Don't you hate it when...?

[Bismarck]

People who write AHs oversimply their events by making them seem extremely complex, like "for a variety of complex reasons" or "in the manuevering the followed, [unlikely event]", just to justify an unlikely event?

[Iñaki]

You can specify a little more please.:)

But in all cases if this a discussion about plaussability I am partidary of some flexibility respect to plaussability because... well I put an example:

-We are in Other timeline forum, in a forum of alternate history but this forum is in a universe where Germany and Central Powers won the First World War.

One thread is put, the thread is what if Germany not had won the Great War (First World War)?

Well the people make his comments, some put some possible and plaussible ATL and suddenly one of the members make this timeline:

a madman creates a party antisemitic, is partidary of the arianism and the pure race (although he is dark haired) he achieves the victory in the elections, he makes a rearmament and the allies that are winners in this ATL no make any decision against him, the allies also make a conference in that they accepts to give the madman parts of a country because they have a lot of fear of this (although they have all the powers of english and french empire) the madman declares the war , the madman wins against France, the madman is partidary to death all the jews and builds factories and Concentration camps only to kill all the jews and gypsies, and he wants to make all the slavs slaves, the madman is mad he decides to declare war against Russia and United States when England is still in war, the madman at the end loses the war but not before killing a lot of jews, killing by famine a lot of slavs and other populations,

The madman believes in the astrology, the esoterism and the total arianism.
He is a total murder of other races but he likes a lot the animals (and make of the legislation to protect animals the most advanced of his time) he is also vegetarian and another thing he makes his personal architect minister of armament and this architect shows all that is the most competent member of the nazi party, ah and about the nazi party.... and so on.

Commentaries in this Forum: implaussible; improbable; put it in ASB; ha, ha! this is a joke or you are the mad; but well this is not time of silly timelines it is time of probable timelines and so on..



Well guys I suppose you know who is the name of this madman: Hitler

And unfortunately for us we know that this timeline exists (although it seems a lot of implaussible), well is OTL.

[MrP]

*cough*

NOT a vegetarian. His doctor frequently advised him to avoid meat because it was seen as worsening his stomach condition.

Linky (http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/hitler.html)

In the interest of balance, a counter-argument (http://http://www.geocities.com/hitlerwasavegetarian/).

A third article (http://www.slate.com/id/2096259/), which claims that veggies often fall off the wagon. In my experience it depends on why the person's a veggie. Those brought up often to it don't have the attachment we ethical converts do. Unlike the veggies the author speaks to, I have had this thrown in my face several times, carrying the implication that veggies want to wipe out large numbers of people.

The stupidest demonstration of this train of thought can be found in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six. A book (despite it being fiction) I find has disturbing parallels with that other bit of tosh (which pretends to reality), The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Sorry, Inaki, I know you didn't mean it that way. But as I say, I don't like that misconception being promulgated. :(

There was one girl in Germany who wrote into a veggie mag I subscribe to, very upset because her local Catholic Priest had told her that a) Genesis tells us not to be veggie, and b) that Hitler was veggie, so it was an evil lifestyle. What a deceitful goit! :mad:

[Iñaki]

No problem MrP:)

And I am sorry I read the article of your link, so Hitler is not vegetarian and well it seems that is not so lover of animals that is write in some books.

Originally posted by MrP
There was one girl in Germany who wrote into a veggie mag I subscribe to, very upset because her local Catholic Priest had told her that a) Genesis tells us not to be veggie, and b) that Hitler was veggie, so it was an evil lifestyle. What a deceitful goit! :mad:


Yes, I agree totally with you. What is this? Maccarthysm against vegetarians?:mad:

So in my former post you can erase the lines about vegetarian Hitler and also lover of animals (I had not the correct data)

But well apart of this Hitler is a good example of how implaussible could seem an ATL until we know that it in reality could exist.

Because this I attempt to be very flexible about plaussability in ATL.

[MrP]

Yes, I agree totally with you. What is this? Maccarthysm against vegetarians?:mad:

Sadly, yes. It's one of those problems with being a minority, I guess. Still, at least nobody's likely to prevent me from holding a job on grounds of diet. Though, sadly, it is an unavoidable impediment to some careers, e.g. the Army. *sighs wistfully*

But well apart of this Hitler is a good example of how implaussible could seem an ATL until we know that it in reality could exist.

Because this I attempt to be very flexible about plaussability in ATL.

I certainly agree with you there. Hitler is a pretty weird event! Practically ASB, even!

[Steffen]

Yes, I agree totally with you. What is this? Maccarthysm against vegetarians?:mad:



Some veggies are just so ripe targets.

Last year, some girl at the uni told me she´s veggie because she loves animals and don´t want to hurt them.

I gave the classical answer: How cruel have you to be to eat little bunny´s food yourself.

Result: She broke into tears, called me a bastard and hurried away from the table.
I wished I had known this reaction earlier, I´d have saved it for a more cherishable moment. :p

[MrP]

Some veggies are just so ripe targets.

Last year, some girl at the uni told me she´s veggie because she loves animals and don´t want to hurt them.

I gave the classical answer: How cruel have you to be to eat little bunny´s food yourself.

Result: She broke into tears, called me a bastard and hurried away from the table.
I wished I had known this reaction earlier, I´d have saved it for a more cherishable moment. :p

Reminds me of an occasion at school.

We had a weekly charity collection to which I was one of the small number who usually gave money. However, this week I'd discovered that the money was going to a cancer charity to fund research into it. Since such research inevitably involves animal testing I was having a crisis of conscience about it and din't plan to give any.

The collector was a girl with whom I'd already had several arguments, because she's a fox hunter. When I didn't give any money that week, she had a go at me. Even though of the other blokes in the class, only one gave money. A two penny piece. :rolleyes:

So, angry at being attacked, I shouted back that I didn't care to be lectured on morals by a disgusting fox hunter. At this she mysteriously broke down into tears and ran off. I was left a bit puzzled, but not very abashed. Then I found out that a friend of hers had recently died of cancer. Oops. :o :(

[birdy]

People who write AHs oversimply their events by making them seem extremely complex, like "for a variety of complex reasons" or "in the manuevering the followed, [unlikely event]", just to justify an unlikely event?

i might hate that, assuming i'm not one of them:o

[arctic warrior]

People who write AHs oversimply their events by making them seem extremely complex, like "for a variety of complex reasons" or "in the manuevering the followed, [unlikely event]", just to justify an unlikely event?

I don't really hate it, I just see it as a sign of people who doesn't do their homework properly, as you have to think up really possible alternatives to OTL events when doing AH. Events unfolding in AH needs to be anchored in rationality (well not Hitler types) according to the possble actions to be taken. Well, am I not making this complicated...

[Anaxagoras]

People who write AHs oversimply their events by making them seem extremely complex, like "for a variety of complex reasons" or "in the manuevering the followed, [unlikely event]", just to justify an unlikely event?

This is true to an extent, but then, history is filled with innumerable examples of extremely unlikey events.

[Anaxagoras]

Suppose, for example, that I was doing a timeline about the English attempting to take over France in the 14-th/15th Century, and I wrote in my timeline that a peasant girl suddenly decided that she was receiving messages from God telling her to lead the army against the English. She thens goes to the French king, who gives her command. Then she drives the English out.

This would, of course, be laughed at on this board, wouldn't it?

[arctic warrior]

Suppose, for example, that I was doing a timeline about the English attempting to take over France in the 14-th/15th Century, and I wrote in my timeline that a peasant girl suddenly decided that she was receiving messages from God telling her to lead the army against the English. She thens goes to the French king, who gives her command. Then she drives the English out.

This would, of course, be laughed at on this board, wouldn't it?

Absolutely - right on the mark! But this is the actually the thing that could happen, due to some old prophesy. Well then name the goddam thing as it is and relate it to the religious/culturate climate of society at the time. But this also requires a lot of homework - right ?:)

[Akiyama]

I've noticed people almost never write timelines that involve world-changing visionaries like Hitler, Joan of Arc, Mohammed (or any major religious leader), Karl Marx, Gorbachev etc.

I wonder why this is? Are people just not very imaginative, or do they try and avoid such "implausibility"?

[Tony Williams]

I think it depends on how important the event is to the main plot. If it's absolutely key to the plot, it has to be explained carefully, but if it's a subsidiary issue, you don't want the reader being distracted by a lot of detail over something that doesn't matter much.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)