Random

Needs Help: Matriarchy In Name Only get usage counts
Deadlock Clock: 18th Sep '12 11:59 PM

Total posts: [97]
1 2 3
4
has crowner
While I do agree that shedding examples where there's no claim of matriarchy is a good idea, I think there's another problem. The support has to be something more substantial than 'women dress attractively' or 'men get to fight'. It can't be based on what individuals think would or wouldn't happen in a matriarchy. The only solution I can think of is to only include examples which say 'matriarchy' on the box, but are blatantly ruled by men or egalitarian (if I'm using that word correctly).

With all that considered, I'm leaning towards cutting it. The way this is going, there won't be any examples left.

edited 3rd Jan '13 11:43:30 AM by abloke

"Only women can have (Insert Important Job Y Here) and writes that as an example despite the example not being a matriarchy..." Isn't that exactly what a matriarchy is?
78 Noaqiyeum3rd Jan 2013 04:40:32 PM from a thought-experiment gone horribly wrong , Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The it-thingy
...case in point. XD
Can't you see who I am? I'm invinci8le! Like a force that is out of control
It's the key to achieving my goal - un8r8ka8le!
Could we please have a crowner for this to decide if we should cut it or change it to something clear?
80 SeptimusHeap10th Jan 2013 01:02:23 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Here's the crowner. I think I did it right.
82 SeptimusHeap10th Jan 2013 01:46:20 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Two tips:
  • It's useful to explain what the issue is in the box.
  • I am sure we had more options than that.
83 Madrugada10th Jan 2013 02:29:30 AM , Relationship Status: In season
With Mod Hat On
Crowner hooked and three other options I found in the thread added.

edited 10th Jan '13 2:29:37 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
84 SeptimusHeap10th Jan 2013 02:30:47 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Upvoted the redefine options, but downvoted the YKTTW one since it will absolutely guarantee we never get this done.
I gave the option of cutting the page a one-up. I also bumped the YKTTW option down. The only problem I can think of with the current frontrunner (redefining it to "says matriarchy, obviously isn't") is that it would need clear and inarguable guidelines, which might result in a shortage of examples.

The whole description, I think, would have to be rewritten. A lot of the examples currently on the page seem to stem from individual opinions of what should happen in a matriarchy — clothing, who gets to join the army, etc. — as opposed to what would have to.

edited 10th Jan '13 3:28:14 AM by abloke

86 Madrugada10th Jan 2013 03:39:49 AM , Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
By making it "defined as, or called a matriarchy within the work", we sidestep a lot of the problems of defining 'matriarchy' ourselves; the question becomes "Does the author directly say that it's supposed to be a matriarchy, or does (s)he have one of the characters say that it is?" If the answer to that is 'no', then it's not an example. We'll still have some of the problem of tropers wanting to use the page to complain about the way some author did or didn't handle it, but we at least have a criteria that's clear to use to catch and cull those.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
87 johnnye10th Jan 2013 07:42:08 AM from Brighton, UK , Relationship Status: If it's you, it's okay
Theoretically the new definition is alright, but it's so restrictive that I can't see it finding many examples at all. Add to that the difficulty of getting people to supply really informative entries to YKTTW, and it just seems like too much work to be worth it.

I suppose that if someone was really willing to give the YKTTW the diligent curation it'd need, it might work, but could we cut the existing page in the meantime?
Zaldrīzes buzdari iksos daor, so Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus.
88 SeptimusHeap10th Jan 2013 07:45:45 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
I can see YKTTW as an option, but only if the launch of that YKTTW isn't a prerequisite for the closure of this thread. Otherwise, it's just going to hold this thing up forever.
89 Madrugada10th Jan 2013 09:36:43 AM , Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
I'd say "Bounce it back to YKTTW" is cross-compatible with all three of the others, individually. The other three are mutually exclusive among themselves. Making cutting contingent on launch of the YKTTW would, I think, be unnecessary

edited 10th Jan '13 9:37:34 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
I'd say anything but cutting it would be too confusing to explain why a particular example should be included. I still don't think I've made clear how the Nobody's Princess example fits (in the first redefinition), but nobody has said that it doesn't either.

I believe whenever a TRS makes a YKTTW the YKTTW has to be finished before the TRS can be closed. I think it was lu127 who said so.
91 SeptimusHeap18th Jan 2013 02:10:26 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
And that's the reason I am saying nay to YKTTW'ing this.
Are we ready to close the crowner?
93 Madrugada22nd Jan 2013 01:54:53 PM , Relationship Status: In season
With Mod Hat On
It's been open for 12 days; "Cut" has a 5 to 1 ratio in favor, of 18 votes.

Calling the crowner with a final decision to cut, on the grounds that it is not clearly defined, and even the clearest possible definition is still subjective and will invite complaining.

edited 22nd Jan '13 1:56:28 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
94 SeptimusHeap22nd Jan 2013 01:55:47 PM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Ooh, a crowner call!

I'll immediately execute the decision.
95 Madrugada22nd Jan 2013 01:56:54 PM , Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
don't forget to clear as many as possible of the wicks.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
96 SeptimusHeap22nd Jan 2013 02:01:24 PM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
I already did that. There were only 8 after all.

Also added the discussion note and cutlisted both the main and Laonic/ page.
97 SeptimusHeap23rd Jan 2013 01:48:27 AM from Zurich, Switzerland , Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Page is gone. Requesting lock.
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.

Page Action: Matriarchy In Name Only
10th Jan '13 1:22:44 AM
What would be the best way to fix the page?
At issue:
Matriarchy In Name Only suffers from an insufficiently clear definition and was becoming "complaining about social structures you don't like".

Total posts: 97
1 2 3
4