TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Trope Repair Shop: Does it need improvement? (also concerns Image Pickin')

Go To

ccoa Ravenous Sophovore from the Sleeping Giant Since: Jan, 2001
Ravenous Sophovore
#276: Feb 8th 2012 at 10:52:03 AM

On occasion, a trope that keeps coming back to TRS with the same problem, like lots of misuse, will keep having "clean up and leave alone" win in the crowner, even though this is a solution that has proven not to work before. While it's hard to say a different solution would definitely be more effective, we can say with certainty that "try the same thing again and hope it works this time" isn't all that effective.

I know there have been accusations that the "TRS Crowd" keeps bringing back tropes to the TRS until we get the solution we like, but I haven't seen anything that sinister going on. It's more like a trope that had a lesser (or no) solution applied is brought back later as being still broken, often by someone who didn't even see previous TRS attempts.

One problem I see a lot in the TRS is when a page that attracts lots of natter in the examples gets brought up and people vote to keep the examples anyway, very rarely will one of the people who want the page to keep examples (or not be cut) volunteer to curate. The only solution I can think of for this is that if no one volunteers to curate when it's been shown to be needed, that the option is disregarded no matter how many upvotes it has. Harsh, but if people want problem pages to stay out of the TRS and be kept, they need to take responsibility for keeping them free of problems. Just saying "I like it, you better not make it example-less!" and then expecting someone else to do all the work isn't fair to anyone.

edited 8th Feb '12 10:56:22 AM by ccoa

Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
Martello Hammer of the Pervs from Black River, NY Since: Jan, 2001
Hammer of the Pervs
#277: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:05:00 AM

I couldn't agree more with that third paragraph.

edited 8th Feb '12 11:05:27 AM by Martello

"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.
DrStarky Okay Guy from Corn And Pig Land Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Staying up all night to get lucky
Okay Guy
#278: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:07:14 AM

Just saying "I like it, you better not make it example-less!" and then expecting someone else to do all the work isn't fair to anyone.

This so much. Clean-ups voulnteers don't come out of nowhere.

edited 8th Feb '12 11:08:00 AM by DrStarky

Put me in motion, drink the potion, use the lotion, drain the ocean, cause commotion, fake devotion, entertain a notion, be Nova Scotian
lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#279: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:07:49 AM

I'm new to TRS, but I've noticed threads having reached a consensus, and sometimes, when that consensus dictates cleanup or wick migration, the thread dies. Possibly because no one cares to do it.

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
LMage Since: May, 2011
#280: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:11:06 AM

@ ccoa

While I agree with your third paragraph to a degree, I also think that many people don't seem to understand what curtaining entails, and avoid taking such responsibility because they are afraid they will screw it up, do the wrong thing, not do enough, etc. and then as a result the blame will come down on them when the trope is pulled back into TRS and the argument will be made "Well we tried! Too bad so sad, cut away!" when in reality they think (and know) the trope is fixable, they just did a bad job at trying.

This was me for a long time, I am trying to be better about taking responsibility for thing I want to stay (like ANF), but this is still a mentality that is bound to not be unique.

edited 8th Feb '12 11:13:29 AM by LMage

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#281: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:21:49 AM

One problem I see a lot in the TRS is when a page that attracts lots of natter in the examples gets brought up and people vote to keep the examples anyway, very rarely will one of the people who want the page to keep examples (or not be cut) volunteer to curate. The only solution I can think of for this is that if no one volunteers to curate when it's been shown to be needed, that the option is disregarded no matter how many upvotes it has. Harsh, but if people want problem pages to stay out of the TRS and be kept, they need to take responsibility for keeping them free of problems. Just saying "I like it, you better not make it example-less!" and then expecting someone else to do all the work isn't fair to anyone.

I feel the opposite. If people feel there's problems with the examples and they need to be cleaning up, then those people should be the first ones volunteering to do cleanup. Seriously, I've seen people sit up and make lists of every single example of "misuse" on a page and then do absolutely nothing to curate when the time comes to do so. And by "curate" I don't mean nuking those examples, either. Sometimes, it takes a day or two to make a relevant topic on the subject and consult with the wiki sages.

