Needs Help: Base Breaking Character

Is it normal that I seem to be allowed to edit the crowner?

Sorry about that delay, guys. Crowner's been hooked.

I've just read the entire thread and I agree with dragonfire5000.

Well, we've had a few more days and we haven't seen any serious changes in the ratios on the crowner.

• We have 23 yays, 2 nays on allowing historical examples.
• We have 17 yays, no nays on putting more emphasis on why a character is divisive rather than the nature of the arguments they create.
• We have 15 yays, 3 nays on axing rule 2. Bye bye rule 2.
• We have 7 yays, 8 nays on creating a thread to approve all entries. I think we need at least a 2:1 ratio to enact things like this, right? That's what I've seen in other threads, at least.
• We have 2 yays and 14 nays to cut the trope. So it's not going anywhere.

We can wait a few more days if necessary, but opinions aren't really changing. It seems we have our votes.

Edited by PhiSat on Jun 16th 2019 at 12:06:59 PM

Given that we have 25 votes on the first one, but only 15 on the one about a dedicated thread, I think we can encourage a few more voters.

Again, about a week has passed, here are the numbers:

• We have 27 yays, 2 nays on allowing historical examples.
• We have 23 yays, no nays on putting more emphasis on why a character is divisive rather than the nature of the arguments they create.
• We have 18 yays, 3 nays on axing rule 2.
• We have 7 yays, 10 nays on creating a thread to approve all entries. A few more votes in the "no" camp.
• We have 2 yays and 16 nays to cut the trope.

All in all the votes we did get were all towards the majorities that already existed. We do have a lot less votes for thread creation, but that's probably because the people who didn't vote don't care either way would be my guess.

Edited by PhiSat on Jun 21st 2019 at 9:26:27 AM

I know the dedicated thread is skewing towards no, but I still think it would be a good idea regardless. Do we really need a vote on that one?

I think so, since a lot of people even within this thread disapproved of a dedicated cleanup. I think there's cleanup thread fatigue, personally.

Edited by PhiSat on Jun 21st 2019 at 9:37:52 AM

In that case, I think we can call it, and see how it goes without a cleanup thread.

I don't think this example on YMMV.Finding Dory is valid, seeing as they're barely more than background characters:

• The two female randos, one of whom sports a tomboyish haircut, who may or may not be a lesbian couple.^note They're often referred to as "the two women with the baby," only because they're seen looking into a baby carriage in the trailer. In the movie itself, they're actually putting the sippy cup containing Dory back into the carriage when they think that the baby inside (Hank in disguise) dropped it. They, themselves, are never actually seen with a baby. When they appeared in a trailer, it sparked a lot of hype from people who believe there should be more positive portrayals of homosexuality in family films, but also a lot of animosity between them and exactly the kind of people one would expect to have a problem with this. Even the filmmakers decidedly not taking a stand and leaving it up to the viewer has been controversial.

That depends, is there evidence for that hype? Are there a lot of fanfics/drawings of that couple? A Deviant Art search for the two will probably answer that question.

Also remember, for shippers, NO character is too obscure. Lyra Bon in MLP is a prime example of this.

So we're re-focusing the trope, right? Then we need to figure out what sort of reasons a character would be controversial.

That Finding Dory example would probably be Ship-to-Ship Combat, if it is really a thing.

I mean there's a million reasons a character might be controversial. Abrasive personality, the work promotes them but they don't contribute to the plot, Values Dissonance between cultures, etc.

Clock expired; closing.