This is the thread we use to talk things over with people who have received a suspension notice. A lot of the time the notice goes out just so we can explain how seriously we take certain things, not because we want the person to feel bad and go away.
If you're suspended, give What to Do If You Are Suspended a read, then post here to begin your appeal. We try to respond to appeals in order via batch posts every few days. If a moderator has responded to your appeal, you will receive a notification in your private messages, even if you're suspended from PMs.
The Forum Rules
apply here.
Don'ts
- Don't be rude. Rule 1 applies here, too.
- Don't try to negotiate your suspension outside of this thread, such as by sending Private Messages to moderators or posting elsewhere. Such activity may be thumped or otherwise removed, and may warrant an additional suspension block if it keeps happening. All communications have to take place within this thread.
- Don't respond to other suspended users. This is a place for you to discuss your suspension, not others'.
- Don't post multiple times about your appeal if it hasn't been a few days since your last reply from us, since it makes it more difficult to compose responses. If you've posted, we're likely looking at it, and kindly request you to be more patient.
- Don't make another account to try and get around your suspension. This is called ban evasion and will get you bounced. (Again, read What to Do If You Are Suspended if you don't know what these words mean.)
Edited by Synchronicity on Jul 15th 2023 at 11:35:01 AM
~Fighteer
> There are two things to consider here. First is whether we want politically-focused edits on a wiki about pop culture.
Objection. The matter is not about if we want politically-focused edits. It is about if a page is allowed to point at authors political opinion expressed in the work. I fully agree, that discussing what opinion on the political questions is closer to the truth is a waste of time. Documenting the views expressed in a work, preferably confirmed by Word of God, is another matter entirely.
> We have discussion pages and private messages for a reason
Was there, did that. Put a relevant edit on the discussion page, PM's apparently didn't work in this case for some reason.
>Continuing the edit war doesn't do anybody any good.
Fully agree. It seems that a third party, preferably authorized by local gods of the internets should clarify the matter. Could you walk me through the appropriate procedures?
edited 27th Feb '17 7:54:02 AM by permeakra
Lost in Space
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
It is unclear to me what those bullet points underneath A Father to His Men contribute to the example. Besides the fact that they violate Example Indentation rules, the second bullet is about a maternal figure, which, while technically allowed by the trope, is also listed as a Deconstruction, which makes it seem as if the trope may not actually be getting used. Introducing the author's political views as a third bullet, however, is pure natter and contributes nothing of value.
I recognize the author, by the way. It's someone we had to ban, partly because of their ownership issues towards the articles for their fics, and partly because of their political views. Using the article as a platform to complain about them is, however, completely forbidden. Discuss what's in the work, not what the author believes. That's a basic component of the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment.
As for how to deal with these problems if the other troper won't participate in discussion, I already told you: Ask The Tropers.
Lastly, the article is rife with Zero Context Examples and needs a good scrubbing.
edited 27th Feb '17 8:13:28 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
It is unclear to me what those bullet points underneath A Father to His Men contribute to the example.
Um. Let me expand here. The fic's Celestia genuinely cares about her subjects and act attempts to act as a motherly figure, trying to create social security networks (which seems to be in agreement with the trope?) In-fic It leads to blowouts. (which I consider a deconstruction) It also is an expression of the authors views. While the fic's Celly definitely tries to be this, I'm not sure if another example of the trope (Ted aka Darth Vulcan) counts. I didn't see it, but well, it may be a matter of opinion.
How we should proceed from here?
> Using the article as a platform to complain about them is, however, completely forbidden. Discuss what's in the work, not what the author believes.
I'm sorry for being annoying, but please, clarify the official standing on the following situation:
A person is known to have a strong political opinion (in this particular case Realtiy Check) and it is in fact pointed on the page about the person (yep, the page about RC does say that he has strong political views and use his works to preach them)
A work by this person is used as a platform for political satire, to express and preach the person's views. In this particular case (The Rise Of Darth Vulcan, the part I refer as Cirrus&Hilltop debacle) we have a strong attack on the governmental social programs: social security (via invoking Orphanage of Fear if I recall correctly) and... let's name it social guidance (Cirrus&Hilltop, the two cities in the fic, were designed to get as much social grants as possible, which instead of creating a harmonious community led to a community of egoistic rule lawyers)
It was confirmed by Word of God that it WAS an expression of the author's political standing.
Should the fact that it is an expression of the author's views be commented/noted anywhere? May it appear if it is relevant? In what context? Or maybe every notion of the author having any political views should be erased from every page?
