Please note that I'm not talking about how the wiki itself receives criticism, but how criticism (more specifically negative criticism) is received in the general atmosphere of the site. Put simply, I don't think the site is "suppressing criticism" of itself, but I do take issue with the general attitude towards criticism of works within the site.
I've browsed TV Tropes
casually for a while now, and I've noticed that for the most part, no one ever says anything bad about works, at least not in the main section of the site. I feel that this is a major blind spot in this otherwise fairly good database of knowledge. Looking further, I was able to find quotes from Fast Eddie himself that seem to address this, but in an erroneous way. To be specific:
Fast Eddie: Let me real blunt. Negative reviews suck. They suck for the work and they suck to read.
<later on the same page>Fast Eddie: A negative recommendation would be "don't read it." Useless.
Feel free to disagree, but I don't think this is true. In fact, I think it is downright intellectually dishonest to claim that all negative reviews and criticisms do not add content to the wiki. It is true that pure hate reviews do not bring anything to the table, but not all negative reviews are pure hate reviews. Not all criticism of a show or a book or a fanfiction is spiteful, even if a person straight up says "I didn't like this <whatever>."
In fact, some of the very best criticism comes from analyzing the worst aspects of a work, especially by someone who honestly doesn't like it. Why? Because they can see the things the writer and even the writer's fans have turned a blind eye to. If you get a good negative reviewer, they can tell you exactly what they didn't like and why they didn't like it. As the author of a work, you can take their reasons into account and use them however you'd like with your next work, but even as a consumer you can take the negative review's aspects into account, and maybe even learn why you like or don't like what you just read/watched.
"Don't read it" would indeed be a bad negative review. But, on the other side of the coin, wouldn't "OMFG THIS IS THE BEST, READIT READIT READIT!" be a just as bad positive review? Admit to this and you have to admit that there are different types of positive reviews, and some are more useful to the wiki than others. In that case, can't there be different types of negative reviews, as well? What about "Don't watch it, because X, Y, and Z" where the aforementioned letters are thought out, reasonable critiques, such as "the humor comes off as juvenile" or "the art is bad because the artist doesn't follow simple rules of anatomy." Then you, as the consumer of the product reading the review, can think about the things they pointed out, and decide for yourself whether or not you agree with them. Maybe your opinion won't be swayed, but at least after reading the review you'll have a better view of why you did or didn't like the work, because the negative review forces you to think about it, just as the positive review does. And thus, you learned something, and perhaps deepened your enjoyment of the work in question.
To deny the validity of negative critique on the wiki is to deny that some people just don't like certain works. And everyone doesn't like some things. Maybe you feel Lord of the Rings is too wordy, or Naruto is too juvenile, or The Grapes of Wrath is too unrelatable to modern society. If you can write thoughtfully about these things, why shouldn't you be allowed to say it? If fans of a work are going to get up in arms because you made a completely valid point, then they should be the ones to take the blinders off, not you. There's no need to be inflammatory, and maybe if you word it well people will even see your point of view.
Furthermore, I feel that the biggest sufferers from this complete lack of negativity are fan works. Fan works are completely legitimate writing practice for aspiring writers, but without critique, they don't gain anything from it. Just writing alone will not make you better at writing. You need people to look at your writings and tell you what they did and didn't like about it. Being told how awesome your fanfic was feels really good, sure, but it won't make you a better writer. I feel like a lot of people on this site really would appreciate hearing things about their writing, because we all want to improve, to be able to tell our stories better, even if those stories involve other people's characters. Negative criticism is the backbone of improvement, because if you don't even know what you need to get better at, how can you work at it?
To summarize, I think some well thought out, non-trolling negativity would be very good for this site, both for the consumers and producers of works. Just because I hate something doesn't make my opinion intrinsically more or less valid. Saying you love something without giving a reason is just as pointless as saying you hate it without a reason. For the readers, negative criticism will help them understand why they do and don't like books/shows/whatever. For the writers, negative criticism helps pinpoint weaknesses and address them to become better writers overall.
I was really just looking to spur some discussion about this, so talk away. Be negative about this very review, if you want, as long as it's constructive. I feel that this wiki has a lot to gain from addressing this blind spot, and don't we all want to make the site as good as it can be?
TJ 4 life. Also the password is changed again.