Real Life section maintenance

The Trivia thread should be discussed there. I do have an idea about it as well.

I'm working on compiling what everyone's said so far about the status of the RL section maintenance thread and the "public" versus "private" voting. In case anyone wants to join in on the, uh, fun without going through a few pages. And also to try to better understand where we are myself. That'll probably take a while, but luckily everything's already on the thread so nobody actually needs me to do this. (I'm also refining what I said previously, so le shrug). Let me know if that sounds dumb

Well, I just checked who added the "Right through" tropes and I'm surprised to say ~Theatre_Maven_3695 added those. I think there's someone (not Maven) in the past who, on multiple occasions, has added tropes prior to discussion, but you'd have to ask Nohbody or someone else. I can't recall who it is right now.

EDIT: Actually, there was an announcement for both of these tropes here but we totally missed them because the next post was opening the topic of "This thread might be getting closed."

edited 12th Sep '17 8:40:44 AM by WaterBlap

Yes. He announced that he'd added them. He didn't ask for discussion about whether they should be added. And the crowner is specifically written to be limited to "cut or not?" It doesn't allow for any other options. That's why they need to be discussed before they're added at all.

I was under the impression that certain trope categories, like sex and morality tropes, were automatically NRLEP.

We still need to discuss whether they actually fit those categories. Some tropes only touch on those categories tangentally, and can be okay, and some may be only questionable if they're about people, but may be okay about objects.

By the way, the two tropes in the crowner have now been at no consensus for a few days since we began to discuss them, and reasonably stable at that. I think it would be okay to call them as still allow real life examples and not bring them up again without new evidence of problems.

edited 12th Sep '17 12:48:59 PM by AnotherDuck

I wouldn't be opposed to requiring actual discussion of a trope before it's put on the crowner, and any that don't have discussion (vice just "adding [trope]" posts) get zapped.

As for changing this thread into something like the CM thread, I don't know if outright eliminating crowners for voting is a good idea, but at the moment I can't cite any concrete reason for that uncertainty.

In regards to the "Right through..." entries that inspired this discussion, neither of them have anywhere near a high enough ratio to be made NRLEP, and have been on the crowner since September 1st, so I'm going to call them to keep RL examples.

• Right Through His Pants: Added 1st Sep '17 at 07:17:52 AM, 1.09:1 (23)
• Right Through the Wall: Added 1st Sep '17 at 12:45 PM, 1.3:1 (23)

—

Nothing pending as of this post.

edited 14th Sep '17 6:25:07 AM by Nohbody

I see having separate, dedicated threads as removing bureacracy and clutter. You want llamas, you go here. You want chocolate teapots, you go there. You don't have to wade through unrelated posts or ask for special permission as long as you're in the right department, so to speak.

Possible changes:

• Small: submitter to the crowner has to sign their username. Without that, it gets removed or struck out. If it really does need to be NRLEP, they can resubmit with their name, or someone else can submit.

• Moderate change: No trope will be considered unless there is a post in the thread first. A good, this is why post. If it's put on the crowner without a post, it gets removed or struck out until and unless the original submitter or someone else makes an argument for it.

• Big change, probably requiring programming and 2.0: Three vote system, keep, remove, keep but clean.

edited 16th Sep '17 9:40:50 PM by Candi

I would prefer the "big" option, because one of the problems with the current system is that it forces a binary choice cut vs. keep. But it wouldn't work with the current technology - unless you made a separate crowner for each trope. Would that be a workable option?

edited 16th Sep '17 11:32:50 PM by GnomeTitan

I think the "Moderate" option would be the best. It wouldn't need too much work, and it would still be a pretty strong restriction.

edited 17th Sep '17 4:21:35 AM by Piterpicher

As I said above, discussion first ("moderate" option) seems the best way to handle things, given the limitations of the platform.

As for the "small" one, people who add crowner entries are already identified in the entry history. What actual difference would there be from how things are currently operating?

edited 18th Sep '17 8:00:15 AM by Nohbody

Moderate and big for this thread.

"n"th-ing Moderate for now, up to Big when we get the next Major Version of TVT.

On a completely unrelated note

Parental Neglect strikes me as the category of trope we'd want to preemptively forbid RL examples on.

Maybe, but I don't like making decisions like that without actual problems.

Yeah, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

We also had a spree of similar discussions a while back and we more or less decided (IIRC) that if there isn't anything wrong with the page, then we shouldn't make it NRLEP.

Why is Drivento Suicide NRLEP "due to the nature of this trope," but not other suicide tropes?

It's in the "Too Common in Real Life" folder. In real life, that trope is basically "someone committed suicide." Also, trying to determine the events that led to a real life suicide is more than likely to be pure speculation or gossip. I don't know what the discussion was at the time that trope was added, but if we're talking "the nature of the trope," I'd think those three things are big factors.

Also, I'm not seeing where someone said "due to the nature of this trope"? Can you provide links?

Is there a problem with other suicide tropes?

On the Driven to Suicide page, the "due to the nature of this trope, NRLEP" line is right above the spoiler warning in the main body of the article.

I've seen some misuse of a few of them. Suicide Is Painless is suplosed to be the opposite of Driven to Suicide and includes a few examples of "person committed suicide out of boredom or due to terminal illness." The definition of seppuku used on this site is basically "Japanese person makes a big deal over committing suicide," which I get is a broader definition than usual, but it's still seeing misuse.

I removed a generic "example" from Suicide Is Painless.

Anyway, that trope I don't really have much of a problem with, after reading the examples. They seem objective; they're not flamebaity; they're not obviously problematic.

There's discussion here. Beyond that point, every post predates the history crash so it isn't possible to find the discussion (unless you want to hunt through 40 pages of comments). So I appeal to my previous comment here as to my answer to your question.

The Society in General section of Periphery Hatedom is basically just a Real Life section listing a bunch of generalized examples and possible ROCEJ violations. The page isn't NRLEP, but do things like racism and political parties really count as "hatedom?"

Political parties, definitely not. Politics is for everyone. There is no periphery as such. I'd argue the same for real life in general. People are not created to appeal to certain demographics.

Sounds like that whole section should be axed.