As for personal vendetta, I repeat: I don't care enough. If there are people I don't like on a site, I simply avoid them.
edited 27th Feb '17 9:15:55 AM by permeakra
Lost in Space
I don't know anything about the author or their work, other than what I've encountered in the course of adjudicating some of these situations. What I can say is that the kind of commentary I saw on that article is not what we want on our wiki, violating several of our rules. It will stay removed, not least because the entire mod staff is heartily sick of drama over pony fics.
Edited to add: The author of that fic may be a vile human being, but the wiki will not be party to attempts to discuss his political points of view.
Now, as to whether the example of Celestia as a deconstruction of A Father to His Men is applicable, it sounds like it might be, but it needs to be indented properly. That's something that can be worked out in discussion.
As for dealing with other tropers, I'm afraid that "avoiding" them won't work here. We work collaboratively on this wiki, and that means facing our disagreements.
edited 27th Feb '17 9:43:54 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
throwback
@Septimus Heap: Got it! What should I do to fix this?
Currently writing something. Currently procrastinating.
Fighteer, I'm sorry for being annoying, but you are avoiding the question.
It also seems, that you misunderstood what I'm trying to do here. The site is not mine, I'm a guest here. I plainly ask how should the things be done. There is nothing personal here, neither is much emotional investment: I edit pretty rarely and I fully admit that my edits are of poor quality because English is my second language. The latter is why I edit rarely.
I also don't care enough to invest emotionally into other people over internets, at least unless I see a nickname for several years continuously on everyday basis. I admit that people are different and have different values, and I try to stay neutral in my edits just to avoid unneeded conflicts most of the time, but that's it. I try to act polite, but I reserve a right to think whatever I find appropriate about other people. I plainly can't be warm and friendly with a person I know nothing about, especially if the person in question acts in a way I find unappealing. The best I can do is to try to be polite and that's it. For that matter, this is my first conflict in how long? four years? AFAIK, it is the first conflict I got into on this site. And I was here for at least a year here before I got registered and made my first edit.
I understood your standing on the particular matter: the comment is staying removed and the entry must be reworked.
But the more broad matter remains.
- Fact: The fact that Reality Check has strong political views and preaches them in his works is noted on the page about him, so it is apparently OK.
- Question: Is it OK to point at such preaching on the pages about his works? In particular, if there was a Word of God on it?
- If it's not, than shouldn't we remove notions of such preaching from OTHER pages, like the page about him personally?
- If it is, how it should be made ? I can imagine two ways: a bloated Author Tract entry, or minor notes under another tropes.
Edited to clarify: Please, note: I DO NOT judge Reality Check for his opinion nor I try to discuss his opinion. I merely document that he has one and expresses it. In my opinion it is fair.
Please, clarify the official standing on the matter in particular (i.e about Reality Check and the Rise of Darth Vulcan) and preferably in general (about people in general preaching opinions on unprovable/subjective topics) and I promise to respect it. I'm not trying to change it, I just want to know about it.
I also promise to bring up conflicting edits to Ask the Tropers when I find my opinion differing from that of the editors, since this seems the right instrument for the task I was not aware about before.
edited 27th Feb '17 10:49:26 AM by permeakra
Zzzzzzzzzz
If I may jump in?
That Reality Check inserts his political views into his work is germane to what we're interested in doing here: trope creative works. We have tropes for just that sort of thing: Bias Steamroller, when a critic does it, Author Filibuster and Author Tract when the creator of a work of fiction does it.
What we are not interested in giving space to is debating the value or acceptability of those views, with one exception: when the validity or acceptability question is raised within the work by other characters with the work. We have tropes for that, as well: Jerkass Has a Point, and What the Hell, Hero?, right off the top of my head. In that case, we allow examples listing when the other characters do it. It's still not acceptable to weigh in with your own opinion of whether they're right or not.
edited 27th Feb '17 10:33:09 AM by Madrugada
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
Understood. Wasn't intentionally trying to do that. If unsuspended, I will go back and review my old edits with that in mind before doing anything else and try to keep a handle on it in the future.
If you choose not to lift it, I understand. It's your site, and I apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks for hearing me out.
~Madrugada
> We have tropes for just that sort of thing
Hm. Let me put it more formally, if you please?
It seems to me that noting authors position is acceptable in entries on the tropes indexed under Creator Standpoint Index and Criticism Tropes when applicable if it is done without discussion of the opinion itself outside reality of the work (discussion within reality of the work is still acceptable) . Is it so? May I act on assumption that it is an official position or at least a general consensus within the moderator community?
edited 27th Feb '17 11:25:48 AM by permeakra
Zzzzzzzzzz
@permeakra: Yes, that's the official position. It sounds like we're all on the same page about handling author's personal opinions and their works.
