Rename (New Crowner 2.6): The Wonka

Deadlock Clock: 10th Jan 2013 11:59:00 PM
Total posts: [128]
1 2 3 4 5 6
The crowner has been up for a month, and has been moving steadily away from a consensus for quite a while now (it's currently at 1.38:1). Time to call it?
102 shimaspawn18th Mar 2012 08:20:11 AM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
No consensus to rename. All that needs to be done now is definition clean up.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
I'll rewritten up a new description based on the results of the previous crowner. It can be found here. Now I'll look at the examples on the page. If I'm unfamilar with the work I'll leave it for someone who is.


Done. Definnitely still more incorrect examples there but I'll need to do more research to determine them. I didn't touch Zero Context Examples because I couldn't tell except for Andy Wahol because I couldn't find anything to add from The Other Wiki

edited 8th Apr '12 1:35:17 PM by ChaoticNovelist

Someone else might have included this as part of the clarification between a Wonka and a Bunny Ears Lawyer, but as someone who self-identifies as a Wonka, I'll offer my own interpretation.

As it has been said, a BEL is a team player, and often a subordinate. In other words, he's someone who is hired or kept as staff (think of a star player in a sports team, who is weird) whose idiosyncracies are tolerated because of his level of ability, but who could be fired, if he does what is perceived as going too far.

A Wonka on the other hand, is either a leader or (more commonly) a recluse. So while you might not like his weirdness, the main difference between him and a BEL is that you're stuck with it, and if there is a personality conflict, the Wonka will usually be in more of a position to get rid of you, than the other way around.

The price that the Wonka pays for this, on the other hand, is generally seniority; either age, experience, or both. We're basically talking about a less socially capable and more introverted (and also marginally less intelligent, and usually non-magical, or at least overtly) version of The Dumbledore. House to me is actually one of the best examples of The Wonka that I know of, to be honest. He's largely in a position where despite his weirdness, people need him to a sufficient degree that he doesn't get touched, as far as potentially being fired or otherwise removed is concerned.

So that, in a nutshell, is the main difference. A BEL, to me, was Lucius Fox, Morgan Freeman's character from the Nolanverse Batman movies. As in, yes he is both weird and brilliant, but he is still sufficiently vulnerable in terms of potentially losing his job, that he needs other people.

The BEL is the less senior version, who because of such, still needs to care about what other people think. The Wonka is the senior version. He's self-sufficient, so he can be as unrestrainedly nutty as he wants to be, without needing to care about whether or not it bothers anyone. In that sense, The Wonka is closer to Chaotic Neutral, usually trending towards Chaotic Good, as is The Dumbledore; but a little closer to CN than the latter. It's not a hard and fast thing.

Truly Dark Wonkas are rare. We generally won't at all mind helping you, but if you think we're insane, you can expect us to interpret that, as you simply being unfamiliar with the rules of our particular environment or system of thinking; not as a concession that said rules actually are irrational or insane.

As a result, we're also going to know that we need to think the way we do, in order to get what we need done, (it's a purely pragmatic thing) so we're not going to care if you think we're insane, because not only can we not afford to care, but the difference between us and a BEL, is that we usually won't need to. You're not our boss, so your opinion isn't really very important.

edited 8th Apr '12 2:14:32 PM by petrus4

[up] So Wonkas are self-sufficient and BE Ls are not; is that your point?

We are in the process of changing the definition to be in line with the last succesful crowner. Discuss it here with others before making such drastic changes to the main page.

edited 9th Apr '12 4:59:51 PM by ChaoticNovelist

More or less, yes.
107 shimaspawn12th Apr 2012 08:51:37 PM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
You don't get to change the definition because you have your own personal definition that has nothing to do with anything else, isn't supported by examples, and is completely different than the one agreed upon by crowner. That's not how this works.

Note that by your definition, Willy Wonka would not count as The Wonka. That in and of itself is an indication that it's a bad definition. You just want to talk about yourself. That is not allowed on the wiki proper and can get you banned. Please look to fiction and not your own life.

Your own life is completely irrelevant.

edited 12th Apr '12 8:54:27 PM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
108 HersheleOstropoler12th Apr 2012 09:08:58 PM from BK.NY.US , Relationship Status: Less than three
You gotta get yourself some marble columns
Should the definition on the page be changed to the one agreed on in the previous crowner?
The child is father to the manOedipus
109 shimaspawn12th Apr 2012 09:14:21 PM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
Yes, it should.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
[up]I drafted a new definition based on the last successful crowner. It can be found here. I'm waiting for comments, revisions, etc.
111 HersheleOstropoler13th Apr 2012 08:59:07 AM from BK.NY.US , Relationship Status: Less than three
You gotta get yourself some marble columns
You probably should have said something before I made the change.
The child is father to the manOedipus
What's the status on this one?
What goes around, comes around
what goes up, must come down
[up] We decided to redefine this trope as 'a eccentrically skilled person who can't be fired from his job because he's the boss' and we decided not to rename. Now we just have to implement the change. I drafted a new article but I haven't got any feedback on it.
Bumb. If I don't get feedback I'll put up my drafted version. The crowner deciding to redefine this trope has long since been closed. It should change as soon as possible. I'll wait until sunday.
[up] Penultimate bumb. I swapped the old definition with the new one in accordance with the page action crowner. The final step is to look at the wicks and bring them in line with the new definition. Any volunteers?
Final Bumb. I can't clean this page up. I can't check the wicks. I'm too busy with Beyond the Impossible and Xanatos Gambit. Someone else needs to do The Wonka.
Incidentally, with each passing day, the condescending Wonka meme grows more well known. How long till people start misusing The Wonka for "patronizing guy"?
Perhaps a better question is "When will people forget the 'Condescending Wonka' meme exists" tongue
Rhymes with "Protracted."
119 HersheleOstropoler14th Jul 2012 07:47:54 AM from BK.NY.US , Relationship Status: Less than three
You gotta get yourself some marble columns
I think that's something we can worry about when it happens.
The child is father to the manOedipus
120 SeptimusHeap14th Jul 2012 07:51:24 AM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
I'll bring this cleanup up in the Special Efforts thread.
121 ccoa4th Sep 2012 09:05:05 AM from the Sleeping Giant
Ravenous Sophovore
Is there still clean-up to do here?
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
Wow... I've had a link to this trope for years, and the original definition was definitely someone who was successful because they were eccentric vs. the BEL who was successful despite it. So now my link's apparently wrong due to some arbitrary drift that's achieved popularity... Thing is, Crazy Awesome's now the only thing left to refer to a Cloudcuckoolander empowered by their eccentricity, but that specifically referred, and still does, only to constantly seriously over-the-top characters. Are all quasi-realistic versions now trope-less or is Crazy Awesome too necessarily extreme as currently defined?
[up] Yes, that was the original purpose behind Crazy Awesome but it's mostly misue now. Others have been working on a Insanity Has Advantages if you want to support them with that.

As for the Wonka, I believe the redefinition was to carve a niche that was neither here (CA) or there (BEL)
What goes around, comes around
what goes up, must come down
What else is there to do here? We've got the name (rename crowner failed), we've got the definition (Bunny-Ears Lawyer at the helm). So what's left, cleanup?

Single Proposition: The Wonka 2
6th Feb '12 6:38:37 AM
Vote up for yes, down for no.
At issue:

Total posts: 128
1 2 3 4 5 6