ch14

If Dumbledore saw a chance to possess one of the Deathly Hallows, he would never let it escape his grasp until the day he died.

Wait, is the message Harry got with his cloak from Dumbledore? (edit: he admits that in ch79). I thought Dumbledore refused to lie? And yet he's letting the cloak escape his grasp while saying that.

(For a moment I thought he might be saying he wouldn't let the chance escape his grasp, rather than the cloak itself, but that's just silly, and there's no particular reason why that would even be true, if the other isn't.)

that's just silly, and there's no particular reason why that would even be true, if the other isn't.

I was under the impression that in canon, at least, the Deathly Hallows are sensitive to 'ownership,' and so Dumbledore might think that giving the cloak owned by Harry to Harry is the best way for the cloak to end up being owned by Dumbledore.

1ChristianKl5yWhat makes you think that?

Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, January 2015, chapter 103

by b_sen 1 min read29th Jan 2015174 comments

7


New chapter, and the end is now in sight!

This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. This thread is intended for discussing chapter 103.

There is a site dedicated to the story at hpmor.com, which is now the place to go to find the authors notes and all sorts of other goodies. AdeleneDawner has kept an archive of Author’s Notes. (This goes up to the notes for chapter 76, and is now not updating. The authors notes from chapter 77 onwards are on hpmor.com.)

Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.