TV Tropes community

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Doctor Placebo said:
Also had people tell me that, despite the complete lack of deaths on the government side, it's a landmark moment cause it's the first time the capitol building was attacked. Spoilers: it's not.
Click to expand...
That wasn't even the first. There was the 1856 caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks. I believe there were also more minor brawls between members even before then, when Congress was rather more contentious than the current relatively polite affair it is now.
 
Last edited:
Doctor Placebo said:
Also had people tell me that, despite the complete lack of deaths on the government side, it's a landmark moment cause it's the first time the capitol building was attacked. Spoilers: it's not.

https://history.house.gov/Oral-History/Events/1954-Shooting/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-capitol-attack-history-1.5863856
Click to expand...
AnOminous said:
That wasn't even the first. There was the 1856 caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks. I believe there were also more minor brawls between members even before then, when Congress was rather more contentious than the current relatively polite affair it is now.
Click to expand...
*cough*
en.wikipedia.org

Pennsylvania Mutiny of 1783 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
On June 17, 1783, Congress received a message from soldiers of the Continental Army stationed in Philadelphia, which demanded payment for their service during the American Revolutionary War. The soldiers threatened to take action that day if their complaints were not addressed. Congress ignored their message, but the soldiers did not act on their threat. Two days later, however, the Congress received word that a group of about 80 soldiers had left their post at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, approximately 60 miles (97 km) west of Philadelphia, and had joined with the soldiers stationed at the city barracks. The group of approximately 500 men had effective control over the weapons stores and munition depot.​
​
The next morning on Friday, June 20, the State House was mobbed by as many as 400 soldiers demanding payment. The soldiers blocked the door and initially refused to allow the delegates to leave. Alexander Hamilton, a delegate from New York, persuaded the soldiers to allow Congress to meet later to address their concerns. The soldiers allowed the members of Congress to peacefully adjourn that afternoon. That evening, a small Congressional committee headed by Hamilton met in secret to draft a message to the Pennsylvania Council, asking them to protect Congress from the mutineers. The letter threatened that Congress would be forced to move elsewhere if the Council did not act.​
​
That was the incident that got WASHINGTON DC created in the first place.
 
It's funny seeing how terrified the userbase of this site often seems. Keep track of how often they bring up the terms "good faith" or "bad faith". You can accuse anyone of making a "bad faith" post without saying they're breaking any rules, and get the mods involved in spite of this.

f.png
 
redfishbluefish said:
It's funny seeing how terrified the userbase of this site often seems. Keep track of how often they bring up the terms "good faith" or "bad faith". You can accuse anyone of making a "bad faith" post without saying they're breaking any rules, and get the mods involved in spite of this.

View attachment 2875805
Click to expand...
Seriously, on the occasion where I try to have a conversation on that site, I end up having to walk on eggshells every single time. Even if I try to link a video that I think would be worth discussing, like so:

Marvel Cinematic Universe - TV Tropes Forum.png

they instead respond like this:

Marvel Cinematic Universe - TV Tropes Forum (1).png


Oh, and my next post defending my stance (or something, I forgot what it was) ended up getting thumped.

Marvel Cinematic Universe - TV Tropes Forum (2).png
 
Kabuki Actor said:
For me, this will be the most autistic trope, or at least the one that's the most autistically misused one on the website. It's kind of the supposition that time can't affect anything without the author's direct permission.
Click to expand...
Well... because technically that's true OF FICTION. Since fictional things - by definition - do not exist, then nothing the author doesn't indicate or say happens. Characters don't go to the bathroom off screen - because they don't go to the bathroom at all, they don't exist.
 
LightDragonman1 said:
Oh, and my next post defending my stance (or something, I forgot what it was) ended up getting thumped.
Click to expand...
You should start archiving your posts when you start posting "controversial" stuff; we all know that the jannies hide everyone's posts to avoid encouraging more people like you.

Seriously, they had an bot that erases every single post that you made.
 
Kabuki Actor said:
View attachment 2881658
Oh no...they think that ASMR channels are relevant!
Click to expand...
"Both hunger and sexual desire are classified as 'needs' and going without either for a long period of time can..."

Yeah but I'm pretty sure only ONE of those will be fatal if you go without for a long period of time.
 
They recently added JK Rowling to the Fallen Creator page for reasons:

Fallen Creator Darth Wiki - TV Tropes.png

What did Rowling say that was seen as transphobic? I've been out of the loop.

Either way, TV Tropes will not let anything that could be remotely seen as transphobic slide. Not on their watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom