TV Tropes - Enforced Crapsaccharine World

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 19:28:07

I don't agree. Not much else to say.

DonZabu · 2011-04-15 19:29:08

I like to think that Fast Eddie would rather not do things like this, but the website has become inundated with Stop Having Fun Guys and he has to change the policies so that they shut up.

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 19:29:36

^^^ I'd say it's the informal language, the entirely different layout and the "no such thing as notability" policy, actually.

^ I don't think so, though I could admittedly be mistaken.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 19:29:54

^That.

Turtle · 2011-04-15 19:32:00

The layout doesn't really have much to do with the tone, so I wasn't counting that.

You have a point with the policy on notability.

But it's difficult to have an informal tone without an opinion, or at least the appearance of one.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 19:33:43

Sure you can have an informal tone without an opinion. You can make jokes or write self-demonstrating articles, for starters.

Turtle · 2011-04-15 19:35:35

You can't do either of those and have a neutral page.

DYRE · 2011-04-15 19:36:04

Yes you can.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 19:38:20

What? You're saying you can't make a joke or make an article self-demonstrating without expressing an opinion about a work?

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 19:38:37

Sure you can. Just make jokes and write self-demonstrating articles without inserting your opinion.

Besides, it's not like Eddie has said "no opinions, ever, period". He just doesn't want people to go overboard with them, and obviously, they aren't regular tropes.

Turtle · 2011-04-15 19:42:02

I dunno. Maybe I'm equating "opinionated" with "informal." Maybe I'm tired or something.

All I know is that everything I've seen of the site from the day I became a Known Troper has turned me off rather than drawn me in. The natter and rampant opinions were what fascinated me back then. "Look. Here's a site that's not afraid to be opinonated and fun." I feel like those elements are disappearing a little more every day.

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 19:43:54

Ah. Well, there's the problem, I guess - you enjoy the site that TV Tropes doesn't want to be, rather than the one it has always aimed to be.

BaronGrackle · 2011-04-15 20:18:39

^^ I felt that way too, Turtle. I came to tvtropes because I saw something and liked it. It's still pretty much like that today, but it's gradually changing. VERY gradually, since a lot of users tend to ignore the unpopular edicts. (such as not linking the YMMV tropes)

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 20:22:37

Y'know, that post honestly depresses me a bit, which I know is not your intention. But you're right, that's exactly how it is. I guess I should stop taking the piss out of the mirror wiki; it might not be such a bad idea after all.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 20:24:22

A mirror wiki for people who don't like the main one might not be the worst idea ever. The one that exists, though, is pretty awful.

Icalasari · 2011-04-15 21:59:11

IJBM2 should try to scrape together cash (:D donations from us!) so we can make our own mirror TVTropes

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 22:06:39

If you really dislike the real site that much, I think you'd be better served trying to make the existing mirror wiki not suck.

Me, I want no part in this. I happen to like the idea of a TV Tropes that exists to be actually read.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 22:07:23

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't participate. But if it was well-done, I probably wouldn't complain about its existence.

vacasama · 2011-04-15 22:08:20

This starting to remind of the complaints that Toonzone gets.

ClockworkUniverse · 2011-04-15 22:10:51

And for those who have no clue what Toonzone is?

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-15 22:12:19

Compared to Toonzone's fairly strict rules regarding post content, TV Tropes seems extremely relaxed to me.

@ INUH: This site.

Vorpy · 2011-04-15 23:02:29

* Note how everyone WANTS to constantly link to stupid inane complaining for laughs.

thatguythere47 · 2011-04-16 00:22:24

I think the issue is the wiki got away from eddie, the in-jokes became entrenched, the negativity and subjectivity rose in prominence and the natter made pages look like a schizophrenic arguing with himself. Faced with his prized website becoming a shell of the original ideal he pulled in the other direction and I would argue he pulled way to far.

It's one thing to outlaw subjectiveness on the main page, it's a whole nother thing to outlaw complaints on a forum. It seems that in his haste to get rid of what he considered the worst parts of tvtropes he's also getting rid of the charm.

Vorpy · 2011-04-16 00:29:30

Except complaining only seemed to encourage the stupid people to get worse. Sure, having a "This is what's wrong with Homestuck" thread or a place to post why YOU did not like North was nice, but to have rampant fan hating and one-sided bitching was annoying to scroll past and be encouraged by others. After all, Fast Eddie could have banned unproductive complaining or aimless bitching, but then that would be harder to define than all complaining.

Khwarizmi · 2011-04-16 00:32:43

>could have banned unproductive complaining or aimless bitching

This is what we're trying to encourage when we rename such threads instead of locking/zapping them.

Icalasari · 2011-04-16 00:53:30

"If you really dislike the real site that much, I think you'd be better served trying to make the existing mirror wiki not suck."

I like TVTropes too. I just heard that the mirror wiki is run by someone who hates anime which makes it a bit lopsided, and well, if something happened to TVTropes, it would be nice to have a backup

thatguythere47 · 2011-04-16 00:56:36

All complaining is not created equal. There was a complaint in yackfest about DRM and how it was driving the OP more and more into piracy, it was locked despite not causing any issues. Just the existence of a negative opinion was enough to warrant the lock.

inkblot · 2011-04-16 00:59:08

"and judging from yet another Crowner I just saw, Character Derailment is soon to follow. "

I voted for that because the alternatives were nuking the examples or locking the page. I'd rather have the examples exiled to DW than gone entirely.

I'm not a huge fan of the site's rules either. It's not that the site's too restrictive, there's just too much inconsistency. Too many grey areas, too many special cases, too many rules applied to some pages but not others and too many rules just not spelled out. It may be easier for the mods to deal with things on a case by case basis, but it's difficult for me to contribute when I don't even know if I'm breaking the rules.

I'm just sick of the tightrope the wiki walks on.

DonZabu · 2011-04-16 01:01:59

Once again, the layered levels of overreaction.

BaronGrackle · 2011-04-16 01:10:32

Geez, Khwarizmi, I don't like to depress people. It's humbling. Deep down I know that Eddie's neither malicious nor a fool. One of the reasons I fled so fast to the mirror wiki was that I thought I'd be google banned for trash talking him. I copied my "pet" trope over there because... well... it was sort of dismaying to think that I wouldn't ever be able to read something I wrote myself! But, I wasn't banned after all, so it's sort of a moot point. The fact that Eddie didn't ban me after the abuse I sent his way, at least that says something about his character.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

TV Tropes - Enforced Crapsaccharine World

Comments