TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Trope Repair Shop and Image Pickin Problem

Go To

CrypticMirror Cryptic Mirror from Scotland Since: Jan, 2001
#1: Dec 21st 2010 at 4:48:33 AM

We have a problem on the site. Specifically with two fora mentioned. Most of the users of this site don't come onto the forums, generally because they are pretty happy with the way it runs and have no inclination to start poking at things. But we have a core of tropers are thirty or so who actively try to change stuff for reasons that generally boil down to "we don't like this"(we have a particularly egregious[1] example just recently when a newly launched trope was dragged into the TRS simply because they didn't like its name with no attempt to let the trope succeed or fail on its own merits, now there is a dog in the manger approach) and it is nearly always the same group that post this stuff. In a self fulfilling prophecy they propose a change, and then the same core support the change, and then a crowner goes up, which (miracle of miracles) generally results in a mandate for change of around 20-30 votes.

I asked on Ask The Tropers the other day for the amount of users and Fast Eddie gave it as somewhere around the 400,000 mark. So the question is, how can such a small group claim any sort of mandate for change on such small amounts of votes? I propose a new system for changing trope names, unless the proposal for change exceeds 100 votes then no change occurs. This rebalances things to take account of the people who don't frequent the fora because they don't have problem with the way it is. It does mean when there genuinely is a problem then change will occur, because there have been instances where over 100people voted, but means that this core of editors (who seem to want a more bland Other Wiki style) cannot enforce change.

Something has to change because as it stands trope repair and image pickin is being abused for an agenda for change for changes sake.

[1]For those playing the drinking game, that is two shots.

edited 21st Dec '10 4:57:37 AM by CrypticMirror

blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#2: Dec 21st 2010 at 5:18:26 AM

I question your numbers. At a guess I would say there are several hundred people who regularly discuss subjects on the right side of the forum.

Not every person discusses every subject.

Cidolfas Since: Jan, 2001
#3: Dec 21st 2010 at 6:45:40 AM

And not every trope is popular enough to get people interested enough to vote. The reason we have crowners is because people are welcome to vote against as well as voting for something, and for some crowners the number of votes, total, can be less than 15 or 20.

The simple fact is that the people who visit these forums are the ones who care enough about the site to do something about it. The other visitors don't, and we're not going to sit on our hands and wait for them to show up before doing anything.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#4: Dec 21st 2010 at 6:50:58 AM

[up] This. The silent majority can vote if it wants to. If it doesn't vote, it has no say. That's how democracy works.

These types of general sour grapes complaining threads never go anywhere. If you have a problem with a specific rename proposal, discuss it in that thread. Locking.

edited 21st Dec '10 6:51:49 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#5: Dec 21st 2010 at 7:53:31 AM

Okay, on request I'll unlock this and let it go. I resent the implication that there's an inner circle making arbitrary and predetermined decisions on the rest of the wiki. The rest of the wiki could become involved if it chose. Since it doesn't choose, it becomes irrelevant to the process.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#6: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:06:15 AM

I share Fighteer's resentment about the implied Inner Circle. If there is an Inner Circle making decisions by fiat why don't things get done and changed a hell of a lot faster? And where do all these new people keep coming from?

I also would like to say (I know this is heresy to some, but there it is) this place is about tropes. Not cancer research, not famine relief, not world peace. Tropes.

So keeping a sense of perspective is nice.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:12:48 AM by blackcat

CrypticMirror Cryptic Mirror from Scotland Since: Jan, 2001
#7: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:11:26 AM

I have a problem with the rename process as a whole. And I was told specifically by Fast Eddie to raise it here.

Like it or not there is a group who decide change (a resented truth does not cease to be a truth, although it does become one which is harder to accept). It is nearly always the same people who propose the change, then the same people discuss, and often a crowner is introduced without even the option of the status quo. The change is decided and imposed. Now intentional or not, that isn't healthy. It leaves a lot of people disenfranchised. My proposal isn't that we stop changing things when there is a problem, just that we raise the bar to ensure that things that aren't a problem don't get changed simply because of an in-group preference. By building in a barrier to demonstrate a certain level of feeling it means that personal whims can be removed in favour of actual problem pages. If 100 people vote for a change then we can sure there is need for, if less then we can safely presume its just a personal quirk by a few people. As I understand it there is supposed to be a burden of proof in showing that a page is problem, but that burden of proof is too low.

One final thing. When I first raised this issue, I did point out that it was going to be shouted down on the forums, because the very place that is the source of the problem is where we have to go to raise it. That it would encounter hostility, derision, and be dismissed virtually out of hand, its like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas as the old proverb says. The fact the thread got locked down so quickly just demonstrates that there is a bais in favour of the forum status quo. The fact that as Fighteer pointed out, albeit in disparaging terms, these so-called "sour grapes" threads keep appearing means there is a problem, people are feeling ignored.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:17:02 AM by CrypticMirror

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#8: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:18:26 AM

Please identify a specific occasion when a rename or image picking proposal went through, in your opinion, without sufficient debate and/or input from the troper community at large. I should point out, as has been mentioned before, that the majority of TRS topics fail to arrive at a consensus for action.

