• Announcements

    • Chaos

      Oathbringer Spoiler Policy   11/13/2017

      Oathbringer is out! Let's make our policy on spoilers clear! 1. You must preface topics with Oathbringer spoilers with the prefix [OB] in the front 2. You are only allowed to post spoilers and spoiler topics in the Oathbringer Spoiler Board, Cosmere Theories, and some select work-related forums. 3. For posts in the Oathbringer Spoiler Board you do not need to use spoiler tags inside a topic marked [OB]. For Cosmere Theories, you also do not need to put spoiler tags inside your topic if the topic has [OB] in the title. However, for Cosmere Theories, if you are adding Oathbringer stuff to an old theory without the [OB] tag, those must go in spoiler tags and you must make it obvious outside the spoiler tag that the spoiler is regarding Oathbringer content. 4. For select things that do require talking about OB spoilers, in Events, Coppermind, and Arcanum forums, those are allowed but keep OB spoilers in spoiler tags 5. Avoid and minimize spoilers in topic titles--even though those two boards will not appear in the Recent Topics ticker, topic titles still appear in Recent Activity and the forum home.  6. You aren't allowed to post Oathbringer spoilers in places other than listed, even with spoiler tags.  It will be nine months and then the Oathbringer board will be re-merged with the Stormlight board and you will not need to tag these spoilers. If you'd like to move something in the Stormlight Archive board to the Oathbringer board, to update it with new Oathbringer information, Report the post and we will happily move it to the Oathbringer spoiler board. Part-by-part Reactions Though the Oathbringer Spoiler Board will be very spoilery, very fast (maybe don't come there until you've read the book, as people do have copies that bookstores sold early), you'll have these five topics for reactions if you want to nerd out: Part 1 Reactions
      Part 2 Reactions
      Part 3 Reactions
      Part 4 Reactions
      Full Book Reactions For parts 1-4, they will not include the interludes immediately following it. On Discord All Oathbringer spoilers on Discord will be exclusively in the #oathbringer_spoilers channel for the nine month spoiler period and nowhere else.
  • entries
    7
  • comments
    16
  • views
    1,738

A Brief Rant on RAFO

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Ookla the Tremendous

787 views

So, as you all know, Brandon Sanderson, everybody's favorite author, likes to answer some of the questions thrown at him with the phrase "RAFO". It, of course, stands for "Read and Find Out."

Or -- if you didn't know, Brandon Sanderson, everybody's favorite author, likes to answer some of the questions thrown at him with the phrase "RAFO". It stands for "Read and Find Out." :)

Anyways, whether or not you've heard it before is irrelevant. The point is, that phrase -- "Read and Find Out" -- is almost universally dreaded by the entire fandom. Countless fans have proposed theories after digging around the Cosmere (Sanderson's in-text universe) and got nothing in reply except a smug little RAFO.

I actually hate it for a different reason than most people.

I had been operating under the assumption that "Read and Find Out" meant, well, to go read and find out. I thought that if you got an RAFO that meant all the clues were there, you just had to go figure it out.

Apparently I was mistaken.

It's generally used as a "no comment" of sorts by Brandon, used whenever he can't or won't answer a fan's question. I actually knew that -- it's just that I had been taking it literally, instead of how it's apparently supposed to be used.

There are, in fact, little business-style cards he hands out with a big RAFO on them. They say:

card_rafo.jpg

Which annoyed me quite a bit when I first saw it. I mentioned in one theory that perhaps the answer was hidden in the text, hence the RAFO that was received. I was promptly corrected.

I get that the question can't be answered right now -- but could we please use a slightly less ambiguous term? Why say "Read and Find Out" when you don't actually mean to go read and find out?

Simply put, I think a "sorry, can't answer" or a "no comment" would work much better, even though RAFO is rather catchy.

Anyways, that's my take on the issue. Note that some people might not even think there isan issue (feel free to argue you points down in the comments if this is you). Also note that I'm not trying to single out or offend Brandon or anybody else. I'm just trying to state the problem I have with a common phrase.

Good night, and thank you for your time. :)

Source


4
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0


2 Comments


Well presumably the Bandersnatch has time constraints, and may not have the time to explain precisely why he won't answer each and every question--and the act of explaining might give away too much.

 

Even so, some clarifications for "RAFO--wait and see" and "RAFO--I'm never talking about this again" would be grand.

1

Share this comment


Link to comment

I think that the 'RAFO' has become one of Sanderson's trademarks (even though he didn't actually invent it), so to change it now would be to eliminate part of the whole culture that surrounds signings.

 

In short, I think maybe when Jordan created it, he might have been able to find a better term, but now that it's so well known and used, the term is a little late to change.

1

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now