So Bad It's Horrible Cleanup

I was just about to go on here to say that. Add it back.

Just sent a DM. Lets see if they get back.

I disagree with that deletion reason. Just because a video agrees with your POV, doesn't mean it can't also be a garbagey pile of garbage. I hate Trump, and I think that ad is awful for being hamfisted, extremist, and biased, just as the example says. Trump sucks, but that doesn't immediately "validate" everything that opposes him. It's not that black and white.

I added it back.

Greetings to all, I'm the one who deleted the anti-Trump video. I would sincerely want to know how the video's claims are "fabricated" as the entry says. Factually, Trump did or does: 1) Make disparaging comments about all the minorities shown in the video 2) Refers to immigrants as "criminals" regularly 3) Even if he directly never said he hates LGBT people, he did pick an homophobic VP and has pushed an anti-LGBT agenda as president. The note in the example reads as "Trump is not that bad" which I think violates the ROCEJ. At best, the entry tries to say "Both sides are bullshit" which is a discouraged mentality in the wiki.

I also sincerely think having a girl cussing in the video does not make it bad nor qualifiable for SBIH.

The way I see it is, we need to put the politics aside. The fact of the matter is, people hate it. Even people against Trump hate it, because it takes such an extreme stance. And while Trump is not a person I'll ever defend genuinely, there's nothing inherently wrong with saying "both sides are wrong" if both sides are indeed acting like children, and the video is just immature and inflamatory. Even if everything they said was true, that doesn't make the video good.

Exactly. ROCEJ doesn't mean we can't talk about politicians at all.

Well, then it's probably better if we remove the note that reads as Trump apologia and the claim that the affirmations are "fabricated" because that's inherently untrue.

Well...wait, where did he say he outright hates the LGBT community or thinks all Mexican immigrants are criminals and scum? There's a pretty big difference between making offensive comments and outright claiming to hate all of a certain group, and all the note claims is that he hasn't made those specific claims. If he did, that's one thing, but can you prove these things are true?

I'm not also sure how it's apologia. There's a huge difference between defending someone and discussing facts. Again, if the video was accurate there's one thing, but if the video wasn't accurate, then the note is just explaining the inaccuracies in a pretty neutral way.

Edited by WarJay77 on Sep 22nd 2019 at 9:07:07 AM

As I said, he maybe hasn't said so directly but his actions as president prove the ad was right (ffs he launched his campaign saying Mexicans were criminals). The note is not neutral, it reads as "Trump is not that bad", and time has shown that yes, he is that bad.

...No? It literally just says "here are things the video claimed Trump has said that he didn't actually say". You also have to keep in mind when this was made— during the campaign. Even if we can say in hindsight that it was correct, these claims were fabricated at the time, because at the time the video was made, none of this happened.

I genuinely think your politics are clouding your judgement on this one. I hate Trump too, believe me, but pointing out that people had lied about things he did IS NOT THE SAME as claiming he's not a bad person. If someone made a video stating that Hitler was a pedophile in addition to a bunch of factual claims, pointing out the inaccuracy wouldn't be the same as saying Hitler isn't a bad person- just that, factually, he wasn't a pedophile.

In other words, even if the video may have predicted some things, it still pulled those claims out of nowhere and lied about exactly what he'd said to make him seem worse. Stating that these claims were in fact false doesn't mean we also think Trump is good. Just that he isn't pure evil, and that even people opposed to him can do bad things in opposing him.

I think we might have to delete all the political ads, sadly. Even the Tories "face ad" has defenders. ROCEJ is very hard to do when things are literally political propaganda. For that matter, the Dinesh D'Souza films can probably go too.

Well, if the political ads all go, what about other very-political works, like Squirrel and Hedgehog?

...Squirrel and Hedgehog isn't listed under Horrible?

...It's not? I could've sworn... that's weird.

Okay, I'll replace my question with Holy Terror and other similar comics.

I... genuinely don't know. I mean, Holy Terror is ugly as sin and poorly written, but part of why it's listed is for very political reasons.

I think it could go.

Figured it out. Anything that actually is political propaganda (e.g. Hillary's America) can go. Propaganda of other non-political types that causes harm (e.g. Vaxxed) and stuff with Unfortunate Implications can stay.

The way I personally see it is that politically charged examples are fine if the horrible part isn't just because of the politics. The Racial Holy War game, for example, is not only super offensive — it's also a genuinely unplayable game on a technical level. Holy Terror is a mess for not only it's politics, but also it's godawful writing in general. And, for "Tuck Frump", I think the lying-and-obnoxious part of the ad contributes to it's being awful, while the politics are just part of it.

Anyway, we definitely need more opinions here.

Edited by WarJay77 on Sep 22nd 2019 at 9:46:59 AM

Hid Tuck Frump for now.

Holy Terror is pretty much universally reviled so it should stay. It's hated for political reasons partially, but regardless of political affiliation it's pretty awful. I've never seen it defended anywhere. Just because something is despised partially for political reasons isn't a reason to cut in my opinion. And when it's hated for dehumanizing and demonizing an entire group of people I don't think it's right to just dismiss that as simply "political". That might be political but still a valid reason to dislike something. And Holy Terror would be awful even if it wasn't rampantly Islamophobic. So yeah, I agree that political examples are okay as long as they are pretty universally disliked and the reason for their unpopularity isn't simply a case of people disagreeing.

Edited by TommyFresh on Sep 22nd 2019 at 7:02:09 AM

Agreed, Holy Terror can stay.

Yeah, I think it should be something so genuinely bad that even if people agree with the message they think the work was bad on any other level (such as the writing, art, presentation, etc). Like, if we put politics aside and people on both sides still hate the thing, it's probably a keeper.

D'Souza films can still go, by sheer coincidence he just made a really awful tweet and some of his defenders are rising from the depths.