This generalized complaining with bonus ad hominem attack on TRS posters is worthless for debate. That's why I locked the thread. It looks more like whining that your favorite trope got renamed than anything that's actually a problem.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:20:29 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#9: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:19:20 AM

If people do not choose to participate how are they disenfrachised?

I post on these forums on a regular basis and my ideas and suggestions are shouted down or ignored at least half the time. So what? That is how the collaborative process works. Especially when there are this many egos who really do not have to bother with the conventions of courtesy that F2F interactions dictate.

Other than starting this thread what are the actions that you propose to take to alleviate the problem?

edited 21st Dec '10 8:21:37 AM by blackcat

Nohbody "In distress", my ass. from Somewhere in Dixie Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
"In distress", my ass.
#10: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:31:06 AM

You (OP) say there should be more people involved in the discussion. While in principle I agree, in practice if people don't give a flying fuck even when whatever page is in question gets a banner pointing out that there is a discussion about it (and even links to the thread), all raising the bar will do is ensure that nothing at all changes.

Want more people to give input on decisions? Get more people to participate. How to do that other than one-on-one cajoling/convincing/whatever of individual tropers? We're all ears if you have a specific suggestion, instead of just general complaining and accusations of TRS/IP posters being part of an insular clique.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:32:01 AM by Nohbody

All your safe space are belong to Trump
CrypticMirror Cryptic Mirror from Scotland Since: Jan, 2001
#11: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:37:42 AM

Blackcat: The problem. Changes made on whims of a small group, which is often based on personal likes and dislikes rather than an actual problem. In group bias occurs, not always intentionally, not always maliciously, but it does occur in any and all groups. This nullifies that bias and gives a real test of whether change is indeed required, at the moment the burden of whether a change is required is now falling on the people who think it shouldn't rather than the people who think it should

The solution. Minimum 100 votes majority for a change on a crowner before a change can take place to ensure there is a perceived problem by the wiki as a whole and not just by forum regulars. No crowner to be introduced without the option of Status Quo retained.

Fighteer: Without meaning to be rude, the problem is the process affecting all changes. To bog it down in specifics would be to avoid the problem, the phrase "cannot see the wood because you are too busy looking at the trees" springs to mind. As you have pointed out, threads keep springing up saying there is a problem with this process. We should therefore understand that the reason for this is there is a feeling of disenfranchisement. Lets tackle it by examining the issue head on for a change, because to be blunt, this is exactly the problem any suggestion the current system as a whole is broken leads to the discussion being shut down. We even have a trope for it The Complainer Is Always Wrong.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:38:38 AM by CrypticMirror

EternalSeptember Since: Sep, 2010
#12: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:47:23 AM

[up] The problem is, that crowners don't get more than 100 votes. Ever. By implementing this change, you would just stop every page action.

It's not just that there is a silent majority that is opposed to these changes. Most crowners have a "do nothing" option, and they could vote for that, but they don't.

Actually I agree that so few tropers voting is a problem, but do something about it by getting them to vote. Help in finding a solution in which crowners will have more than a hundred votes, even if for non-action.

blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#13: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:51:30 AM

All groups have bias, that is what makes them a group. Even if it is nothing more than being in the same room together there is an implied bias toward the other people who are not in the room.

And in every group there are always a small percent of group members who are active and a larger less active to inactive percentage that gripes about what the smaller percent is doing.

I want to know what plan of action you intend to take to alleviate the problem. You have been very clear about what you think other people should do, what plan of action do you have other than discussion? Are you going to draft the framework for an appeals process? If your proposal is accepted are you going to harangue people to vote if the vote stalls at 17 for 6 months?

Meeble likes the cheeses. from the ruins of Granseal Since: Aug, 2009
likes the cheeses.
#14: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:52:06 AM

I think the issue here is a case of selection bias... you are seeing the tropes that get renamed, so it gives you the impression that the majority of discussions go the "rename" route.

As someone who participates in TRS and has voted against renaming more often than not, in my experience more trope rename attempts fail rather than pass.

Additionally, before an Alternate Name crowner is placed on a discussion, a Single Prop crowner is made to determine whether or not the trope should get renamed at all... this is where the "Don't rename" option is given.

Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#15: Dec 21st 2010 at 9:11:23 AM

The solution. Minimum 100 votes majority for a change on a crowner before a change can take place to ensure there is a perceived problem by the wiki as a whole and not just by forum regulars. No crowner to be introduced without the option of Status Quo retained.
Maybe one in fifty crowners ever gets as much as 50 votes, much less 100. As said, doing this would effectively stop all rename actions. Further, as has been said, we are always supposed to put up a Single Prop crowner offering a no-rename option. Even further, as has been repeatedly said, the majority of TRS actions fail.

