07:43:47 AM Nov 20th 2014
I'd like to know what my fellow editors think about adding Jerk Sue in the list of examples and for which characters this trope fit. It's a major point of debate for fans whether numerous winners like Melanie (overlapping with Villain Sue) and Jackie are this so Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment might apply for them. However, a year ago, I posted a rant about Skylar being a Jerk Sue. SWSU-Master pretty much agreed: http://swsu-master.deviantart.com/journal/forum/1869516/?offset=60#comments. I think it's safe to list him as one?
09:00:56 AM Dec 3rd 2014
I'm inclined to agree. In the comments on the first season finale on Smackjeeves, SWSU states, "Sky was actually the first SFC character I had ever made, and existed long before it started. I wanted to do a Survivor Comic with Sky as the winner, but I needed a reason to include a Fan Character, so thats [sic] how the comic was created." Basically, the first season was built around him winning.
04:35:30 PM Jun 13th 2013
How is Wrecker destroying Krauss's immunity idol NOT a Moral Event Horizon? Every time I add it in, someone deletes it. I would like an actual reason for it too, not " Oh, that was just strategy". Bullshit, he outright stated it was a dick move, knew the consequences, but didn't care. It's even treated as one in-universe! Sorry if I sound out of hand, this just bugs me.
10:44:58 AM Mar 3rd 2015
edited by DestroDertell
edited by DestroDertell
Now that I think about it, it probably isn't. Throughout the season, swsu pulled no punches in making the point that Wrecker is a complete asshole by kicking dogs left and right but he sure as hell isn't the only character who has blatantly cheated in SFC, nor is he the first one; Minerva's ("bye bye little missy" vote) and Violet's (burning down the IC in SFCAS) cheating are arguably even worse because they weren't penalized for it. Given that every other examples involve someone causing issues sticking outside the show (like killing or breaking legs), burning HI Is doesn't fit in.
04:13:38 PM Feb 22nd 2013
Speaking as someone who doesn't like edit wars, I'd like to get this little issue involving Artemis resolved. My opinion is that, regardless of the argument on the comic's DeviantArt page, Artemis hasn't been shown to be much of a Mary Sue in the comic proper. SWSU-Master hasn't treated her in any really special way, so she's just another character to me. Can everyone on both sides agree to be reasonable and try to work this out? I don't want to have to get the moderators involved.
04:56:52 PM Feb 22nd 2013
my main problem with this edit war is that the person who keeps deleting it is her owner. If more people believe artemis isn't a mary sue, I'm fine with deleting it.
09:21:40 PM Feb 22nd 2013
Thanks, Slicer. I appreciate this. You do have very good points. Tailslover does seem overprotective, not wanting to let bad things happen to Artemis and taking criticism of her poorly. However, I don't know if those points apply to Artemis as written by SWSU-Master. If you disregard who created her and only pay attention to her as the author writes her, is she still a Sue?
09:48:45 PM Feb 22nd 2013
Honestly? If you're counting just SWSU's writing, I think it's too early. The third episode just finished. I vote to keep it deleted for now, and in a few episodes make another decision based on what she does. agreed?
10:19:22 PM Feb 22nd 2013
Agreed. It is rather early to judge her. For now, innocent until proven guilty. If the comic's portrayal of her does turn out to be Sue-ish, I'm all for listing it; if not, we'll leave it. Anyone else have opinions, or are we good?
08:24:53 PM Feb 23rd 2013
I agree with this, and I apologize for starting this whole thing in the first place. Not one of my better moments, I'll admit.