Timeline for Why was this question about maester chains closed?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 15:06 | history | edited | Valorum | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 9:52 | comment | added | TheLethalCarrot Mod |
The important part of Valorum's answer that you miss out in your quote is that quote is actually a link to the So Spake Martin quote that I added into his answer. Even if I the newer question hadn't been asked I still would have edited in the quote.
|
|
| Feb 6, 2018 at 7:22 | comment | added | Edlothiad | I'd also argue to say the answer is significant, as if there's a minimum requirement of links to chain length, having multiple links of the same metal is directly relevant to the number of links as it doesn't mean that (assuming the requirement is 10) 10 different subjects have to be learnt, but 10 links in total. | |
| Feb 6, 2018 at 7:17 | comment | added | Edlothiad | 1. Valorum didn't "add" Rand al'Thor's answer, for all we know, Rand could've found the link there. While Valorum could edit the information out of his answer, it contributes to a significant part of the answer, and it already exists on the site, there's no need to copy it twice. | |
| Feb 5, 2018 at 19:27 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor Mod | Ah, so originally the newer question was addressed in the older answer just without actually including the quote / precise info. Either way, though, it's tangential to the main question being asked there, of how many links are in the chain and how long it takes to forge it. Valorum or someone else could edit this information out of his answer, and it'd still be a perfectly valid answer to the question it's posted on. (This is actually a good argument against closing unrelated questions as dupes based on answers at all.) | |
| Feb 5, 2018 at 19:18 | history | answered | Forral | CC BY-SA 3.0 |