agrabes

I don't think there's a need to "prove" it - but you should have at least some kind of reason to believe the two characters might be interested in each other sexually. I think that if there is a character in a book who is never shown expressing any sexual interest in anyone of any gender, then you could in theory ship them as any sexuality. Or, I guess "ship" them as an asexual. But, with characters like Adolin and Kaladin who have clearly expressed only straight sexuality, then it's a stretch to ship them together, imo. I mean, at least it makes no sense to me. Again, I'm not attacking people who do this, but to me the fact that doing something like this is so common just seems strange. This was a good response and definitely provides perspective. I guess if you think about the world of shipping, it's often only based a little bit in canon. People might ship two characters together who have barely even talked on screen. Basically, a hope that character X is secretly in love with character Y even though it's not been explicitly shown on screen. So, I guess this is only stretching it a little further. That even though character X has never been shown on screen to have a certain sexuality, it might be there somewhere if you read certain lines in the right way. Especially if you are that sexuality yourself, I could understand it. But the shear amount of male/male pairings still feels disproportionate. I guess maybe that says something about the demographics of the fan fiction community? Your point about how female characters are often written in lower quality (or at least the ones beyond maybe the one or two major characters) leading to fewer f/f pairings does make sense too though. I think a lot of this is why someone like me can't enter the world of the "true" shippers. I personally feel a ship has to have at least some basis in canon - officially published material, not the author's answers in Q&A sessions or Reddit AMAs. I don't want to say it's invalid if it doesn't have that basis, but I guess it's just outside what interests me personally. Also, I have to be able to see a little of myself "in" the ship for it to really click with me and I just can't relate to it for gay or bi ships. So while I could support bi pairings for Shallan because I think there is enough evidence in the books to imply she would be into it, it's not something I get fired up about. I can respect people having a desire for a male/male relationship between more major characters, but I guess I'll leave those ships for the people who are into it to discuss.

One thing I've never understood about the shipping and fan fiction community is how popular male/male slash pairings are. Nothing against those who like it, but I just can't understand the allure of two straight men who have expressed no interest in a same sex romance getting together. I could at least understand it if one of the characters was shown to be into other men in the main story. I don't think you see as much of this for female/female pairings between two straight characters, but that equally bothers me. I suppose maybe the under representation of gay/bi men in most mainstream fiction leads to a big pent up demand? I'm not really into reading male/male romance anyway, so I'll probably never understand *shrug*. My first real entrance into shipping was Macross F - amazing anime, but I went down with poor Ranka Lee's ship. I remember reading pages and pages of shipping wars over that love triangle. The less mainstream ship I'd most like to see in SA is Kaladin/Laral. I'd settle for a bit more development between those two, not necessarily them ending up together. I think Kaladin still likes Laral at least a little. He respects her intelligence and competence and resiliency. If he shows up in Hearthstone in RoW then there's a chance that Roshone will die and Laral and Kaladin will spend time together again. I could see a cool plot where maybe during the gap year Kaladin's been set up with appropriate land and titles and the privileges and responsibilities that come with it. Laral and Kaladin meet again only this time Kaladin is the one who is higher in society and it's an interesting role reversal from before. I don't really see Kaladin trying to start something with Laral, but I could see her trying to start something with him to marry into his now higher status position.

A little mundane, but I think it will have the ability to be modified like live Shardblades. You could make your plate look the way you want both in design and things like color and opacity could be changed. Possibly make it thinner/more form fitting or make it more like a "deflector shield".

I believe it is a requirement to be a piece of investure that is intentionally broken off from a shard. I don't think you could call Nightblood a splinter of Ruin, at least so far as we know currently. The way Sanderson discusses it, a splinter is always intentionally created. You can't have a chunk of a certain shard's investure just coalesce and become a splinter on its own. It's either intentionally separated by the main shard, or broken off by a rival shard. At least, that's my understanding. So I don't believe it's possible for the Heralds who are basically splinters of Honor (or maybe just the Honor Blades are splinters, but either way) to have parts ripped off which would then become splinters of Odium. I really like the idea of the Unmade being parts of the Heralds, but I feel like that requires the Unmade to not be splinters of Odium. They would be corrupted splinters of Honor in that case. Basically, pieces of Honor's investure that are warped and twisted so that they are separated from the It's also hard to say for certain if the Fused are splinters. I think if you read between the lines, then they are probably bonded with a splinter similar to the Returned or some other similar mechanism. But it also seems like it's possible they are not splinters at all - that they are just the cognitive shadows/spirits of regular people that Odium himself can snatch them up before they go beyond and keep them and then send them back into someone else's body. I suppose it's possible that Odium's plan is to split off as many pieces of the Heralds and other investure from Honor as possible and then try to force it to work against its intent. But it still doesn't make sense why he'd bond them with splinters of himself. Why not just store them up until he has enough to Splinter honor? To be fair, I suppose he may have done that and the Unmade may have only appeared around the time Honor splintered. But, it still seems unnecessarily complex to me. I think that Odium could have forced Honor's investure to work against itself much more directly by just torturing the Heralds into doing something wrong. That may have been the whole point of the torture and desolations to begin with - force the Heralds to break their word over and over?

Don't agree - that's a completely different Shard and completely different situation. Returned = People chosen by Endowment who, when they die, are reborn with the Splinter attached to them. Endowment is a shard whose intent is to give its power to others (AKA endow them with power). The people it gives its power to are friendly to it and also are dead before it happens. I also wouldn't call the Returned "splinters of Endowment" - they are people who are granted the power of Splinters of Endowment. This WoB indicates the Divine Breath is the splinter, not the Returned. Unmade = (if your theory is correct) Pieces of the Heralds, shredded off by Odium, then fused into a Splinter of Odium. Odium is not a Shard whose intent is to grant his power to others. He also is a Shard who specifically wants his power to remain pure and unmodified by other influences. This makes it highly unlikely that he would fuse parts of himself with parts of others. It seems needlessly complex - why create splinters of himself, then fuse them with ripped off pieces of the Heralds? If he can truly rip off pieces of the Heralds, why not just destroy them or lock them away? Like I said, I love the theory (especially the version where each hyphenated name means the associated herald has broken an additional time), but I really don't think it's very likely true. A lot of things Sanderson has said make it seem unlikely. First, that they are splinters of Odium. And second, that the only Herald without a pseudo counterpart is Ishar, even though we know that Taln is the one who has never broken.

I really like the theory that the Unmade are pieces that were "unmade" from the Heralds. But I think Sanderson has directly said it's not true, unfortunately. They are simply Splinters that Odium made from himself.

I think that's a valid conclusion, but also I think the reason you didn't include it earlier is because in RoW the flashbacks apparently only appear in Parts 3-5. So for RoW, Sanderson must have changed it up at least a little bit compared to what he did for the first three books. I think it could go one of two ways: 1) Venli is in all parts because she's the flashback character and therefore she's Group 1. 2) Venli is in all parts that line up with her flashbacks. So, I guess that would still make her probably Group 1. Just maybe not appearing with a POV until Part 3? Or maybe not with the main group until then? I do wonder if there's something to the idea that Kaladin might be in Group 2 or 3, with a more personal arc in this book. I agree with your point that it seems like Kaladin and Venli should be together. But, it does say in your WoB 17 that each of the main characters will take have a book or two where they are less important. I guess you could argue that in a way Kaladin was not super important in OB, though he still had a lot of page count. OB was not his book to be the hero. I have a hard time imagining Kaladin with a truly small page count though.

Yeah, a little predictable but not necessarily bad, repetitive or boring to me. Kaladin has saved the day at the last minute twice and failed to save the day at the last minute twice. But each time was different and interesting. I want the one who saves the day to be a character I like. So if it's not Kaladin, Shallan, or Dalinar I'll be a little disappointed. They are the main characters of the front 5 and also my favorite characters. Venli would be an interesting dark horse choice if she develops enough power in the last two books. Honestly, I've never been a fan of Szeth or his mindset. To me, he's not worthy of being the champion at least as he is now. But, that's just me.

