Welcome back tropers for another installment of Let's Laugh at Idiots Together! I have nothing witty to put here today! So let's just jump right into it, shall we?
—
We open to a Mr. 715 (Mrs. 715? That sounds more like a robot actually. Let's go with E-715 Omegazeta, shall we?) who has apparently been edit banned for consistent bad grammer. His plea to get these privileges back is this—
I'm also Edit banned did try to PM the Admin who done it, but he hasn't replied for sometime (might be off or something)I did not alter the above quote in any way. My best guess is that E-715's language chip was on the fritz that day. But who knows?
—
Next up, we have a fellow named Chuckg (I'm guessing this is supposed to be "Chuck G".) who seemingly doesn't understand that Edit Warring is markedly different from regular Warring. General Chucky claims that another troper, Won Sab, who I can only assume is a descendant of the great Sun Tzu, has demanded that Gen. Chucky not post anything until he agrees to Gen. Sab's declaration of a certain character (we're never told who)'s classification as a Mary Sue of some kind.
Fast Eddie has apparently banned both Generals, to which Gen. Chucky objects. He insists that what Gen. Sab did was wrong and that his ban be lifted, arguing that by letting Gen. Sab "win" Fast Eddie is setting a bad precedent (or something like that). Madrugada then interjects by pointing something out.
How is getting banned being rewarded? He got banned as well.Fast Eddie, sympathizing with Gen. Sab's plight, lifts his ban, but not Gen. Chucky's.
Of course, the great and powerful Gen. Chucky does not want his honor slighted in this manner. So he responds.
OK, let me get this straight: it actually works exactly like I thought it worked? Won Sab actually did have veto power over my content — I'm not allowed to post anything unless he's satisfied with it? Seriously? For reals?
And dude, why do you keep saying "I overrode him without discussion" when we had pages of discussion? We were discussing it all day. What we weren't doing was agreeing, and I thought There Is No Such Thing As Notability was the policy: that is to say, that 'you must persuade everyone else in discussion first' was not required.
Not to mention that: ok, if its objective, then it should stay up because I had a more accurate grasp of the game rules. And if its subjective, it should stay up because universal agreement isn't required for subjective tropes.
To which, Fighteer, no doubt sick and tired of the antics. Must explain to him why what he did was incorrect.
For subjective tropes like Mary Sue, it's up to the originator to justify them. By continually adding them in the face of objections, you become the problem. Methinks the edit ban is because you continually refuse to grasp this fact. Subjective does not mean "nobody can argue with me because it's my opinion". Subjective means, "Do not add without a consensus, because it leads to Edit Wars, " which is exactly what happened here.Gen. Chucky, his honor slighted yet again. Retorts
So, Won Sab is 'the consensus' now. Got it. Sorry for daring to contradict your special friend. Cya.
One last thought, tho: You probably want to update the notability page to make it clear to the newbies that yes, if any one person disagrees with them in discussion, it is a bannable offense to repost the stuff that that person disagreed with. They must wait until that person agrees with them before going ahead.
Because, y'know, otherwise they won't know about that.
At this point, we can assume that somewhere behind the scenes, Fast Eddie was just like "okay no. B&".
In that vein. Gonna have to say—
General Won Sab: 1, General Chucky: 0.
—
That's all for this installment tropers. Tune in next time! And a big thank you to all who left reviews. Your feedback keeps me motivated.
Comments
