Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but at a first glance that could be mistaken for just saying "I Didn't Do It!" ala Bart Simpson or just being framed for something in general.
edited 5th Jul '11 12:00:00 PM by MangaManiac
I like the current name. It's not very informative, but it's not misleading either, and once you read the trope and understand what it means, it sticks in the mind.
This implies, quite correctly, that my mind is dark and damp and full of tiny translucent fish.Guilt by Association, perhaps? The Real Life section gives Collective Punishment as a term for it, though that's a bit boring.
EDIT: OK, it seems Guilt by Association already points to an article. Of course, since it's only a redirect, it could be repurposed for this one.
^Being completely opaque until you read the article does not make for a good trope name.
edited 5th Jul '11 2:59:10 PM by petrie911
Belief or disbelief rests with you.Yeah, a name this difficult to search for isn't going to work even if it does make sense after reading the article, because no one's going to be able to find the article to read in the first place. And this one has been there for years, yet obviously hasn't caught on.
I like Guilt by Association as a replacement. I can see why it was redirected to Hitler Ate Sugar, but it seems more appropriate for this. I'm not so sure about Collective Punishment, because while that gets across that a whole group's being punished for something, it doesn't get across that an innocent bystander's being punished with them, which seems to be the crux of the trope.
I think Guilt by Association Gag might work slightly better. It's a comedy trope after all.
Fight smart, not fair.There is now a single proposition rename crowner about this subject here.
"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 dCrowner's done, I think. Is there any opposition to Guilt by Association Gag, or can we just swap to that?
I don't really like it. It's more Punishment For Association Gag — very often part of the gag is the person who shouldn't be punished proclaiming that fact, and the one dealing out the punishment agreeing that they aren't guilty, but stating that that fact isn't going to change anything.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.I'm okay with the punishment over guilt title.
Fight smart, not fair.Anyone have any problems with Punishment For Association Gag? I added it as a redirect already.
edited 20th Jul '11 2:38:54 PM by Discar
I think Guilt by Association Gag is a more likely search term, and guilt-by-association usually does imply punishment (the term does not mean, I feel guilty for hanging out with these guys), so I think there's little chance of confusion. But I don't feel strongly about the matter.
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.There is now an alternative titles crowner for this trope here. Feel free to add names and edit options as you wish.
"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 dThis is one I'll buy. I think Guilt plays a little better, though there's not a lot of difference.
Creed of the Happy Pessimist:Always expect the worst. Then, when it happens, it was only what you expected. All else is a happy surprise.I like guilt better, both because "guilt by association" is a common term, and it's more compact lengthwise.
Fight smart, not fair.I like Punishment For Association Gag better, since the trope is all about the punishment.
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.But when someone is being unfairly punished, they describe it as guilt-by-association. That's what the term means. I've never seen the term punishment-by-association used outside of this very discussion.
"Why are you grounded? You didn't do anything wrong!"
"Guilt by association. I was in the room when the TV was broken."
edited 20th Jul '11 6:39:43 PM by Xtifr
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.But not every example is even about guilt - there are times when this happens when the innocence of the party in question is actually known - it just goes forward anyhow for whatever reason. Mentioning "guilt" in the title isn't bad, per se, but since the trope is actually about the punishment, I feel it makes for a better trope title.
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.Even when the innocence of the party is known, it's still called guilt by association. That's the standard term.
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.But "guilt by association" is the judgment. We're talking about the punishment.
Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.I added an option for Punishment By Association as a way of splitting the difference.
I think it's vitally important to have a "gag" at the end so people know it's a comedy trope rather than just any instance.
Fight smart, not fair.This has been active for a week and it looks like it's stabilized. Unless there are any objections, I'm going to lock the crowner and do the rename.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Crown Description:
Vote up for yes, down for no.
So, can anyone tell me what this trope is from its name? For the record, it's when somebody gets punished for something they didn't do, because people around them did it, played for laughs. It's been around several years but has less than a hundred wicks and inbounds. I personally suggest renaming, but no good names are coming to me at the moment.
Thoughts?
EDIT: also, on an unrelated note,the real life section seems to be getting bloated and nattery.
edited 5th Jul '11 11:51:29 AM by joeyjojojuniorshabadoo