Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment - Violations, misuse, and other issues

Anyone about the Memes.Super Smash Bros Ultimate thing I brought up? It now has this:

• Why does the Smash community hate Steve? I thought they loved miners ^Explanation Keeping in tune with the sexual predators theme, others made jokes about the competitive Smash players who had relationships with underaged community members through some Fun with Homophones, specifically "miners" and "minors".

That sounds like some knee-jerk joke that the Smash community laughed at for a few hours. And So Unfunny, It's Funny.

Edited by ccorb on Oct 5th 2020 at 5:05:39 AM

So what should I do with those sex scandal "memes"?

You could delete them and maybe put a commented-out note.

Done.

Isn't that meme in question just, like, a single tweet anyway? That's barely Memetic Mutation unless it got copied and played with in various contexts.

This entry on Amusement Park of Doom concerns me because of the "just about what you would expect" since it implies any attraction opened in North Korea would be a nightmare. Not sure if it has enough context either.

Mangyongdae Funfair in North Korea is just about what you would expect. It's open, but nobody actually goes there for good reason. All of the rides are in states of grievous disrepair. But don't worry, the rides are safety tested... Forcefully, by local farmers.

I think what it's trying to say is that the lack of people there makes it a bit eerie. I don't think that's a good example, anyway.

How much of YMMV.Rational Wiki is salvageable and how much is just asking for trouble?

Basically just the Growing the Beard example. Chainsaw the rest.

That's the most rational move.

Okay, but the end of Growing the Beard still has the ROCEJ pothole.

Also, Aren't we whitewashing opinions of the site by removing any sort of negative opinion on them? I feel like we're now giving the wrong idea that everyone likes and respects them despite their stances on certain matters.

Edited by PlasmaPower on Oct 16th 2020 at 3:14:57 PM

It's not "removing negative opinions" so much as "talking about really complex and controversial political crap." The criticisms on the page seemed to come from a variety of political opinions, including other left-wingers, but it's going into debates that seem super risky to detail. If you want to rewrite the entries to be less politically-charged, you're free to try.

Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 16th 2020 at 2:20:15 PM

The intent is to keep the pages neutral (insofar as that is possible, given that the website itself is itself ideological and controversy-attracting), not positive and not negative.

DethroningMoment.Advertising has an entry about Prager U web ads, which doesn't really focus on its beliefs too much but still mentions its propaganda (and a subbullet does bring up its rhetoric). I know DMOS is on Darth Wiki and is pretty much a free-for-all, but does ROCEJ still apply there?

Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 19th 2020 at 9:44:20 AM

If you ask me, it doesn’t belong on that page, but moreso because the problems are neither a single moment nor the advertisements, but rather the whole entity. Though, ROCEJ would keep me from putting it anywhere I think it does belong.

On the one hand, Horrible.Advertising exists.

On the other, it seems to be popular enough among its target audience, so it doesn't really qualify for SBIH.

The whole DMOS page for Advertising seems to be more a "complain about any ad you don't like" situation rather than a proper DMOS page, but that's an issue for another thread. However, two more entries caught my eye for having potential issues:

• James 76's sub-bullet under the "Silent Scream" PSA has nothing to do with the ad and is instead a rant about PETA itself, complete with a link to an admittedly-NSFW website. I dislike PETA myself but this is irrelevant.
• Scsigs has a huge Wall of Text sub-bullet under the Allstate commercial that goes from a complaint about an Allstate ad that subverts the "women drivers" stereotype and devolves into an anti-SJW rant about "gender politics." Plus, that same Allstate ad is explained more succinctly elsewhere on the page, without random ranting about Ghostbusters 2016.

Reminds me we should be taking this to TRS.

>2018

Yeah, I don't think this was the "next" anything.

Knock it off. Seriously, I don't know why you think "oh, we're eliminating racist hatemongers" is such a bad thing, but this trend of self pity for it has worn thin.

We also cut a page for the guy who hawked conspiracy theories for his own profit and tortured the families of murdered children? Good.

Edited by Lightysnake on Oct 21st 2020 at 12:36:38 PM

"Page written in an overwhelmingly negative tone, with several blatant ROCEJ and NRLEP violations on it and its subpages, and given the subject it's unlikely that we'll be able to make the page more neutral. This ATT query and the Removing Complaining project show a consensus that Alex Jones doesn't deserve a page, with eight other Tropers also wanting the page cut and no one arguing in favor of keeping it. "

Oh no, we're cutting pages that only brought complaining, controversy, and misuse. How tragic. We've cut numerous pages for being pure complaint or flame magnets, political or otherwise - see the PRLC.

And didn't you say in the exact same forum post that cutting a page for just being full of complaining is a good thing?

Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 21st 2020 at 3:43:17 PM

My two cents: I don't think we should have pages for purely political commentators in the first place. If they also e.g. write novels, sure, give them a creator page, but even then I'd say keep discussion of their non-fiction work of it. (And yes, I realise that I've left an opening for the obvious jokes by calling Alex Jones' work non-fiction.)

On that note, this is as good a thread as any to bring this up: True Capitalist Radio.

It's not a work of fiction, it's a political talk radio show. That said, that's almost beside the point, since the page is about 1% about the content of the radio show and 99% about the 4chan trolls trolling it. I think nothing of value would be lost if it were cut.