Agreed about the anti-Syladin ship. Sorry to those who support it, but it just feels wrong to me. I think to me what makes it feel messed up is that Syl is in many ways like Kaladin's child. She was given a mind by her relationship with him. Her entire life depends on him literally. The balance of power is too messed up. This chapter didn't give me romance vibes at all - just a close, loving, but non-romantic relationship. Syl loves Kaladin in some ways like a daughter loves her father - she wants to help him and ease his burdens. I think for me, in terms of the Champion thing, I think there will be a "fake out" where it really looks like it won't be Kaladin, but at the last minute he gets himself together and it turns out to be him. It sounds like Kaladin is going to be in really bad shape mentally at the beginning of RoW. Dalinar probably expects the champion to be Kaladin as of the end of OB and gives Kaladin extra responsibilities, etc to prepare him for being head of the military arm of the Radiants. I think this is what beats Kaladin down - the inability to let go of soldiers killed in battle under his command, the people he's failed to save. With Kaladin out of commission, Dalinar starts planning for someone else to be the champion, working with that person to prepare them for it. Maybe even Dalinar himself expecting to be the champion. It all looks good, but then something goes wrong and Kaladin has to step it up again - which he does after a lot of struggle.

I was surprised to see that I scored pretty highly toward Truthwatcher in the order personality test. Never thought this would be an order that would fit me, but I've taken a little more interest in it since taking the test, so I thought I'd throw in my two cents. I really like your 2nd and 3rd Oaths, but I'm not sure the 4th or 5th one fits for me. Your 4th Oath- I will not force others to accept the truth. I don't know if this fits with the Truthwatchers description provided in the order test. In the description, it emphasizes the interaction between Truthwatchers and the political rulers. That is the "watcher" part of Truthwatcher - they see a part of their order's goal to make sure that people in power don't use lies to deceive and/or abuse the people who they have authority over. I think the 4th oath for Radiants in general is about learning the exceptions to the rule - learning when you -shouldn't- just always tell the truth as loudly as you can. For example - if Truthwatchers know the true, complete secret behind the Recreance it would be a moral dilemma for them whether or not to reveal it. On the one hand, it's telling the truth which can never be truly "wrong", on the other there's a good chance that it's better for others to remain ignorant because knowing the information may cause a second Recreance and have devastating consequences. It's a sign of maturity - the young reporter goes and tells the world the instant he thinks he's got a juicy story, while the more mature reporter thinks about the consequences of what might happen before he does. My proposed 4th Oath - I will speak the Truth only when it is right. Your 5th Oath - I will accept when I am wrong. To me, this doesn't seem quite right. It feels too.. negative to me. I could see this possibly being an oath for the Truthwatchers because it is an important thing to internalize, but not the final oath. I think the final oath has to be something about completely mastering the way and/or purpose of seeking truth. My suggestion would be to replace your 3rd Oath with this oath and have something like the concept of your 3rd Oath be the final oath. I'm not sure I'm totally on board with Karger's idea either but I think it hits closer to the mark for me. I think it's got to encapsulate what it means to seek and preserve the ultimate truths of the universe and keep people informed. My proposed 5th Oath - I will spread Truth as far and wide as I can for the good of Society.

I don't know that we've been told the order is corrupted. It's leaned in a certain direction, but that direction is never explicitly defined as being corrupt. Nale is a Skybreaker of the 5th Ideal and is in compliance with his oaths. That says that his actions cannot be out of line with the values of the Skybreaker order. If Nale was violating the principles of what it means to be a Skybreaker, he would be violating his oaths and therefore have no powers. The same applies for all the Skybreakers who serve under Nale. Also, Brandon Sanderson has explicitly said that Machiavelli and the Skybreakers are compatible. It seems that the Skybreakers are an order than can have a lot of variety. Sanderson has also said that it would be valid for a Skybreaker to swear to uphold something like the Pirate Code - something most people would consider the opposite of the law. It is all relative to the individual Skybreaker - what is the "law" or moral code to them and do they uphold it? If so, then they are a valid Skybreaker even if that moral code is something that many people would consider evil.

That's true that Sadeas had been intentionally killing the Parshendi to make the war nastier. But, that's the entire purpose of talking and discussing terms. Had Dalinar and Eshonai actually met, Sadeas' behavior would have quickly been discovered. Dalinar had been named High Prince of War by that time and had the authority to do something about Sadeas' troops committing war crimes. He had the authority to promise Eshonai that it would stop and make it happen. The purpose of having talks is to build trust, so over time the Parshendi could have built up enough trust to understand that the Alethi would at least not slaughter them all or enslave them like the Parshmen. Trust is a lot less necessary for the Alethi than the Parshendi. They had a commanding lead in the war. There was no real chance the Parshendi could defeat them, though they didn't really know that completely. The assassin in white was already coming for their leaders anyway, so there was nothing to lose on that front - talking with the Parshendi was not likely to trigger new and/or unexpected assassination attempts. They would be fully on their guard. They have the ability to dictate terms and impose their will. Force the Parshendi to leave the Shattered Plains, pen them into a certain area, whatever they want to do. The Parshendi basically had 3 options: 1) Fight on until they all die. 2) Have talks with Dalinar and Elhokar to negotiate surrender and live on in defeat - likely to lose political independence and be assimilated into Alethi culture as second class citizens, or remain on a "reservation" in Alethi lands. 3) Risk using the forms of power. I can understand why Venli chose option 3 and don't think she's evil because of it. I'm just saying there was another option that would not involve complete genocide for the Parshendi. They could have taken a different path, but it would have required them to prioritize survival of their people over pride in their culture and national identity. We don't value this choice very much at least in western culture, but I think there's really something to be said for it.