You are attacking a problem that does not exist. The perception of a problem may exist, but then that's something we can't really help. Sorry.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Shale Since: Jan, 2001
#16: Dec 21st 2010 at 9:24:50 AM

100 votes? How in God's name do you want that to happen? We've got an active forum, every page under discussion automatically gets a very visible link at the top so visitors to the trope will know something's going on, and the crowners are still lucky to break 40 votes.

Also, I find it hilarious that the bitching about TRS alternates with almost mathematical regularity between "they change everything on a whim!" and "it's impossible to get anything changed!" Must be doing something right.

billybobfred Cosine! from renamed to wingedcatgirl Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#17: Dec 21st 2010 at 9:25:32 AM

Yes, there's a small group of people who make all the decisions in TRS and IP. The thing is, the sole requirement to join this group is "voice your opinion in the thread and/or crowner". Basically everything possible has been done to encourage more people to contribute to the decision-making process.

Maybe if we made the banners bright flashing red with a 72-point font, more people would pay attention. No obvious problems with that idea.

edited 21st Dec '10 9:26:19 AM by billybobfred

she her hers hOI!!! i'm tempe
CrypticMirror Cryptic Mirror from Scotland Since: Jan, 2001
#18: Dec 21st 2010 at 9:51:38 AM

well if 100 is too high, then make it 55 votes for change on a single issue crowner for change. Really, the one rename in fifty is about right for genuinely causing a problem (although I strongly think it is more like 1 in a hundred, but 1 in fifty is erring on the safe side). The rest are the personal whims. Rather than force participation, which is impossible as I will not deny, make it so that a rename, or a rewrite, or a split, requires a high standard of proof that there is a problem. Because right now it is that they are being done on personal tastes. And strike any changes made without a single issue crowner first, but make it so there is a minimum level of votes it has to achieve before proceeding because on a simple majority it will almost always be a vote in favour of change merely on the proponents of change being the ones to vote. Insert a barrier that they must clear. I originally said 100 votes in favour of change, if that is unreasonably high then fine, set it lower at 55. The thing is it must be high enough so it isn't just a small group of people with similar tastes or opinions.

I'm not against changing stuff if there is an issue, I've voted for changes, and I've argued for them. I do not want to stop that if there is a problem, but most of the time it isn't due to a real problem but a personal one of a few regulars.

edited 21st Dec '10 9:58:38 AM by CrypticMirror

blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#19: Dec 21st 2010 at 10:48:29 AM

but most of the time it isn't due to a real problem but a personal one of a few regulars.

Please give an example of this.

FastEddie Since: Apr, 2004
#20: Dec 21st 2010 at 10:59:42 AM

No, we don't need a list of things someone disagreed with. The important point here is that everyone is enfranchised who wishes to participate.

The perception that there is a "clique" problem is something we can be alert to, though. We do have a bias against ill-made arguments, from whatever source. Maybe the "shouting down" feeling comes from that.

Voting to act, incidentally, is the least useful things we do in TRS/Image Pickin'. The crowners are even only marginal useful for picking among alternatives, because less thought goes into a mouseclick than that needed to muster a clear statement of a position.

edited 21st Dec '10 11:03:01 AM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#21: Dec 21st 2010 at 11:50:47 AM

The perception that a few regulars are "making most of the decisions" is because they're among the few who choose to. The only barrier to participation in TRS discussions is your ability to type a coherent post.

edited 21st Dec '10 12:28:11 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
blackcat Since: Apr, 2009
#22: Dec 21st 2010 at 12:02:50 PM

Fast Eddie: I don't want a list of examples of when someone disagreed with a decision, what I wanted was a specific example of the behavior that Cryptic Mirror was referencing. Sometimes it is hard to understand a perceived problem until you have a concrete example.

Fostering a collaborative environment is difficult and become exponentially so with large groups of people. People often confuse collaboration with consensus and they aren't the same thing.

americanbadass Banned from [CENSORED] Since: Mar, 2010
Banned
#23: Dec 21st 2010 at 7:34:25 PM

I was about to start a topic like this, glad I found this first :D

[[User Banned]]_ My Pm box ix still open though, I think?
Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#24: Dec 21st 2010 at 7:58:37 PM

I find it funny that we have a crowd going "Renames happen too casually!!" And "Images are changed too easily" and another crowd going "Image Pickin has too strict criterions for images!" "Proving Misuse for renames is too harduous and strict!"

Which one is it? I figure we must be keeping a good middle ground, if we are getting malcontents on each side. Eitherway, I am not always happy with the decisions made in either forums, but generally the discussion is good. People are allowed to participates, and the new banners on pages make sure people know about whats going on and being discussed.

edited 21st Dec '10 8:00:03 PM by Ghilz

Shale Since: Jan, 2001
#25: Dec 21st 2010 at 8:46:20 PM

I agree with Fast Eddie that while anybody can come into the forums and state their opinion, people who don't know the etiquette tend to get shouted down rather quickly and are probably not inclined to come back. This is a problem if we want to get more people involved, but it's not an easily solved one.


Total posts: 168
Top