Ambiguous Name: Because Im Jonesy

As far as a rename, Imposter Encounters Original is the shortest I can come up with that gets the point across without being a dialogue title.

edited 31st Aug '15 8:48:04 AM by NativeJovian

claps

• Original Unmasks Imposter
• Imposter Disguise Original Reveal
• Disguised With The Original

The most succinct we can manage is <noun> <verb> <noun>, because there's two characters in the trope. We can put the disguised individual first, or the imitated individual first.

edited 31st Aug '15 8:04:43 AM by crazysamaritan

The Original doesn't always unmask the Imposter. Sometimes even after this scenario they pick the wrong one. Or the imposter manages to cover it up. Read the definition, this isn't a reveal trope. This can be the two of them running into one another alone in a dark alley right before the imposter replaces the original. I like Imposter Encouters Original.

edited 31st Aug '15 8:18:59 AM by shimaspawn

Yeah, this trope even covers things like this. and the scene after with each one saying shoot the other one.

edited 31st Aug '15 11:12:19 AM by Memers

...

First line: "When an imposter is spotted" with a pothole to Spot the Imposter. It later suggests that this can be subverted with a "pretend you're the mirror" trick, but currently it is a reveal trope.

for Imposter Encounters Original. It's clear enough.

The examples don't seem to match the usage and that Pot Hole in context of the whole page seems like whoever wrote the page only read the trope title. The description needs a rewrite for clarity.

+1 for Imposter Encounters Original

If I reword that in my head, I think I understand what you mean. Some misuse also needs purging.

Let's clarify the definition before we trim the fat.

The trope seems to be saying two different things: One, that the trope's about the impostor being spotted because they happen to run into an individual (in other words, that it's a reveal trope), and two, that it's possible for people with good disguise to trick the individual into thinking they're actually a mirror image (in other words, that it's not necessarily a reveal trope). The latter seems to be describing a possible subversion of the trope's intended purpose as a reveal trope (as evident in the laconic and the fact it's the only part of the trope which states that). Thus, I believe we should either remove that paragraph or rephrase it to something like this:

edited 1st Sep '15 4:44:17 AM by KarjamP

I'm pretty sure it's about the imposter running into the individual, but a clever enough imposter can trick the original into not realising there is an imposter. Alternately, this scenario often takes place in private with the imposter then taking the original's place. In this case the deception has been revealed to the audience, but not to any of the characters.

The trope doesn't say any of what you suggest at the moment (other than the fact that "clever impostors can trick others into thinking they're a mirror image"). Could the problem, in this instance, be that the trope's a bit too specific?

The core of the trope is "person disguised as someone runs into the person they're disguised as". Everything else is fluff that amounts to a "see also".

Actually, the trope, as it current stands, is the person being exposed as faked because they happen to have bumped into the real deal. Heck, even the laconic says so:

Some of the people here, including few of the mods, are interpreting the trope more broadly than it actually is at the moment. That is why I'm saying the problem could be that the trope's a bit too specific.

edited 2nd Sep '15 4:59:53 AM by KarjamP

Exactly why my name suggestions were being accused of "too narrow".

We might re-define the trope to be "any encounter between the two", but the original trope definition is "disguise fails because the impostor met the person they were disguised as".

It also lists this is part of the definition though:

The definition itself is offering several different scenarios in order. It's just really jumbled and badly written. It makes the most sense to make this broad enough to cover all the uses of it, especially since otherwise we're stuck making a new supertrope from scratch when this is already being used as it in the wicks and the examples.

The "imposter pretending to be a mirror" sounds like the author was shoehorning in a similar trope for the hell of it. While there is some overlap between Because I'm Jonesy and Mirror Routine, the latter doesn't always expose the imposter, and there are other ways for imposters to "win," as it were.

In addition to the badly needed rename, that paragraph should be rewritten or nuked, tbh.

It was there from the start though so it could simply be that the author was just a terrible writer. We already know they were terrible at trope naming.

In general though, we get better trope usage if we make the supertropes rather than narrow subtropes.

edited 2nd Sep '15 9:50:47 AM by shimaspawn

I agree there and we should list and maybe soft split the specific scenarios when an Imposter Encounters Original

• Imposter convinces others that the original is fake
• Mirror Routine
• They fight, which requires Greenscreening or lots of body doubles.
• 'He's the fake' 'not me you idiot him!' routine vid
• Imposter runs or is foiled

and so on.

edited 2nd Sep '15 9:59:56 AM by Memers

Here's a potential writeup of the Super-Trope:

Here's a potential writeup of the original trope:

Hooked in a crowner for the supertrope name. The current name got a rename consensus so it won't be used for anything other than a redirect.

I don't get where we are going with this. Are we trying to make former Because I'm Jonesy into a supertrope?

No, we're renaming it because it's massively mis/underused. Definition is staying the same. We're just trying to get it more visibility.

edited 6th Nov '15 4:04:01 PM by shimaspawn