from about a billion pages back (last time I was here, anyway):
Harry Potter And The Methods Of Rationality which is extremely author tracty including altering canon for the purpose of author tracts, the author hasn't bothered to read all the canon books, he has some very stupid approaches to plot and characterisation and his views are stupid.
I haven't read his work yet, but I get this mostly from his words and praises that people heap on him.
I recall once reading a selection where Dumbledore criticized the logic of
Lord of the Rings. IIRC he said something about how Gandalf should have just kidnapped Frodo and taken him to Rivendell and said eff all to any morals or civility he may have had.
According to the Trope Page, Dumbledore is supposed to come off as kind of crazy, but the piece taken out-of-context struck me as the author using a character as a mouthpiece for his "rational" reasoning. In general I take no stock in rationality, because it's often
less rational (and less practical) than whatever it is the rest of us do.
I mean, if I see a Chupacabra, and you try to go all Occam's Razor on me, I'm gonna say "shut the f—- up. It was a Chupacabra. I'm pretty sure I know the difference between a humanoid lizard goat-sucker with big red eyes and any possible natural animal you're claiming I mistook it for."
... So what's all this about Pinkie being put on trial?