Rework, possibly Cut List, "You fail X Forever"...:

Total posts: [494]
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20
Well, I no longer agree with that earlier Fast Eddie. He hadn't realized what the real problem was, yet.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

The Good Troper
Too late, that Fast Eddie has decided.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:19:47 AM by CTrombley

Mathematics Is A Language.
Well, he is imaginary now.

It really is time to fix the real problem, not just to try to label it out of existence.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

79 shimaspawn14th Nov 2010 10:25:07 AM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
So we're talking about changing them so that they're about when things are changed for the point of the plot. Not just random minor failures of things?
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
The Good Troper
I think the rapidity that our conception of the problem changed shows that more time is needed before we do any radical changes, to prevent damage before further realizations.
Mathematics Is A Language.
@shima: Not the writer's plot. Our plot to try to fit all together as if it makes sense.

@C.Trombley: Agreed. What we're going to do, why, and how should be rock solid before proceeding.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:28:24 AM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

I'm A Dirty Cowboy
I'm worried about the way this is going. Won't this route inevitably lead to X Goof being merged completely into Art Major X, if it's about errors being made either for conscious reasons or They Just Didn't Care for reasons of Rule of Cool etc.?

Not that that's necessarily bad, but it's essentially the same as a destruction of the tropes as they stand.


EDIT: [down] Cool, that proposal seems coherent enough to me.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:39:30 AM by mmysqueeant

The Good Troper
Alright, my proposal is this:

We should have an index of supertropes - of the kind that is now Artistic License - Indexes - that relate to differences between contemporary science and the world of fiction. These should include things like Art Major Physics (where rule of cool trumps reality), Minovsky Particle (where an inconsistency is consciously done and explored in narrative), Ghost in the Machine (as an example of works of fiction using ideas inconsistent with contemporary research, in an organized troped way) as well as pages - like Artistic License - Physics - to put inconsistencies that are not necessitated by the plot nor repeated throughout fiction. True individual authorial mistakes are not tropes, but if we collect them on a few neat pages they would be. The Crying tropes should be folded into these pages as they are redundant.

EDIT: What relationship should the Applied Phlebotinum tropes have ti this index? I say that they should be a supertrope of Minovsky Particle and within this index.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:41:07 AM by CTrombley

Mathematics Is A Language.
I'm down with most of that, except what is now PhysicsGoof should be Imaginary Physics, to get completely off the condemning merry go round, and that furthermore, all the X Goofs fit this mold as well, with the 'Imaginary' unifying conceit.

We haven't spoken the name of this thing that supplants You Fail Indexes, but Imaginary Science would be one of the items on it.

Phlebotinum will generally slot into one of the Imaginary disciplines.

edited 26th Apr '11 11:46:54 AM by Madrugada

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

The Good Troper
While I still think that Imaginary Physics implies a Minovsky Particle like scenario, I'm not so attached to the word goof that I won't abandon it.
Mathematics Is A Language.
86 Ironeye14th Nov 2010 10:49:33 AM from SoCal , Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
What about something like Faux Physics instead of Imaginary Physics? That might dodge the "imaginary" confusion.
I'm bad, and that's good. I will never be good, and that's not bad. There's no one I'd rather be than me.
87 RhymeBeat14th Nov 2010 10:51:52 AM from Eastern Standard , Relationship Status: In Lesbians with you
Bird mom
Faux X sounds a lot better for what the trope entails.
88 shimaspawn14th Nov 2010 10:52:59 AM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
Faux X does sound a bit better than imaginary.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
I'm A Dirty Cowboy
[up][up] and [up] Disagree.

Faux X sounds like subtropes of Dan Browned, i.e. the writer is pretending that it's been properly researched when it really hasn't.

Imaginary X, I see the problems with it. I want to see all the competing propositions next to each other before I decide.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:53:45 AM by mmysqueeant

Faux still sounds a bit condemning. Fiction Physics? Fictional Physics? Fictive Physics? Pretend Physics?

edited 14th Nov '10 10:57:08 AM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

I'm A Dirty Cowboy
Fictional X solves some of Imaginary X's problems, but again, that title sounds reeeeeeally close to Art Major X and doesn't necessarily convey the difference between the tropes.

