Main Everybody Knew Already Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

11:55:58 AM Jun 13th 2013
Quick question: what was wrong with the previous trope definition? The edit reason listed on the history page says the new definition is more streamlined (which it is), but in my opinion the previous one was straight-up brilliant and a heck of a lot of fun to read. Is this something that I should take to a TRS discussion?

For the record, the old description:
You've got a secret. A deep, dark, Earth-shattering, reality-bending, madness-inducing secret. Something so secret that you have to kill people just in case they do know it. It's a secret of massive proportions. They don't have a classification for how secret it is. The Men in Black would be astonished to learn it. The Ancient Conspiracy? They don't have a clue. It's not even on the Internet.

And then, for truly life-threatening reasons, you have to reveal the secret. You set it up carefully, bringing proof because, I mean, something so secret it's not like anyone will believe you when you spill the beans, right? You take a deep breath, and blurt it out.

There's no shock. There's no surprise. There's mild annoyance when your audience says "What, that's it? I thought you were going to tell us something we didn't already know."

Your deep, dark, Earth-shattering, reality-bending, madness-inducing secret? Oh, they knew about it. They just didn't mention it because they were being polite. Or humoring you. Or, worst of all, they didn't know you were trying to keep it secret.

It is at this point you might want to revisit the "Kill them all if they find out" strategy out of annoyance.

See also Transparent Closet, which is one of the most common manifestations of this. Also often applies to Secret Relationship. Contrast the Open Secret, where even the secret-keeper is aware that everyone knows.
12:34:11 PM Jun 13th 2013
If I read the Trope Repair thread correctly, the issue was with tropers using this trope when they meant Open Secret. The rename/description rewrite is meant to make the differences more distinct.
01:37:48 PM Jun 13th 2013
Sorry — I'm not talking about the changed title (which I think is perfect and good), but the change to the text from May 28th. Was that prompted by a TRS thread as well?
12:52:19 AM Jun 14th 2013
09:47:00 AM Jun 14th 2013
Well, damn. I seriously would have contested that if I'd been watching the page at the time.
10:06:25 PM Jul 22nd 2013
Example As Thesis is discouraged, and that's a classic example of how it can go wrong.
08:23:17 AM Jun 13th 2013
11:15:51 PM Nov 4th 2011
edited by Fanra
I removed from Israeli nuclear weapons, "The United States, the ones who supplied the weapons in the first place, similarly deny it."

There is no proof the United States ever supplied Israel nuclear weapons. There is plenty of proof of the opposite, that the USA was kept in the dark about it, and that Israel actually stole nuclear materials from the USA.

See for more on the subject.
12:42:52 PM Jun 13th 2013
In fact, there's much stronger evidence that France and Israel collaborated on nuclear development — so that when France tested its first warhead in the Sahara desert "there were toasts drunk in Tel Aviv and Paris."
03:11:52 PM Apr 24th 2011
Is there a trope for the opposite of this—something that the speaker mentions casually, thinking that the person they're addressing already knew that, and it turns out to be a shocking Reveal?
01:06:49 PM Jun 14th 2013
The closest we seem to have would be Accidental Public Confession, Type 2.
Collapse/Expand Topics