TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [2,191]  1 ... 79 80 81 82 83
84
85 86 87 88

Content Policy Change:

 2076 Rhyme Beat, Tue, 17th Apr '12 3:59:17 PM from Eastern Standard Relationship Status: In Lesbians with you
Who?
To clarify I am also female.

I had false hope that Eddie had clarified that last bullet point.
 2077 Septimus Heap, Tue, 17th Apr '12 3:59:44 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
[up][up][up]We are not denying that it exists, we are just removing the pages for the works here.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:00:51 PM by SeptimusHeap

Always There
[up][up][up]They'd rather just keep it off of their wiki. It's their call.

And on top of that, condemning the works would break the "No Negativity" rule, and would then lead to even more people whining.

[up]Yeah, what they said.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:01:03 PM by CaspersWish

One big YES!
I just noticed another thing about the guidelines. It separates between "explicit sex" and "implied sex". The thing is, while both a mutually exclusive, they aren't the only possibilities either. I understand "explicit sex" as "sex where we can actually see the act" and "implied sex" as "when the act is only implied to be happening, though no actual confirmation is given".

However, there is still "the sexual act is very much explicitly happening, but we don't get to actually see it", which is neither "explicit sex" nor "implied sex", from the way I see it. I get the feeling ccoa meant my "new" category to be include into 'implied sex', but I wanted it to be made clear.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:04:32 PM by Heatth

 2080 Rhyme Beat, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:02:59 PM from Eastern Standard Relationship Status: In Lesbians with you
Who?
That was a part of ccoa's original post and I think cooa meant to draw the distinction between "sex on screen" and "sex off screen".
@Caspers Wish: I think banning the works violates that much more. If I wan't clear, what I meant is that if whoever's in charge wants to condemn something, fine, but trying to uphold the rules after what I see as a massive violation of the wiki's mission.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:04:02 PM by condottiera

More pluck than an Alabama banjo festival
[up][up]I don't remember ccoa post anymore.tongue (I edited my previous post)

Yes, it is what I think too, but it is unclear, so I wanted confirmation.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:04:46 PM by Heatth

Always There
[up][up]Since when was it the wiki's mission to keep pages that they no longer want on their wiki?

And they're not banning those works, they just don't want them to have pages on the wiki.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:08:51 PM by CaspersWish

One big YES!
 2084 L Mage, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:07:41 PM from Miss Robichaux's Academy Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
Evil Trickster
@Casper

That's effectively the same thing.
"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"
[up]Actually, I think we are still allowed to list them on trope pages. So it is different, as we are not banning every mention of the 'forbidden' works.

@Caspers Wish: That sound a little bit like the scary side of Insistent Terminology. What "we" want is not what I want.

@Heatth: If we're allowed to list them on trope pages, why can't we have page to list all the pages it's listed on? Is that so hard? I said before, we can lock it to keep out pervs.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:10:47 PM by condottiera

More pluck than an Alabama banjo festival
 2087 Marq FJA, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:09:41 PM from Saudi Arabia Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
O' Allah, save Egypt
This is a wiki, where they can't always please everyone. If the staff decides to do something that benefits the wiki, (not just reputation-wise, but financial security-wise) then why do you feel the need to take it upon yourself combat them at every step? Just be calm, stop trying to cause a furor with those "This is injustice!"-style posts, and think for a second.
The current Content Policy Change isn't to secure the site's finances.
Ash-shaʻb yurīd isqāṭ ḥukm al-ʻaskar
Always There
[up][up][up][up]No, it's not. You'll probably still be able to list them on trope pages, and talk about them elsewhere.

[up]Okay. I thought that the whole Google thing was what kick-started this whole thing.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:11:59 PM by CaspersWish

One big YES!
We can't have porn on the wiki. Google makes too much of a fuss. That's just the way it is; yell at them if you want.
 2090 strawberryflavored, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:10:20 PM from Virginia Relationship Status: Dancing with myself
The Classic
[up][up][up][up][up]That would likely cause people to try to make a page on the work since they'd be red links.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:10:59 PM by strawberryflavored

Just because they can always read your mind doesn't mean Espeon aren't the best thing ever.
[up]The pages will be locked, though. And probably with a banner quickly explaining the situation.

 2092 L Mage, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:11:08 PM from Miss Robichaux's Academy Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
Evil Trickster
[up][up][up]

Once again this has nothing to do with Google anymore

edited 17th Apr '12 4:11:16 PM by LMage

"You are never taller then when standing up for yourself"
There is nothing "Slippery slope" about saying "We've made mistakes in the past (cutting works that don't need to be cut) and we need to avoid making the same mistake in the future."

If I wreck my car, saying I need to be more careful driving in the future isn't a strawman. It is a lesson learned from past errors. I can't say "Of course I will never wreck my car, how dare you suggest I'm a fallible driver?" when I've already done it.

 2094 Marq FJA, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:11:10 PM from Saudi Arabia Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
O' Allah, save Egypt
@Discar: The "no pages for porn works" isn't actually driven by The Second Google Incident.
Ash-shaʻb yurīd isqāṭ ḥukm al-ʻaskar
 2095 shimaspawn, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:11:22 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
@Marq It is, but that's not the primary motivation for it. It's the secondary motivation. We aren't doing this just because of Google. We're doing this because we found some genuinely horrifying shit on the wiki in the process of cleaning things up for Google. So it's a little of both.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
If we're allowed to list them on trope pages, why can't we have page to list all the pages it's listed on? Is that so hard? I said before, we can lock it to keep out pervs.

I think the main problem is that, due to our No Negativity* rule, having a page is the same as saying "we" approve the work.

Personally, I agree with you. But I can see the reasons behind the purge as well.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:14:01 PM by Heatth

[up][up] I've heard it vehemently denied that this had anything to do with it because Fast Eddie said so, and now people are flip-flopping. If he doesn't want to lose money he should just come clean.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:15:02 PM by condottiera

More pluck than an Alabama banjo festival
[up] He doesn't want to lose money because the wiki needs money.
 2099 Hershele Ostropoler, Tue, 17th Apr '12 4:17:10 PM from BK.NY.US Relationship Status: Sharing a spaghetti noodle
You gotta get yourself some marble columns
This is why we keep using the term paedoshit. The fact that we made up the word means that it's not loaded down with anyone else's assumptions of what it means.
Unfortunately, it also means we have no frame of reference for what each other think it means.
The child is father to the manOedipus
@Heatth: I personally don't think editing a work's page is the equivalent to a personal stamp of approval. Having a page on something bad does not mean everyone on TV Tropes likes it.

@encrypted: I know, I just mean that he shouldn't lie about his motivation.

edited 17th Apr '12 4:19:29 PM by condottiera

More pluck than an Alabama banjo festival
Total posts: 2,191
 1 ... 79 80 81 82 83
84
85 86 87 88


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy