Another proposal to change how TRS and Image Pickin' work

This is focused on IP, but I bet TRS has a similar issue.

Recently, Eddie changed the way the flow of new threads into IP and TRS is managed: instead of a hard cap on the number of threads that can be open at once, threads must be approved by a moderator before they are opened. I propose that the criteria for approving threads be re-evaluated and probably refocused, because I think it's drifting in the wrong direction.

More specifically, I think the decision whether or not a thread should be opened should be based on whether the thread is valid, not based on a value judgement about the suggestion. That is, if the "valid reasons for making an IP thread" are followed, the thread should be opened, even if the suggestion itself is manifestly stupid.

I think threads should only be declined if they fail to meet "good workshop thread" standards, like not having a suggestion in the OP for something that has been discussed before. Bad suggestions will be shot down by other tropers (including mods) after the thread is opened, without the need for a unilateral decision made by a single person that it's bad, which sends several undesirable messages including "the mods/admins don't trust tropers to make a good decision about this" and "on a scale with democracy on one end and tyranny on the other, TVT is closer to tyranny". There have been threads declined in the recent past where A) if I were the one who posted it, I'd probably be justifiably irritated that it wasn't opened, since I followed all the rules and suggested some images that clearly I think are good, and B) a much stronger "nope not gonna do this" message would have been sent by many people discussing it, proper-like, than one person deciding it shouldn't be discussed at all.

Some examples of "bad" (IMO) declines: [1], [2], [3]

Some examples of "good" (IMO) declines: [4], [5], [6], [7]

edited 17th Jul '14 3:10:59 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

The whole reason for vetting the threads instead of just letting any thread that's made be opened is that once a thread is opened for discussion, we have to wait for consensus to close it. Or at least we need to wait for it to go inactive long enough to warrant being clocked, then locked. That's heading us right back in the direction we came from — lots of open threads that nobody gives a crap about.

To cover your "bad" declines:

The reason for #1 ( Cute Monster Girl) in the OP boils down to "I like these better." Yes, they're more monstrous, but they aren't as cute.

The reason for #2: (Ridiculously Average Guy) As Eddie pointedout, that's quite pedantic. Additionally,we aren't the World Fact Almanac, we're about tropes, and tropewise, mediawise, for much of the world, the "Ridiculously Average Guy is not Chinese.

The Reason for #3: Ok, that one was purely subjective. I probably would have opened it, if I'd gotten to it first. But going up against Fast Eddie on something he thinks is funny? You're gonna lose.

edited 18th Jul '14 6:40:15 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

I think offering a bad suggestion is the same as not offering a suggestion, which is the minimal you should do for an IP thread on a page with a working image. I also hold that the suggestion should be clearly better than the current, as otherwise it's just about how many people like what image more. I don't think being pedantic about the trope definition helps either, if the current still adequately illustrates the trope.

Also, I'd have voted for the current Cute Monster Girl pic anyway, since I think that's one of the best on the site.

Check out my fanfiction!

Same. In that case, I think it would have sent a clearer message for the suggestions to have been rejected by dozens of people instead of just one.

I agree with the statement that a bad suggestion is functionally the same as no suggestion, my problem is a single person deciding whether the suggestion is good or bad. IP does not have the same problem of being "full" that TRS has, though, and if there are "lots of open threads that nobody gives a crap about" it's not really a big deal.

Interesting that Madrugada is defending the practice of not opening threads due to subjective reasoning; 100% of her declines were for objective reasons ;) And of course Eddie can and should do whatever he wants to his site, but the proposal is meant as a matter of policy, not criticism of admin fiat.

edited 17th Jul '14 8:34:11 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.

I agree that funny is purely subjective. One person's funny is another's confusing so it would be nice to have an opportunity to discuss it before closing. That seems like a small request.

Thank you, but all that really indicates to me is that while a subjective reason may be the first one that springs to mind, there's usually an objective one lurking there somewhere.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

TRS frowns on coming in with a predetermined "suggestion" at all, so I'm not sure what a "similar issue" would even be. Even if someone may be way off on an "unclear description", "ambiguous name", "duplicate trope" or "really a Useful Note" thread, but only on a factual basis and not a procedural one, the fact that they did make that mistake means others could too and there must be something to discuss. You have to establish an actual problem to have a TRS thread; you can't just say "I like this one better", even if "better" means "better according to the guidelines".

The relevant part of the Image Pickin' policies reads:

I might want to add something there saying that mods can reserve the right to open these sorts of threads with a clock already imposed on them if they suspect the thread doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of going anywhere. But even that assumes that this is even a problem among threads not closed by Fast Eddie, and when it comes to that: The fact that two of your three "bad" declines were by Fast Eddie should have reminded you that that message has been well established several times over.

Speaking for myself, I probably would've opened the Pac-Man thread...the current is slightly amusing but only slightly.