I'll lift the suspension; please go back and clean up any other pages you know of like this, and thanks for being willing to solve this.
edited 27th Feb '17 1:41:09 PM by Madrugada
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
I've read the image rules and I will only upload images if the images already on the page are that bad and low quality. I promise to respect the images on this site, though.
Lost in Space
- If an image already exists, regardless of its quality, you should start an Image Pickin' thread to replace it.
- If an image already exists, and there is a commented note stating that it was selected by Image Pickin', then you should leave it alone.
- If an article does not have an image, and there is no note stating that it was deemed not to have one by Image Pickin', then you may freely add one. Image Pickin' is still recommended if you want to get feedback.
- When adding an image, try to make sure that it fits our guidelines, or it'll probably get changed in Image Pickin'.
Got it?
edited 27th Feb '17 1:54:31 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Lost in Space
~YT45: I take issue with the "not deliberate" part. You are very clearly typing the words into the edit window, so it's not like you did it by accident. Most of the things you added were cleaned up by other tropers, so there probably won't be much for you to remove. What I'd like to know is that you will not add political natter in the future.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Lost in Space
~NVPOWER: I wanted you to repost the PM you sent to me in the topic, not just reply vaguely in it. That said, your PM indicates that you understand the issue, so I'll release your suspension.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
From now on, I will do an Image Pickin regardless of how bad the picture is.
Lost in Space
Dear Eris, there's economical writing and then there's not actually addressing the points under discussion. I think you'll be back soon, but I'll go ahead and release your suspension. Sink or swim, I guess.
I meant that I didn't think I was doing that, or that it sounded agenda-driven. Obviously I was wrong, call it bias-driven myopia on my part. Like I said, I'm willing to look back at my history with an eye to that, try to identify it outside of my own biases, and not repeat it in the future. If I don't recognize it and thus don't see what not to do, then I will voluntarily refrain from further editing, because I really don't want to be a problem. In any case, I will also try to avoid any potentially controversial topics. If I screw up, I'll accept the consequences for it.
I hope this is acceptable to you guys. If not, then that's your decision to make, and mine to respect. There will be no hard feelings on this end.
Lost in Space
~YT45: Well, we'd certainly prefer to hear that from you than belligerence or apologia. So sure, you can edit again. Just keep it cool and we'll be fine.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fighteer: I wasn't removing an English translation. I was removing a term very few people use to refer to the 2.5th gen of the franchise that for some reason people elsewhere blame me for making up in the first place. Still, making the same change two years apart doesn't really sound like an edit war to be banned over.
Lost in Space
Well, could you discuss it with the people who think it should stay on the page, please?
I think I understand where I went wrong with the trope editing. I am sorry about that, and I realize it was not a bright idea to try to negotiate with the main troper (without actually negotiating at all).
~Syrika: You may want to take a break from TLP work there. Also, why did you ignore the messages about example indentation?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Lost in Space
~Waggish Pony: It's somewhat difficult to parse your language. Readding those Unfortunate Implications examples on YMMV.Seventh Heaven was grossly inappropriate, constituting both edit warring and a violation of our policy for UI examples, which mandates citations. Further, you seem to have a serious bias over the show that you insist on putting into every article about it.
Given that we previously suspended you for editing issues on that very same page, I think we're going to have to call it quits. This suspension is going to be permanent.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
throwback
~/@Septimus Heap I didn't mean to, sorry! I read it and just didn't respond to it.
Looking at the Example Indentation page, I understand where I went wrong with lone sub-bullets, and I'm pretty sure that I recognize the place in Temporarily Exaggerated Trait that I didn't fix, despite that I should have known something was wrong. Somebody else has edited over that page since then.
If I do get editing privileges restored, I'll stay out of TLPs and let other people decide whether to cut or fix mine. Though if they do decide to keep them, I'll be there to help with crosswicking.
Currently writing something. Currently procrastinating.
~Syrika: Two only tangentially related issues. One, you've been using improper Example Indentation on Temporarily Exaggerated Trait despite 5 messages about it. Lone subbullets are never OK. Secondhandly, folks in the YKTTW Crash Rescue thread
have raised issues with your TLP launches The Lightfooted and Temporarily Exaggerated Trait have description issues, with the former not clearly explaining what it is about and examples not helping and the second having an one sentence description.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman