Needs an Overhaul: Legal Jailbait

Page action crowner with more options than just "rename"? There are several alternative ideas posited in this thread.

Really? I don't see any? But if you do, feel free to go for page action.

There is pretty clearly not a consensus in favor of renaming.

Considering that there's no proof that the name is harming the trope, I can't support a rename.

Sure, it's an oxymoron, but I've never had any trouble figuring out what it means.

Grammatically speaking, Legal is a modifier, which modifies Jailbait. Jailbait is a term that, even from just the discussion here, doesn't have an exact definition in the public eye. If there's a need to modify a word, you naturally assume that it doesn't mean exactly what it usually does. It suggests a metaphor or allegory or something like that. Which is pretty much what it is.

It's also possible to misunderstand anything by overanalysing and misinterpreting it too much. Bloodless Carnage can easily be seen as something other than blood, like oil. That's not the trope, though.

More importantly, I see far more difficulty in understanding the trope because of the name in this thread than on the actual page, which is where it really matters.

edited 14th Mar '12 6:41:23 PM by Feather7603

Lots of good reasons for the name to be different, but not for the name to be changed.

I think that including pre-nubile examples implies they are jailbait, which I think is medium creepy. i think we need a less creepy name, or we need to split off the pedo examples.

edited 15th Mar '12 3:59:28 AM by pawsplay

I would like to say that I'm afraid "jailbait" is the reason we had some really creepy things here. Like: "character X is now the hottest candidate to replace character Z as the queen of this trope" (no, I'm not kidding, this was on the page). Also, if you look at the OP, there was both misuse and creepiness in the examples. I think it's important to consider thesen factors as we vote.

I myself cleaned up the page, and I can assure you it had problems.

edited 15th Mar '12 8:18:47 AM by lu127

That's what No Lewdness No Prudishness is for.

Man, I'm a little shocked that this is a 19-18 vote. The name is gibberish.

"The name is terrible" and "the name should be changed" are related but different arguments. If the crowner was about the first question it'd be nearly unanimous.

That's just an assumption.

Prediction. "Assumption" implies some sort of conclusion is based on it. Anyway, unclear what the point of calling it into question is, totally academic.

edited 17th Mar '12 1:18:06 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Well, my point was, "I disagree," based on the statistical evidence that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that there may, in fact, be differences between people. Probably. And no, I'm not going anywhere with this.

edited 17th Mar '12 2:04:19 PM by Feather7603

Let's just call the crowner. The vote was decisive, it's time to enjoy the interbellum and discuss other things.

I was gonna say let's wait at least three days, before remembering this has been up for over a week, and been unambiguously under the 2-1 margin the entire time.

So another vote to close.

Calling the crowner. No consensus to rename.

If no other options are brought forward, please holler for a lock.