Agreed - finally decided to sign up for the newsletter so I could read this section and that is also what I took from Dalinar's comment. The impression I got is that Kaladin has been forced to do things he that are hard on him morally in the war during the last year or so and it's weighing heavily on him. Dalinar saw that he was about to crack and had him change duties for a while.

I don't think Surrender is as bad an option as you make it out to be: 1) Dalinar and Eshonai had been in contact and were in process of working out a deal until she took Storm Form and lost control. 2) While the humans do keep the Parshmen as slaves, they do not know (at the time Venli is making her decision) that the Parshmen and Parshendi are the same species. The humans always acknowledged the Parshendi as fully sentient beings who could not/should not be enslaved like the Parshmen. The Parshendi knew and understood this, we see it from Eshonai's prologue that all parties understood the Parshmen were a separate category from humans and Parshendi. The Parshendi knew that humans would not attempt to take them all as slaves similar to the way they had with the Parshmen. If her goals were truly to preserve the life of her people, surrender was the best and most reliable option. It may have forced them to become vassals of the Alethi, or to pay homage, etc, but it would have preserved the lives of the Parshendi and not made them slaves any more than a defeated human nation would have. I don't totally blame her for choosing to go for the forms of power either. It was a reasonable choice given the circumstances - she risked the return of their old "gods" on the chance that she might discover a safe form that was able to defeat the humans in battle. But, it was also a choice made in pride. To Venli, being defeated in war and submitting to the Alethi was just as bad as dying or being controlled by the Fused. Wiser rulers (such as Eshonai, pre-storm form) understand when the surrender is the right decision and are able to consider it an option. Venli at that time was not mature enough to understand.

I would argue that if a Syl POV is included in RoW, it will be one of the several small, brief POVs that don't get listed in the outlines that are put out while he is writing the book. OB had 5-10 of those. Just the way he discussed it in that quote seems like he wants to include a Syl POV to give us an idea into how her mind works and things like that, maybe some insight into Kaladin from Syl's perspective, not that she's got her own independent story or something like that which would justify several interludes, etc.

You're right, we don't see him interact with them. But, we are told that they all meet. I personally think what we've been shown so far implies that Gavilar was trying to play a game that he knew very little about. For example, he assumes that Eshonai would want to bring back the Fused. He had a few pieces of the puzzle and drew the wrong conclusions. It may be that I'm totally wrong, but that's the feeling I get. I think he was just a conqueror who wanted to first restore a united Alethkar, then achieve the goals of the Sons of Honor to restore a Theocracy with himself as the god-emperor and conquer as much of the world as he could behind that united banner of all Vorin nations. If he could defeat the forces of evil during a desolation, even better for his legitimacy. I think he felt tying in the Vorin religion to his rule and as the source of his legitimacy would secure his dynasty long term, unlike other conquerors whose empires generally died with them.

Theory on why women dress in any particular way aside, I don't think your conclusion that Jasnah is a headstrong lesbian follows at all from any of the points you've made. I mean, come on - just dressing nice without any sexual context does not imply she's doing it to lure people in. Jasnah does not ever act in a flirty or sexy way, which is much more important in revealing her motives. Even if she does have an adversarial vibe going with other women, that doesn't mean she's a lesbian. I also don't think she really has an adversarial vibe going with women. She just takes a while to warm up to people. She has a good relationship with Navani. Her relationship with Shallan is a little rocky, but that's sort of a mentor/mentee, student becomes the teacher type rivalry and the rockiness mostly comes from Shallan's side. Wanting to assassinate her brother's wife is an objectively good decision though a bit cold, knowing what we know about her after OB. Basically, there's no evidence that Jasnah is a lesbian. There's very little evidence she's asexual - only that she never attempts to enter a romantic or sexual relationship on screen (I mean it's Sanderson, so there won't be on screen sex). There's also a small amount that she is either straight or bi - that she considered marrying Amaram at one point which may or may not mean she was interested in a sexual relationship with him at some point.

