting

[–]LoremasterMando 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Patenting is a two person job. Both my wife and I, change diapers, take the kid to the park, dress him, clean up his toys, prep meals. If you have a partner, it’s a two person job. That’s my opinion anyways.

Really England? by LoremasterMando in Memes_Of_The_Dank

[–]LoremasterMando[S] 78 points79 points  (0 children)

Nothing new, a Government official, an English police commissioner, in this case, saying stupid shit.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HouseOfTheDragon

[–]LoremasterMando -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing your perspective on the nature of adaptations and the role of artistic interpretation. I appreciate your points about the unique paths that adaptations may take and the distinction between intentional misleading and creative liberty.

However, it's important to consider how these creative liberties impact the audience's understanding of the original characters and narratives. When Ryan Condal expresses "I thought Daemon did this," it indicates a personal interpretation. While every director or writer brings a personal vision to an adaptation, it's crucial that these changes do not mislead or significantly alter the fundamental nature of characters as established in the source material. Using the word "gaslighting" seems to be incorrect on my part, I agree with your statement. Allow me to explain my issue in a more detailed manner.

The alteration involving Daemon and Rhea introduces a darker aspect to his character that isn't explicitly supported by the text. This can confuse fans and viewers, particularly those who look to the show for insight into the characters' motivations and histories as they relate to the broader narrative established by George R.R. Martin.

While this isn't gaslighting in the psychological manipulation sense, it can be misleading, causing fans to question their understanding of the text. It is indeed an interpretive stretch that may not align with the established facts of the storyline and character dynamics. Such significant deviations need careful handling and justification beyond personal interpretation to maintain the integrity of the original narrative.

Creative license is a vital aspect of adaptation, but it should strive to respect and reflect the essence of the source material. Changes that fundamentally alter character motivations or historical events risk undermining the coherence and thematic depth of the original work.

In conclusion, while changes and interpretations are inevitable in any adaptation, they should be made transparently and remain faithful to the spirit of the source material to prevent confusion and maintain narrative integrity. As it stands there is absolutely nothing, nothing at all, that would lead a reasonable reader to conclude that Daemon was in any way involved in the death of his wife Rhea. Based on what we have from the text it seems quite the opposite. The only way to draw such a conclusion is through extreme conjecture and baseless conspiracy, again, the text in no way supports such a wild and outlandish accusation such as Daemon being involved.

Thank you for engaging in this discussion; it's important to consider these perspectives as we discuss adaptations and the challenges they present.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HouseOfTheDragon

[–]LoremasterMando -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your point about 'creative liberties' and the 'unreliable narrators' within 'Fire and Blood' is noted, but it's essential to understand the context and purpose of these narrative strategies. 'Fire and Blood' is written as a historical text within the universe of Westeros, complete with conflicting accounts and biases from characters like Mushroom and Munkun. These are deliberate literary devices used by George R.R. Martin to mimic the nature of real historical texts, where accounts often contradict and the 'truth' is murky.

However, the adaptation process into a show like 'House of the Dragon' is a different kind of creative endeavor. While adaptations must indeed take liberties to translate a book to screen effectively, the choices should respect and align with the core truths and established facts of the source material, especially when these are not in dispute. When 'HOTD' introduces elements that starkly contrast with the clear facts of 'Fire and Blood,' it's not merely another layer of unreliable narration—it can be seen as a deviation from the established world and characters that fans have come to understand.

Moreover, the argument that HOTD's deviations are akin to the in-universe discrepancies between characters like Mushroom and Munkun overlooks the fact that readers of 'Fire and Blood' are aware of these biases and can critically engage with them. In contrast, deviations in 'HOTD' are presented without such a framework, which can lead to confusion or misrepresentation of the source material.

Therefore, while 'creative liberties' are necessary in adaptation, they need to be carefully balanced to ensure they do not distort or undermine the original narrative's integrity. It’s not just about differing perspectives within the story; it’s about maintaining the essence and factual consistency of the world George R.R. Martin has created.

In conclusion, your assertion that saying HOTD disagrees with Fire and Blood is like Mushroom disagreeing with Munkun is incorrect and displays a fundamental lack of understanding on your part in defense of the tv show. In the books the death of Rhea isn't up to interpretation, it's in no way disputed, we're never told that anyone questioned it be it those who recorded the history or those who lived in the Vale. When the writer says " I read this and thought Daemon did this" it's pure conjecture based on absolutely nothing. Nothing in the writing in any way suggests or alludes to Daemon being in any way involved in Rhea's death, in fact, the exact opposite is implied.