Follow TV Tropes
Tough Act to Follow should at least wait until the act to follow is out. If it should go under the act in question or the following one is different question than this thread covers.
What about Audience-Alienating Premise? It was decided elsewhere that it should wait until it's proven that audiences were alienated, how long a waiting period would that be? Would it very by the mediums metics (box-office, ratings, sales, ex.).
I seen it be misuse for a strange premise that might be uncomfortable for viewers.
I think there should be a one-month wait period for Audience-Alienating Premise. I think that's a good amount of time to see how well a work sold to determine if the premise alienated a potential audience or not.
As for Tough Act to Follow, we should wait at least until the work is out and see how well critics and fans rated it compared to its predecessor.
Edited by ADrago on Mar 12th 2019 at 9:20:27 AM
Tough Act to Follow is indeed when a work fails to live up to its predecessor but it's very often used for upcoming works as "This is a sequel of a popular movie, therefore there's lot of pressure and expectation" which is not the definition of the trope at all.
I'd also suggest to add Internet Backdraft to No Recent Examples, Please! because it's also very often used as "Something awful just happened in the last episode that aired five minutes ago" as opposed to concrete evidences of a massive backslash. Maybe one or two weeks.
Edited by Silverblade2 on Mar 13th 2019 at 1:41:23 PM
So far, most of the pages on the index are there because they have caused so many problems that they required a dedicated cleanup thread (or at least an ATT thread) that arrived on a mandatory waiting period as a solution.
Before adding a new page to the index, we should demonstrate that there is a problem and we're not just adding rules for the sake of rules.
Can you guys give some specific examples of bad Tough Act to Follow, Audience-Alienating Premise, and Internet Backdraft entries that could be solved by a mandatory waiting period?
Uh... I've plenty bad examples of those but I tend to delete them so....
There're also Magnificent Bastard and The Woobie (and subtropes) that also have 2 weeks waiting and their respective cleanup threads.
Edited by Silverblade2 on Mar 14th 2019 at 9:03:45 AM
Internet Backdraft is by definition abrupt, inflammatory backlash. The problem isn't jumping the gun, but a lack of objectivity on what isn't an example and no way to tell at a if it's too minor (what is the threshold?) to count.
I giving it a waiting period, but fixing it I think requires giving Internet Backdraft (which is where complaining is being dumped after other tropes were cleaned up) stricter criteria (I proposed it require a citation covering, not part of, the controversy to prove it's sufficiently widespread, but hope we can come up with something less drastic).
Still, a waiting period might help since only notable Backdraft would still be around to count.
What about It's the Same, Now It Sucks!? I've seen it used but suspect it's the opinion of one troper for an ongoing story as opposed to representative of the fanbase.
That makes a lot of sense. I think mandatory waiting periods are very seldom going to be a cure-all; they should be considered only as part of a larger cleanup effort.
Hows Only the Creator Does It Right? Should it only apply after the works is out and judged?
Crowner for Overshadowed By Controversy is at three days and is 21:0, I don't recall such a landslide vote on crowners ever. Safe to call?
Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Mar 15th 2019 at 9:54:35 AM
Safe to call.
I think that the time restrictions on Base-Breaking Character and Broken Base should specify that they start when the controversy occurs, not when the work is released (unless the controversy started before the work's release). Like this:
Thats a good idea.
And in cases where the start of the arguments are hard to track?
Can't have a rule to cover every eventuality, but better to have an inexact rule than none at all.
I feel The Scrappy should have a six-month waiting period similar to Base-Breaking Character because people use it for knee-jerk reactions the moment a character does something controversial or add examples before the work is even released. Plus The Scrappy already has a dedicated cleanup thread.
I'd go with a shorter time limit, but it needs to have a limit of some kind.
Should it be until a given story is done to determined if a person is a scrappy?
I'll give a to The Scrappy having at least a 6 month waiting period.
Yes, we can't tell for sure if we're supposed to hate them otherwise
Scrappy 6-month waiting period. This looks like the next issue to put to a crowner. Can we do that?
About Base-Breaking Character and Broken Base. What if something happens that adds or fixes said break, does that need another 6-months to add?
I assume Win Back the Crowd needs the work to release and successfully win them back?
Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Apr 12th 2019 at 4:35:59 AM
Waiting period for The Scrappy.
Can we specify that the waiting periods do not apply to In-Universe examples on the main page?
Make it so.
In NeverLiveItDown.Real Life
I get the impression that those examples are less than 25 years old. Is it ok to delete?
Yep, pull. For the record regarding the latter, the documentary premiered in 2009, which is too soon.
Almost half that page is within 25 years.
Speaking of that trope, NeverLiveItDown.Sports and its subpages are at a ten month waiting period. That feels a bit arbitrary, so should we shorten/lengthen it to six months or a year to make things simpler?
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?