User blog comment:Zathronas/Speculative author: Ozpin, the great and powerful/@comment-10390252-20140831163030/@comment-11188061-20140901163748

"Ruby is involved in a fight with Roman in a dust shop that ends up in a fight between Cinder and Glynda. And you're telling me Ozpin was there just to see if the niece of a friend was okay WHEN HE NEVER EVEN ASK IF SHE IS!"

I dare you to refute that Ozpin isn't just there to check a friend's niece condition. Point: You can't. Plus, I don't think even a blind man can miss how totally fine Ruby is. Ozpin doesn't see the need to ask a redundant question, and so do I.

I repeat, Ozpin has no way to confirm that the Huntress Glynda fought is Cinder. It is a matter of concern that Ruby somehow got herself involved with Roman, but the little conversation confirmed enough that Ruby knows nothing of the larger scheme of things. Perhaps even Glynda herself has already confirmed that before he even got in. After that, the only issue of concern is to invite her into Beacon, and perhaps indirectly trying to protect her from harm.

"They talk and both know about Qrow. But hey if you want to assume he didn't know go right ahead."

You're assuming that this threat they're talking about is Cinder. I believe many people believe that they're referring to some other threat such as the Grimm, or a war among Kingdoms. Point: The statements are way too vague, and there is nothing that points to them talking about Cinder. Forcing a connection isn't the same as finding one. Extra point: I'm suggest you go through my sentences again and understand what I really meant. You sound very confused.

"You say  I'm assuming Glynda knows Cinder, I use the fact that Cinder stays holed up in her room for the assumption. What are you using to assume she doesn't know her? Because yours is just as much an assumption than mine.

Yes I do assume she is the queen as much as you assume that she isn't. My assumption is based on the fact that no one else fits the bill (except Weiss which I disregarded.)"

Very good; we understand each other that assumptions are just assumptions, and thus I'm free to refute your points in plausible manner, which I've checked thus far is exactly what I'm doing.

The 'fact' that Cinder stays holed up in her room is guess what, not a fact. The logical reasoning is that she stays holed up in her room; that is correct. But do not confuse it as a fact, because just because we see Mercury and Emerald roaming around freely and not see Cinder does not equal to the assumption that she's staying inside her room. She can be walking around the campus doing her own stuff.

You want to use this reason fine, but I'll use the reason that she dares infiltrate Beacon without any sort of disguise other than her clothes as my own support. I can even say it's better, since you can't even prove that she's holing up in her room. For all we know, her sewing is a night time work and she spend her daylight dancing around dining hall and singing poems. Can you refute me? Sure you can, but then it becomes a stalemate.

"Storytelling 101 You don't show consequences that affect the storyline? The only time you do that is when you want to keep it secret. What the point here."

That consequences consist of Team RWBY suffering hilarious punishment that will make the audience laugh. Do you really want to see Team RWBY scrubbing the toilets? Is it even necessary? It neither affects the storyline in any major manner, nor is it needed since there's more than enough comedic material, and is thus a complete waste of production time.

There's never just the 'only' time, I thought that's Common Sense 101. The point? The point is that it's a waste of time and resources. There's no fixed format to a story. They're willing to skip how Ruby and Weiss riding on a Nevermore, which is arguably an important segment in keeping the coherence of the story, then they can totally skip this bit as well. We know for a fact that they're facing budget, manpower and time problems and still are.

Besides, it's just a possibility. You're arguing about a possibility that I raised to stand against another opposing possibility, and I wasn't even arguing that against you.

In the end, you cannot see past your vision that the current Professor Ozpin is a super mastermind who sees and knows and control everything and will not hesitate to sacrifice his students for the greater good.

Thus far, all I've seen is a concerned man who's willing to do anything he can to shield and protect his students to the point Ironwood scoffed at his naivety. He allows his students the freedom of choice. He allows his students to be the children they should be. He acknowledges and cares for them, and tries to make time for his students such as Ruby and Blake despite being a busy man. Of course he may have ulterior motives, but everyone has that. He does not even forcefully pry into Blake's past, even though knowing that she may very well hold information that can help him greatly in identifying the enemy one way or another. If he is truly the merciless man you say the correct action would have been to interrogate her until she spills, or wait until she let her guard down before trying again. He has not been shown to do either of those things.

End of story: I merely suggested that it may the opposite, and that he has turned over a new leaf after realizing his mistakes, and it came to this. I am... saddened. I wish your career good luck.