To the general topic: If I'm not 100% certain on whether or not an IP thread should be open, I pitch the issue to the rest of the staff. I tend to avoid opening threads for TRS strictly because for the most part I really only participate there to do scut work and throw out the occasional name suggestion. Other mods are much more familiar with the ins and outs of that system and are better suited to making those evaluations.

edited 18th Jul '14 6:26:20 AM by Willbyr

I would have declined to open the IP thread for Ridiculously Average Guy as well, and for much the same reason Eddie gave, although I would have worded it differently. In fact I would have worded it pretty much the way I did in my post in this thread.

And that one is a good example of what I meant by "Under a subjective reason, there's often an objective one." He said "don't be pedantic", which sounds subjective — one person's "accurate" is another person's "pedantic". I would have said, "In Real Life the Average guy may be Chinese, but that's not what the page is about. Tropewise, mediawise, for much of the world, the 'Average Guy' is Caucasian". We're both saying the same thing, really.

Morgan: yes, while the fact that somebody made the mistake is an indicator that it's possible, we do want the opening posts of TRS threads to identify what they think is the problem and support that there actually is a problem with some evidence solider than "I thought it meant" or "I don't think it's a good name". That's one reason that TRS threads are, (to me, at least) easier to make the call on; either they've supported their claim that the page is broken or they haven't, or if they haven't included support, it's fairly easy to look at the page's "related" link and see how well it's performing or skim through the examples on the page and see if there's a pattern of consistent misuse or difference between the definition and the examples. Renames are about the only TRS subject where coming in with a suggestion isn't encouraged. If the OP says that they think the trope is being misused, a good OP will identify the type of misuse (confusion with another trope, shoehorning, poor description, whatever) and suggest a solution; if they think it's not thriving, a suggestion of how to bolster it's health (merge, rewrite, rename, needs a crosswicking binge, again, whatever) is part of a good OP. And so on.

edited 18th Jul '14 6:57:44 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

So would you guys have opened the thread for Knight in Sour Armor: [1]?

^Hypothetically (since I am not a moderator) I would prolly not have opened it with a request to offer a suggestion, since it was through IP twice already.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Personally, I wouldn't have. The first reason given is basically "I don't like it" — because "It's a pun rather than in illustration of the trope." That alone wouldn't be enough for me to decline, but he follows it up by saying, and this is a direct quote: "I don't know how the trope's idea could be easily conveyed with a picture,".

So, essentially, he's saying "Take down the current image because it's a pun/joke image, even though I don't have any suggestions to replace it with, and have doubts that it can even be replaced."

Again, this is one where Eddie's reason as stated is subjective, and mine would have been essentially the same reason, but stated more objectively:

"The only reason you give for wanting it removed is that it's a pun, but you acknowledge yourself that it may not be possible to illustrate this trope in any way. You only offer a vague idea of a possible replacement — "there may be something in Batman that will work." Declining to open."

^ Interesting. I hadn't checked to see if it had been through OP more than once, keeping that image. If I had checked, the message would have been shorter, and pretty much exactly what Septimus said: "IP has already confirmed this as the page image twice. Don't make another thread about it without a concrete suggestion."

edited 18th Jul '14 10:45:21 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

I probably wouldn't have opened that one either.

I should have noted that my position is self-admittedly at odds with the official position of the wiki. I know of one time when one troper's confusion (mine) wasn't enough evidence, in my mind, of a potential broader confusion, but that was an extreme case where I confused one snowclone family for another... and the thread was still taken seriously even after I tried to clear that up.

That said, I'm not sure we really disagree here; the rest of your response boils down to "TRS is more about establishing a problem, not proposing a solution". Even your cases where "suggestions are encouraged" - and I'd argue that even in those cases they aren't vital - the OP is really only making a suggestion as just another participant in the thread, albeit one who gets to jump in before anyone else has even weighed in on the problem. There is no TRS thread that wouldn't have been started if the OP didn't have a suggestion; there is no such thing as a continuum where a page or group of pages can be moved to a more ideal place on the continuum even if their current spot is okay, whether we're talking about their names or anything else. That's why I focused on the one element of the Image Pickin' guidelines that does fit that "continuum" concept, even if I'm not sure my specific solution would be best.

No, we aren't disagreeing at all, and you're completely correct that in TRS it's more important to identify the (perceived) problem clearly in the OP than it is to suggest a solution to it. But having some idea of what might fix it and why does tend to shorten the "flailing around try to figure things out" period that many TRS's used to go through, especially the "Not Thriving" ones.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

^^ You're right. In TRS proposing a solution in the OP is discouraged, whereas in IP proposing a solution in the OP is encouraged and in some cases mandatory. Thus my opposition to rejecting a thread because one person thinks the solution isn't good enough doesn't really apply to TRS, and there have been some good arguments made that what I am opposing is useful and productive in IP, anyway.

I am glad we are talking about it though :)

edited 19th Jul '14 2:55:22 PM by rodneyAnonymous

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.