re: Crackpot ASOIAF Theories SPOILERS

quote:

---

Davos is the last person to do something that deceitful.

---

Yeah, Davos would never do anything like that. Davos, even over Ned, I think is the most honorable character in the series. He has the best moral compass in the series and can always see what is right.

quote:

---

You misunderstand my claim. I don't think its Davos's intent for Jon to be murdered. I think he's expelling every last resort to get Shireen away from Mel. He's trying to be a hero, not ruin everything. Its tragically poetic and I think its exactly the type of thing GRRM would write.

---

Wait, what? All that does is get Jon away from Shireen and Mel, and leave Mel to burn Shireen alive without protest. In the books, Shireen and Mel are at Castle Black. Why the hell would Davos lure him away? He doesn't even know Jon in the novels.

quote:

---

Which is why he is going to these lengths to get Shireen away from Mel. Its absolutely tragic and the furthest thing from his intent that, if this holds true, Shireen will be burned and Jon attacked as a result of his actions.

---

Please reread the books. Jon is with Shireen and Mel. Luring him away merely fricks over Shireen. It's a dumb theory.

I've read some far out theories and tin foil speculation but I gotta say that one is pretty far out there. Isn't Davos on his way to Skagos to see some canibals about a boy or something like that? The theory just doesn't ring true at all to me. Does not jive with my view on GRRM's writing style.

Oh, and the bit about the other skin changer aiding Jon by pushing him out of Ghost? Probably even more unlikely IMHO. I don't even think he and Jon like one another at all.

quote:

---

I've read them several times, and probably spend more time reading threads/theories/wikis and listening to podcasts that anyone on this board.

---

Oh really, GameCockAlum?

quote:

---

The letter specifically demands Shireen.

---

Yes, because she's Stannis' heir. Why wouldn't Ramsay demand her, and even if he didn't, why would Davos demand he send her to Winterfell controlled by the Boltons. Surely Davos knew Jon wouldn't just hand her over, especially after the Karstark incident.

quote:

---

I think Davos' intent was to have her send south, away from Mel, where Stannis would have won Winterfell by her arrival.

---

Well, that's one hell of stupid gamble.

quote:

---

His worst case scenario is that Jon marches south. Jon isn't going anywhere without Stannis's daughter and heir.

---

Ummm, that's not the worst case. Worst case he obliges to Ramsay's request.... in which case how does Davos know about this? You have yet to answer that.

quote:

---

In the event that he does, Davos knows that the wildlings still at the wall would never allow Mel to sacrifice Shireen.

---

Actually, you are completely wrong here and multiple wildlings say she should have been killed. They certainly wouldn't have gone to the bat for Shireen.

quote:

---

The 4th option, the one where Jon gets murdered by his brothers, is something that he could have never foresaw and never would have crossed his mind.

---

I think Davos is intelligent enough to know that if Jon led an army to Winterfell to take down the Boltons that his brothers might have a problem with it and kill him. He's no stranger to their vows.

quote:

---

The point is that he knows he has to get Shireen away from Mel, at any cost. As is evident in the show, Davos knows he has to get her away. However, as I propose, he ultimately fails horribly. He is the only character who could have written the letters. Ramsay couldn't have. Stannis had access to the Dreadfort ink, assuming that Davos didn't take it, but there are some pretty big hold ups with that theory as well. The theory is in the grand idea, its easier to see if you don't lose the forest for the trees.

---

And to put the final hole in your theory, why wouldn't he have dragged down both Shireen and Mel to Winterfell? There's no reason not to unless Jon is in on it.

Your condescending theory isn't worth debating any further. Let me repeat a quote where you've been condescending to us all on this thread;

quote:

---

I've read them several times, and probably spend more time reading threads/theories/wikis and listening to podcasts that anyone on this board.

---

So yeah, you're saying that we're all stupid but you. You assume that the rest of us haven't read the same crap you have. That is simply insulting to everyone who regularly posts in this thread, and you should shut the frick up because you're just coming across as a dick, and a stupid one at that.

Honestly, frick you. I take everyone's opinion seriously on this thread because I assume they're just as well read as I am. I don't take the superiority road. Anyone who disagrees with my opinions I bring up basic quotes to support my theory, and often they do as well to where we have a healthy non-condescending conversations. This is a Crackpot thread for a reason, and not because others are more well read. We bring up bizarre things, and if you simply brought up Davos being behind the Pink Letter as "bizzare" instead of "I know more than all of you", we could have had a healthy conversation; but instead you decide to be a condescending dick about having quite simply a stupid and crackpot (and I mean that lightly) idea.

So in short:

quote:

---

What? When have I ever made that assumption?

---

You said that you've read more about these theories than anyone else on this board. You've made that assumption, dick. Please read through your simply condescending posts to every poster on this thread. Cite your sources instead of just saying "I've read more than you".

That is simply ridiculous, and I really think we have among the best theorists in ASOIAF fans total. I don't remember any of your posts making me reconsider things. So read through the thread, realize your theory is simply crackpot and highly unlikely, and be respectful to your fellow posters instead of a condescending dick.

quote:

---

Which BTW I've been posting in on and off for about 3 years.

---

And you have yet to make one good theory, or even an entertaining Crackpot theory we all know is false.

Have you looked through the entire thread recently? Because I'm not sure that's true, as I've added at least a few crackpot theories for sure. And it certainly wasn't my intent to be condescending. I'm in no way claiming to be a "top theorist", I simply enjoy reading the material. Obviously I don't know if I've read more than anyone here, and I assumed that was an understood blanket statement to defend my position.


To simply dismiss this as impossible is arrogant though. The play between Shireen teaching Davos to write, Davos then writing the pink letter in attempt to save Shireen. It's pretty strong, IMO. He also happens to have had access to the Dreadfort Ink, he had access to Ravens. There is enough going on to at least give thought to the idea.

Can you honestly not see that comment written out of a guilty pleasure type of admission? It wasn't intended to be a "douche" comment. It was intended to come across as, unfortunately, I waste too much time on this shite. While at the same time defending my position since you so forwardly accused me of needing to read the books again. You can't just jump on a comment and completely ignore the fact that you are the one who brought the hostility to the conversation.

I'm sorry if you thought I was ushering in some internet dick measuring contest about how many fan theories we've read, that certainly wasn't the intent.

quote:

---

I think you've come around that it's a douchebag comment, but I find it bullshite that you didn't mean what you said. I think you think you're more well read than the rest of us, but ok. I can make due with it. I guess you'll finally get attention for your stupid posts now that you haven't read more about it than the rest of us.

---

In fact I don't, I post with multiple people in this thread on other sites. I'm not generally one to propose theories, I more of drop my thoughts on the situation and discuss it. When I do, they are arguably far fetched and more of an idea than a theory, because I'm not going to come in here and pitch someone else's idea as my own and I enjoy the discussion.

Obviously that doesn't work when an arse hat jumps in and immediately meets an idea with "reread the books". I don't care if you want to shoot holes in the idea, like I said, I enjoy the discussion. But you don't have to straight away take the stance of being an a-hole.

Can you at least see the irony here? You're accusing me of being a pompous douche. Your second comment to me was "you need to reread the books".

That escalated quickly.

Thanks.