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
I'd surely hope that, if I found myself drunk and next to a computer, the last place I'd go is TV Tropes.

I mean, you could drunkpost and earn a halal thread here instead.
 
Jewelsmakerguy said:
Like, I get why the trope exists (to point out how poorly writers parody things ala Seltzerberg). But South Park proves that there's just some things the site is better off not having if they get offended this easilly.
Click to expand...

No, it proves that the people in charge of the site could be a little more strict on what goes on a trope page, which is a pretty big problem over there.

They've been doing some work to combat this, but not enough, if you ask me.
 
Steamboat_Bill said:
No, it proves that the people in charge of the site could be a little more strict on what goes on a trope page, which is a pretty big problem over there.

They've been doing some work to combat this, but not enough, if you ask me.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the mods aren't much better than the people they're supposed to moderate.
 
Sergeant Politeness said:
The entire Dethroning section is just whining about how much you didn't like this one part of that thing anyway. Given how much TV Tropes tries to claim it's here to "celebrate" media, I'm surprised it's still a part of the site.

Also, why is this a page?
Click to expand...

I think I can fill in some blanks on that one.

TV Tropes has always tried to have an "irreverent" sense of humor about itself, and that page is but one facet of this "meta-aware" humor.

All The Tropes has kept the page under our depreciated Administrivia category, but considering we already have a far simpler "don't make stupid pages for stupid reasons" rule already, I'm going to fling this thing over a cliff ASAP.

As for the Dethroning section, it was a 'containment vessel' for bitching and moaning as it was originally intended, as, during one of the saner moments of Fast "Gus Raley" Eddie's tenure, he realized people would be tempted to bitch and moan about media despite his North Korea level insistence on happiness and sunshine, so the Dethroning section is basically a "if you MUST bitch and moan, do it here" section.
 
So if you have a character that is LGBTQetc and a character that has autism that is bad because people will assume gay is some kind of illness?Some tropers don't really understand the fact that most people will not automatically assume that if a character is in one way then that means all characters who fit that profile are that way.That's one problem with movie reviewers they have a tendecy to assume everyone will over analyse a movie.I don't think they get that part.Also bitching about Power Rangers a movie that crashed and burned with audiences is unintentionally hilarious.
 
Rabbit without a hat said:
The YMMV pages are also chock full of whining at times.
Click to expand...

Ugh, definitely. They think that posting their word vomit on how much they hate Character/Ship/Scene/etc. 6133542424 on the YMMV page will protect them from criticism because "IT'S MY VIEW!!! YMMV IS FOR SUBJECTIVE THINGS! DON'T SILENCE ME!"
 
upload_2017-8-27_17-34-38.png


Case and point. Heaven forbid people in 1917 aren't fully okay with gay people, or might use homophobic insults. Honestly harsher in hindsight is a pretty big tism magnet, since lots of example are "A person died, therefore this is harsher now,". Like dude, everybody dies.
 
There's alot of YMMV "tropes", such as Base Breaking Character, that seem to be there entirely because some spastic got triggered by someone else's opinion.
The worst example is Fandom Berserk Button; normal people don't give a fuck if you like something they don't, even if it's something like the Star Wars Prequels.
They base all of these YMMV bullshit on salt from butthurt fanboys posting anonymously on the Internet, and last time I check, those are the last people you should ever take seriously, ever.
 
Last edited:
Rabbit without a hat said:
View attachment 269587

Case and point. Heaven forbid people in 1917 aren't fully okay with gay people, or might use homophobic insults. Honestly harsher in hindsight is a pretty big tism magnet, since lots of example are "A person died, therefore this is harsher now,". Like dude, everybody dies.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, it's not even someone dying; sometimes it's actions that might be construed as sexual harassment/sexual assault/rape or things that might be in poor taste due to 9/11 or a school shooting.
 
In theory the harsher in hindsight entry would have been for situations that came true in the real world in a negative way.That's why a movie like The Siege seems strangely prophetic today.But the whole thing has been abused like many other entries to the point that it doesn't mean much anymore.I would say the unintentional period piece thing also gets kind of dumb at times.With folks looking for even the tiniest detail that ties something to an era as evidence that that something is dated 'the song heard in the background was popular circa 1994 this makes the whole thing dated'.
 
Rabbit without a hat said:
View attachment 269587

Case and point. Heaven forbid people in 1917 aren't fully okay with gay people, or might use homophobic insults. Honestly harsher in hindsight is a pretty big tism magnet, since lots of example are "A person died, therefore this is harsher now,". Like dude, everybody dies.
Click to expand...
I guarantee you, once Sean Bean dies, his countless movie deaths will be listed as Harsher in Hindsight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom