• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Least favorite alt-history story?

Listen up, I'm also trying to find out the truth here, but unfortunately, I have to deal with many sources which, well, aren't perfect, and even try to excuse him!

Listen up, you are coming off really really badly here. Please stop muddying the waters when the most obvious answer is that the personal friend of Hitler and officer in a criminal organisation that at very least had written orders to murder POWs, personal involvement in slave labor and at an operational level partnership with SS death squads was aware that Third Reich's institutions were directed to commit war crimes.
 
Listen up, you are coming off really really badly here. Please stop muddying the waters when the most obvious answer is that the personal friend of Hitler and officer in a criminal organisation that at very least had written orders to murder POWs, personal involvement in slave labor and at an operational level partnership with SS death squads was aware that Third Reich's institutions were directed to commit war crimes.

You don't understand, Death's, you have to find the specific document which has "I know about the Holocaust, signed General Romnell" on it. Otherwise we will simply have to assume the null hypothesis, which is (apparently) that the guy who was friends with Hitler had not bothered to so much as look at Poland and Russia for the entire war, or for that matter at what his own men were doing to the Tunisian Jews.
 
Listen up, I'm also trying to find out the truth here, but unfortunately, I have to deal with many sources which, well, aren't perfect, and even try to excuse him!
Listen up, this is all rather damning of you especially considering your "Adolf Nazi" schtick. At the very least it's rather bad considering your past claims of being able to mathematically ID who was responsible for Naziism when you are struggling to assess sources. There comes a point where you need to stop. Look over your shoulder, you must have missed it.
 
Last edited:
Listen up, I'm also trying to find out the truth here, but unfortunately, I have to deal with many sources which, well, aren't perfect, and even try to excuse him!
Moderator post:

As I've told you before, World War II can obviously never be off-limits as a subject of discussion on this site and this can obviously involve open discussion of historiography. However, we moderators and other members alike have repeatedly told you that your agenda with regards to Nazism is bizarre, inappropriate and disruptive to this forum. Your posts in this thread in particular are alarmingly close to soft whitewashing of Rommel's record. As your posting shows no signs of improvement despite repeated warnings and kicks, we have decided to ban you.
 
I've only skimmed it but it just looks like a standard post-1900 board melodrama. It doesn't look any less plausible than the standard fare there with the likes of Rumsfeldia, A Giant Sucking Sound etc. Big noise events which don't make a lot of sense and crazy leaders.

There's a global depression at one stage which I couldn't find any explanation for, but that might be on me.
 
Last edited:
I haven’t read it and have no interest in doing so, but I have to ask what people here think of the Death of Russia story? A site I frequent absolutely loathes it, and I’m wondering what people here think.
From what I have heard of it, it looks like atrocity porn. Saying that it isn't worse than other prominent TLs in Post-1900 is damning with faint praise.
 
Big noise events which don't make a lot of sense and crazy leaders.

I think there's a structural bias towards that kind of thing in timelines. Not that there isn't in actual narrative stories, and with justifiable reason (after all, conflict is a part of storytelling), but it feels stronger and less diluted there.

As for the timeline itself, it just feels like one of those things that everyone oohs and ahs over with every update while it runs, but then quickly gets forgotten as the audience moves to the next shiny thing after it's finished. (Meaning it's not memorably good but not really memorably bad IMO either).
 
Undoubtedly a lot of media goes for sensationalism and cheap thrills and there's a streak of that a mile wide in AH. A lot of AH is basically a bastardised form of published political/military thrillers.

As you say it's not very interesting and it's not very good. But there's certainly a big audience for it.

I think the AHs I've enjoyed the most have been very well-researched, subtle in terms of what happens and where they take the reader*, and also character-driven. Even history book-style stuff should really have character arcs. What I'm saying is that the ones I've enjoyed the most have been good stories.

*I've said this before, but if your title is NUKE THE BASTARDS: PRESIDENT DREW CAREY AND THE WAR IN FINLAND then you need to get a new title. You've already told me most of the plot, why would I want to read it?
 
Like the authors previous work, it's a revenge fantasy against those to his left and against Russians.
And brown people too. His little gaggle of teenage fans hyping him up is just worse. Though, should be a bit uplifting - if the bar in AH.com is so low then a good writer (like how many on this site are) doesn't need to spend as much effort to make a popular TL, whereas a mediocre writer just has to punch his weight up a little.
 
And brown people too. His little gaggle of teenage fans hyping him up is just worse. Though, should be a bit uplifting - if the bar in AH.com is so low then a good writer (like how many on this site are) doesn't need to spend as much effort to make a popular TL, whereas a mediocre writer just has to punch his weight up a little.

That's certainly the more cheerful interpretation of events. The other is that if cumbria came back tomorrow he'd be a celebrated visionary
 
I'm not soliciting advice or interested in discussing that particular TL so much as saying I'm not sure my job is to ensure quality TLs get posted, since AH.com is a discussion board and not a timeline posting board.

My view (as a non-Moderator) is that the Moderator's job is not to judge quality (or otherwise) of a TL, merely whether or not it transgresses the rules and whether or not it is posted in the right place.
 
My view (as a non-Moderator) is that the Moderator's job is not to judge quality (or otherwise) of a TL, merely whether or not it transgresses the rules and whether or not it is posted in the right place.

That's pretty much my take on it too. Half the problem with far too many online forums these days is that mods allow subjective issues to override objective standards and rules.

Chris
 
Back
Top