Well, I think it's a little unclear. Early in the prologue it says this: Which directly says that Amaram was included. However, later it says this: Which, while the wording isn't 100% precise, implies Amaram was not there at least at that moment. So there are two contradicting statements. It might be that as an early draft, it will later be revised to make it clear that Amaram was not there and was never part of that portion of Gavilar's plan. But as written/transcribed, it does not say that Gavilar's discussion with Amaram was separate.

True, but in the SA4 prologue (SA4 prologue spoilers) So either only Amaram and Gavilar knew the secrets , or neither of them knew what was really going on in that prologue scene. Or, the prologue isn't in final draft and may be edited to change who is supposed to know what. It doesn't make sense for Amaram to have been in on it if Gavilar knew what was really happening So, I guess you may be right that the rank and file of the Sons of Honor don't know everything about the true goals of the order based on the small snippet we see in the SA4 prologue. But I'm not sure it would make sense for the goals to be as theorized by the OP.

Welcome! I don't know if I'd go so far as to say I think there should be "revenge" on Shallan. But, I do think you're right that something felt off about Shallan's sudden marriage to Adolin at the end of OB. It felt like she decided she wasn't interested in figuring things out anymore and just wanted to take action so she didn't have to think about it anymore, or something. Not that Adolin isn't worthy of her love, just that something felt rushed or off about the marriage. The romance plot is not the only place this pops up - she does it in pretty much all aspects of her life. I think there will be a pay off for this in RoW or SA5. We will have a scene where she realizes that she's lost out by not being real and sort of bypassing the tough parts of her decision making process and it teaches her to stop doing it. That said, in terms of Kaladin and Jasnah - I don't really care much about Shallan's relationship to them. I don't think Kaladin and Jasnah go together, personally. They're just too different and not really compatible as friends or lovers. I think one of them would have to change significantly, or maybe Jasnah would show a side of herself we haven't seen yet since we don't know a ton about her yet as a character. If you ask me, they'll remain respected colleagues but not interested in hanging out with each other "outside work." Though I will say that if Kaladin and Jasnah did get together, I do think it would definitely cause a reaction from Shallan. The guy she kinda/sorta had feelings for and the mentor she admires and it's implied she might have some subconscious attraction for getting together would be a tough one for her I think. I think if Kaladin and Jasnah were together, their relationship would distract and diminish Shallan's importance. Just like when Shallan was upset that Jasnah came back and suddenly Shallan was no longer top dog in terms of Radiants and intelligence/research, if Jasnah and Kaladin become a super couple I think it does the same thing to Shallan again. I don't think this will happen, but it could be fun to read about if it did.

Wasn't Gavilar known to be a member of the Sons of Honor? If so, that implies his goal was to cause the Parsh to become the Voidbringers in order to kick off a desolation so that the Heralds would return. I don't think he was interested in enslaving the Parshendi.

It's all right - we're all prone to this kind of thing. I appreciate that you're willing to consider this from a different angle. And for what it's worth, while I don't personally think Colin Kaepernick is quite as saintly as people make him out to be (imo - he tried to use this issue as a way to avoid a life of obscurity after NFL defenses figured out how to counter his playstyle and he had been pretty much permanently relegated to the bench, I would have had much more respect for him had he done this as a starter) I do think you are absolutely right about people using the "disrespect for the flag" issue as a distraction so they didn't have to think about the real implications. Even if I'm not on board with Kaepernick himself, the countless other players (or more importantly, the underlying reason they wanted to protest) cannot be ignored. People are doing it today too, like you said. People do this all the time, so they don't have to confront uncomfortable realities for them. I know I've done it in the past, we all have. And trust me, even though we don't see totally eye to eye on this, the way people on "the right" use these distraction tactics is very frustrating for me. In some ways, I could say almost it's more frustrating for someone like me who is a moderate with light conservative lean on some issues, slight liberal on others - because these are people who I might otherwise identify with, proving themselves to be unworthy. And it makes me worry about myself - what might I be doing that is contributing to these problems, without knowing it? And how do I forge my identity as someone who respects his own cultural roots, while agreeing with some of the values that you have, but disagreeing with others? For me, when I see people like that I try to explain the situation to them, put it in new context. Most conservatives (justified or not) feel that their way of life and belief is under attack. And they feel like they are not even allowed to think for themselves anymore. So when someone tells them "If you don't support Kaepernick, you're supporting racism!" they get upset and look for ways to sidestep the issue. But if you put it in the right context, at least imo, it let's them think about it in new ways. They may not change their mind right then and there, but the next time an issue comes up, they will think of it in a more open way. That's what seems true and real to me - helping people understand what they're really saying and what it really means, outside of partisan political context. All I can say is, I know I've put my foot in my mouth plenty of times before. I've said things out of ignorance that I should never have said. And I don't expect you to agree with me, all the time. I just hope that everyone can respect that most of us are trying to come from a good place even if it leads us in a different direction.

And I personally think that while your opinion and approach toward these issues is valid, I respectfully ask you to think critically about your own position and approach to this issue in the same way that you ask others to think critically about theirs. You have said that you don't want to antagonize or criticize others, but in the post you implied that those of us who don't like celebrity/social media culture are simply using this as a smokescreen to distract from our racist beliefs and/or our discomfort for those who advocate against racism. These types of statements are hurtful and are what makes it difficult for moderates and conservatives who want to fight racism and authoritarianism to come on board with you. While I don't know anything about you as a person, you strike me as someone who sincerely and deeply believes that it's important and good for society for people like Brandon Sanderson to speak out on these issues. There's nothing at all wrong with believing that. You clearly want to do what you think is right. I just ask that you have respect for those of us who differ with you on the best way to address these issues and respect for what is deeply meaningful to us that might not be meaningful to you. It's important for us to have the same respect for you. You are not the ultimate arbitrator of right and wrong on these issues, neither am I. If I disagree with you on some aspects of how to address this issue, it's not because I'm a secret racist. It's because I think there's a better way to combat the issues faced by society. And in the end, the best thing may be for people like me to do what we do best and for people like you to do what you do best and tackle the problem from both ends.

I don't know - I never read Elhokar's story this way. Throughout WoK, he seemed like a generally petty and self absorbed guy. A guy who was happy to watch the world burn as long as he had his champagne and caviar. A guy who was too dumb to understand he was putting people in danger. He married a woman who clearly had bad character based on her later actions, though to be fair he may not have had complete freedom of choice in that. I always read Elhokar as a crappy king and generally not a good person who realized after exposure to people like Dalinar and Kaladin that he needed to do better. I think sometime during the events of WoR was when he realized he needed to make a change, but he just kinda... well... was incompetent and couldn't figure out how to do it until OB. Even if he had become a Lightweaver, I don't think he would have figured out how to be a good king and it would have taken him time to become a good person. I think if there was a positive final truth for him, it would have been something along the lines of him figuring out what he is actually good at and using that ability to do good.

Sanderson's first response really speaks to me. This is a challenging time for everyone in our country. And I think one of the hardest things to do is for each person to find their way to contribute. And for those of us who are more moderate, or even conservative politically it's tough for us to find our place. But I also think that moderates like myself are the most important people to these kinds of movements - we make up most of the country and we need to speak up and stand up for what is right. For me personally, the struggle is that I agree with the principles of the BLM movement and believe our country's criminal justice system is in desperate need of major reform, but find little in common personally or politically with many of the voices who support the movement. I don't agree with the aggressive way many people discuss the movement on social media. Not aggression against people who are oppressing others, but aggression against those they feel are not enthusiastic enough in support of the movement. I think outrage does absolutely no good unless it's aimed at a specific goal. There's no value in adding one more voice of rage. And on social media, if you are not a voice of rage, you are considered part of the problem. So how do I personally support this important movement? Unlike Sanderson, I have the luxury of not being a major media figure. I have the luxury of addressing these issues in private, on a one to one basis with those I care about. I have the luxury to wait and throw my voice in when I can help make a meaningful change to enact real improvements. And importantly, I recognize that I have the luxury of not being someone that this impacts directly on a personal level. So, I personally have chosen to do what I think Sanderson would have preferred to do - keep an eye on the situation, keep learning, advocate for change and reform privately in the way that is sincere and consistent with my own values rather than those of the social media mob, and strike when the time is right.