And that's another thing: people are in too much of a rush to fix stuff. It's not like the pages are gonna go anywhere if we don't hurry up and make changes RIGHT EFFING NOW!!! And even then, sometimes it's not necessary to even nuke an example (even Zero Context Examples) so much as to rewrite them.

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#282: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:25:49 AM

One problem I see a lot in the TRS is when a page that attracts lots of natter in the examples gets brought up and people vote to keep the examples anyway, very rarely will one of the people who want the page to keep examples (or not be cut) volunteer to curate. The only solution I can think of for this is that if no one volunteers to curate when it's been shown to be needed, that the option is disregarded no matter how many upvotes it has. Harsh, but if people want problem pages to stay out of the TRS and be kept, they need to take responsibility for keeping them free of problems. Just saying "I like it, you better not make it example-less!" and then expecting someone else to do all the work isn't fair to anyone.

I am inclined to agree with this.

ccoa Ravenous Sophovore from the Sleeping Giant Since: Jan, 2001
Ravenous Sophovore
#283: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:29:31 AM

Actually, I think the reason people don't do a clean-up when they bring up the problem is that someone will then say (without reading, obviously): "I see no problem on the page right now. Case closed!" I had this exact issue come up when I opened a TRS thread for Moral Guardians - I cleaned the natter and crap off the page before TR Sing it, and got replies to the effect of "I see no problem" from people who didn't read the OP but looked at the page.

Keeping the bad examples until a majority can see and agree (or disagree) that there is a problem is kind of like preserving a crime scene.

And, honestly, if you believe that keeping the examples, as an example, is not the correct course of action for the page, why should you be the one to have to shoulder the burden of keeping the page clean when a majority want them to stay? That just breeds bitterness.

edited 8th Feb '12 11:31:46 AM by ccoa

Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#284: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:30:34 AM

To be honest, axing bad examples needs no TRS. It's only necessary if there is a serious recurring misuse problem.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Ironeye Cutmaster-san from SoCal Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
Cutmaster-san
#285: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:31:29 AM

There is a significant difference between "there are bad examples, and the page inherently attracts them" and "there are bad examples, but that's just because no one has bothered to clean them up". What you seem to be suggesting, Zeal, is that when the people in the second category outvote the people in the first category, it's the responsibility of those in the first category to do the cleanup. That is, that the people who think that a clean-up will just be a temporary fix have a greater responsibility to do it than the people who think that it's the best solution.

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.
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#286: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:33:15 AM

[up][up][up]Or you can do like captainpat did on Amazonian Beauty and paste the removed examples to the discussion page. Then someone can go there, see why they were removed, and make changes if possible.

[up]Not exactly. I'm saying that there are some tropes which are inherently going to attract that sort of thing. For example, no matter what we rename them to, White Gal With Black Guy/Where da White Women At? and Asian Gal with White Guy/Me Love You Long Time are going to attract misuse. There is NO WAY we are going to eliminate it, because most people are ignorant of the specifics of the stereotypes through no fault of their own. A rename isn't going to solve a thing, cutting the examples is going to make them pointless, and cutting the page entirely is just a bad idea entirely. There are some tropes that are going to be that way, but everyone seems to think that those three options are always the go-to solutions. For the aforementioned tropes, a rename actually ended up hurting the tropes.

edited 8th Feb '12 11:44:24 AM by KingZeal

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#287: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:36:13 AM

Actually, I think the reason people don't do a clean-up when they bring up the problem is that someone will then say (without reading, obviously): "I see no problem on the page right now. Case closed!" I had this exact issue come up when I opened a TRS thread for Moral Guardians - I cleaned the natter and crap off the page before TR Sing it, and got replies to the effect of "I see no problem" from people who didn't read the OP but looked at the page.

Keeping the bad examples until a majority can see and agree (or disagree) that there is a problem is kind of like preserving a crime scene.

As someone who has done a ton of wick checks in the past, I agree. I've often juggled with the idea of deleting them, especially when a page has so few wicks my wick check encompasses them all. Kill two birds with one stone if you will. I generally decide against it, because for one, it preserves the evidence (nothing is more annoying that doing a wick check then have half a dozen people who won't read the thread go "There's no problem I can see" and for two: I can't predict how the thread will be fixed. Sometimes threads are redefined to match the misuse for example.

Nocturna Since: May, 2011
#288: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:51:05 AM

Exactly. It's rather difficult to do cleanup when it hasn't been decided what that cleanup should be.

ccoa Ravenous Sophovore from the Sleeping Giant Since: Jan, 2001
Ravenous Sophovore
#289: Feb 8th 2012 at 11:53:31 AM

^^^ What does that have to do with who should curate the page? To reiterate an earlier question: if Troper A genuinely feels that Option X (whatever it is) is the best option for the page, but the majority pick Option Y, why does it fall on Troper A to do all the work to implement Option Y? Shouldn't those who feel that Option Y is the best choice be the logical ones to do the work?

edited 8th Feb '12 11:54:24 AM by ccoa

Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#290: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:16:39 PM

Not inherently, because Troper A was the person who recognized there was a problem.

For example, if Troper A says "half of the examples are misuse", then they recognize misuse when they see it. The tropers who chose Option Y may have no clue what constitutes misuse or not, but they might all agree that Troper A's solution was not enough, too much, or just plain wrong. That doesn't take any familiarity with that specific trope, so you can't expect them to know how to perform the necessary work.

The inherent buck-passing is another problem I'm seeing here. Who cares whose responsibility it is to do what changes? Either you want the wiki to be cleaned up or you don't.

edited 8th Feb '12 12:19:19 PM by KingZeal

lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#291: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:25:31 PM

Acknowledging there is misuse, or that a page is natter-filled and then bringing that problem into discussion is one thing. But I can't say I'm happy with people saying "It needs a periodic cleanup and it'll be fine!", without volunteering to do the work. I myself opened a TRS thread on such an article, and all responses against doing something drastic with the page boiled down to: "there's nothing wrong, needs a cleanup".

And who is going to do it? If one objects to a drastic solution, then one should take responsibility and keep the page proper.

edited 8th Feb '12 12:26:08 PM by lu127

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#292: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:28:14 PM

But that's not an inherently better solution. It's basically saying, "Well, if no one wants to listen to me, then I shouldn't participate."

Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#293: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:50:36 PM

King Zeal, the problem is with the people who say "It will be fine, as long as it's kept cleaned up, and someone who isn't me does the work of keeping it cleaned up."

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#294: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:52:34 PM

Yes, that is a problem.

But it is also a problem when someone says, "Hey, here's a problem with this page and here's what I think we should do. Oh, you're not going to use MY idea? Well screw it then, I refuse to help."

Like I said, this is textbook buck-passing. It's moreso about passing blame than arguing whether a methodology is valid.

edited 8th Feb '12 12:54:26 PM by KingZeal

Osmium from Germany Since: Dec, 2010
#295: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:53:45 PM

If the TRS decides something and I don't agree with this, why should I invest the time and effort on somthing I don't want? The people who want a certain solution (no matter what kind of solution) should be the one who invest their time, not the one who disagreed.

lu127 Paper Master from 異界 Since: Sep, 2011 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#296: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:54:12 PM

[up][up] You're right there. I myself have been convinced that my initial proposed ideas on a page weren't the best, a number of times. But that's basically ragequitting and immature.

edited 8th Feb '12 12:54:48 PM by lu127

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#297: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:55:16 PM

[up][up]Because it's about fixing the page and not about what you want?

FastEddie Since: Apr, 2004
#298: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:55:48 PM

Yeah, we will not be able to compel people to work on solutions they disagree with. Just won't happen.

The better focus would be on getting people who do agree with the solution to work on it.

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#299: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:58:14 PM

I disagree, Eddie. The best focus would be to have a crew of people who curate certain pages regularly.

Sort of like "mods" of the pages

edited 8th Feb '12 12:58:44 PM by KingZeal

Osmium from Germany Since: Dec, 2010
#300: Feb 8th 2012 at 12:58:56 PM

It is about my time, and I decide how to spend it, and why should I waste my time doing something I consider wrong? The people who consider a solution the right way are the one who should take care of it.

edited 8th Feb '12 12:59:12 PM by Osmium


Total posts: 888
Top