EDIT: In my opinion.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:56:27 AM by mmysqueeant

92 shimaspawn14th Nov 2010 10:57:29 AM from Here and Now , Relationship Status: In your bunk
Fictional Physics isn't bad. I still like Like Physics Unless Noted if we're going that route though. People assume that Physics works how it does in the real world. When it doesn't in a story, then it's been noted and we take note of it. It's got no condemnation to it what so ever.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
Like Physics Until Noted is cumbersome. No concision, and the meaning isn't instantly clear.

edited 14th Nov '10 10:59:58 AM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

Faux already replaced "What do you mean its not" in Horrific and Symbolism. It stands for "played for x but not really"
I would prefer "Imaginary" over "Faux". "Faux" has the meaning "fake, but with pretension to being real", and has a negative connotation.

If we're going to allow things with negative connotation, we might as well keep "You Fail X Forever" or "X Does Not Work That Way."

If we aren't, then "Imaginary," while imperfect, is better than "Faux".

I think there is a bigger issue here, though. The whole matter of changing things to not be negative. Why, exactly, does it have so much emphasis (aside from Fast Eddy said so)?

Do we really imagine natter will go away if we talk about some tropes in a positive, rather than negative way? I mean, do you really think that someone reading a trope about wonderful imaginary physics, and all these creative writers who came up with their own zany laws of nature, won't feel the urge to find their favourite show in the list, and add justifying edits about how this show's science isn't really all imaginary, and how it's actually quite realistic, etc., etc.?

Also, I strongly dislike the idea that we have to make the wiki fluffy and soft and kind. Over-the-top criticism like the Darth Wiki may be too much, but not allowing things like "X does not work that way" for being too negative? Really? Bah.

Tropes may not be bad, but come on. Isn't this a bit over-the-top?
The Good Troper
How about bad meme titles? Title: Fucking Physics How Does It Work?

edited 14th Nov '10 11:02:40 AM by CTrombley

Mathematics Is A Language.
Nah. We outlast that sort of meme on a daily basis.

The reasons were already given. Negativity is a turn off in bulk. Just because a thing is popular to write doesn't make it a good read.

Fictional X is very clear, and we can do things with making believe it all fits into The Multiverse's 'reality.'

edited 14th Nov '10 11:10:15 AM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

"The reasons were already given." In the 21-page-long thread about The Scrappy? And, by you? Did most people agree with you? Or is everyone who disagrees automatically not thinking? "Negativity is a turn off in bulk." Is it? Citation needed. Well-humoured, non-over-the-top (or amusingly over-the-top, but not-in-a-mean-way) negativity can be amusing and attractive and appealing. "Just because a thing is popular to write doesn't make it a good read." No, but if a lot of people agree on something, you should at least consider that there may be some underlying reason, or that the fact that you disagree with the whole lot doesn't necessarily suggest that they are mindless sheeple, while you are absolutely correct.

I mean, hey, there's lots of cases where I've disagreed with the majority, and had to accept their decision, but even if I were the admin, I don't think I'd automatically respond to such situations by saying that the majority is obviously wrong, and vetoing their decision. (Well, unless people were suggesting something that would, I dunno, get TV Tropes in trouble with Google or something bad for an objective reason like that).

edited 14th Nov '10 11:20:41 AM by girlyboy

I still believe that Bizarro X would be good for a non-negative version, it implies that this is a mixed up interpretation of real science, but also implies what we are aiming for, that it should be acceptable in the fiction's own "bizarro world"

edited 14th Nov '10 11:15:45 AM by EternalSeptember

100 TotemicHero14th Nov 2010 11:22:12 AM from the next level
Not a bug!
Why are Fast Eddie's ideas beginning to sound like my original suggestion of the name "Acceptable Breaks From X" actually fits now? tongue
Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

Alternative Titles: You Failfix
Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the title will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative titles.
At issue:
We are looking for the correct pattern to replace the "You Fail X" titles.

Total posts: 494
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20