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

Eyeesh. Chop that.

Yeah, choppity chop, too contentious.

That entire page is problematic.

This ATT thread points out how problematic YMMV.The Rageaholic is, especially the Acceptable Targets section, which has a few political jabs.

To paraphrase what I said in ATT: Documenting that the creator's works deem these targets acceptable? Fine.

Writing it up in such a manner to agree with him and glamorize his hatred of them? Not so much.

Agreed.

So I requested Ben Shapiro and Louder With Crowder be added to the Permanent Red Link Club, with the reason that they're "Political pundits not involved in any creative works." They were added as separate bullets, but since the Crowder page was about the show and not Steven Crowder himself, I think that entry should be re-written.

You can clarify that in the Locked Pages thread. Maybe something like, "The show has more political preaching than tropable content, and the majority of the page thus violated the ROCEJ." Not that exactly but something like it.

(I'm still wondering if we could have salvaged it, not because I like the page at all, but because I don't want something else like Last Week Tonight cut under the same logic.)

John Oliver at least has original tropable content. I don't think Ben Shapiro or Crowder had much that is tropable.

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Apr 15th 2021 at 10:57:38 AM

Newly launched trope Buy or Get Lost has a pothole to the ROCEJ page in the description. I would have mentioned it on the TLP if I'd noticed it. Thoughts on re-phrase?

Just cut the pothole. We don't do those anymore, and it's just inviting more attention to controversy.

Noting here that in order to avoid Flame Bait, Abrahamic God Archetype will not allow any examples from Mythology or Religion.

Just looked over DorkAge.Real Life for something else, and noticed that several of the Architecture/ entries, and possibly the first one under "Automobiles and Motorcycles/" seem to be at least partially politically motivated. (Blaming architectural decisions on "Commie Sympathizers"?) The first ones may have been intended to be tongue-in-cheek, but as we are all aware, websites really do not have Humor Mode.

Funnily, what are often considered "commie blocks" were first envisioned by Le Corbusier, who also supported fascist movements and admired Mossolini.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Corbusier

Edited by Nen_desharu on Apr 17th 2021 at 10:58:20 AM

Found these entries in the real life folder for Appropriated Appellation that give massive red flags. Mainly the first and last ones because we can't use SJW on this wiki because of how dodgy it is.

• The online term "Social Justice Warrior", or "SJW", was created as a ironic pejorative term for people who often spoke negatively about sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or anything of that ilk to a tiresome extent. It was initially used to describe overly-PC Tumblrites who had just found out what "cultural appropriation" meant and applied the term rather broadly, before expanding to become a general invective that could be yelled at anyone - possibly by people who didn't quite grasp that calling your opponents warriors for justice is basically calling them superheroes. Eventually, it was adopted as a self-descriptive term by geeky online folks with strong opinions about inclusivity and social equality, leading to a fad for replacing "warrior" with other Dungeons & Dragons classes, and eventually these buttons being sold at conventions. Its use as a pejorative does seem to have seen a resurgence as of late, as some of the aforementioned people took it increasingly far.
  • Origin of the term may have derived from 'keyboard warrior', which was a derogatory insult to imply someone who would fight for a cause at the safety of being behind a computer screen.

• "Snowflake", being short for "special snowflake". Originally this was only ever used as a term of abuse by the alt-right against people who aren't openly racist or sexist or what have you, to imply that such people are against free speech and Can't Take Criticism, but since a lot of people who used the term in that way would hit the roof at the mere suggestion of someone not agreeing with them, nowadays it's actually more common for leftists to call the alt-right "snowflakes" instead. This may well be the only case of a group successfully taking a slur against them and applying it to the people who originally were using it.

• "Shitlord" was used as an insult to the kind of person against SJ Ws and meant sexist, homophobic, racist, etc; in just one word. The term became so overused and parodied, almost no one uses it anymore and the ones that do only call each other that as a friendly term to make fun of its lack of hurtful meaning, or (occasionally) as a sort of praise for someone who'd rather stand their ground when attacked by the aforementioned SJ Ws.

Edited by RainbowPumpqueen on Apr 20th 2021 at 7:58:41 PM

Oh my goodness, nuke it now!

Those entries (including the one about snowflakes) don't just violate ROCEJ, they atomize it into particles smaller than actual snowflakes.

Whoa, hold up. It's an objective truth that some groups adopted these monikers meant to insult them, and we can talk about that without casting judgment either way. Let's see if these examples actually fit.

The SJW entry could remove some irrelevant or dodgy aspects, but otherwise it seems valid if true. However, the entry for "snowflake" is misuse because they're not appropriating the insult as a name for themself, and the entry for "shitlord" needs either a rewrite or to be cut because right now it's focusing on mocking the term, not describing how it was reclaimed to describe the entire group (I don't think jokingly calling others "shitlord" would count unless the group reclaims that name unironically).

Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 20th 2021 at 9:28:42 AM

In a query I posted in ATT, I inquired about the validity of a Values Dissonance example on YMMV.A Sound Of Thunder.

This is the specific example:

• Values Dissonance: It's Keith, the liberal president, who is devoutly Christian, while the conservative Deutscher is specifically called out for being "Anti-Christ". In modern America it's most usually the conservative politicians who use Christian morals to attempt to enforce their conservative views, despite a traditional separation of Church and State. It's worth noting that Bradbury himself was a staunch conservative in his final years, during which time he had some very positive things to say about Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Take that as you will. Also a case of Values Dissonance since the Sound of Thunder was made during the time when Christianity was generally considered as "neutral" topic until the rise of the Moral Majority movement among American Conservatism in 1980's.
  • The story never actually classifies the candidates as being "Liberal" or "Conservative". It only describes Deutscher as "anti-Christ, anti-human, and anti-intellectual" These terms could describe extremism at either far end of the spectrum, especially depending on the reader's point of view. Then again, political ideologies might be aligned differently in the fictional world of the story than in ours. Hence, YMMV.

In addition to being natter-y, the only other reply in the query noted it may be misuse of the item.

I just read the story for class, and I don't think Keith is established as a liberal. All we know is that Deutscher is considered "a militarist, anti-­Christ, anti­human, anti­intellectual" while Keith is considered to be more moderate and not much detail is given on his beliefs. We don't even really know much about their parties in the story, just the general consensus on what people think about them (and the fact that somehow Deutscher's victory correlates with Nu Spelling). Maybe one of the adaptations elaborates upon them but not the original.

Edited by mightymewtron on Apr 20th 2021 at 8:03:30 AM

The first and third Appropriated Appellation entries sound fine to me. We can still use "SJW" in an entry about the term itself. But yeah, the "snowflake" one is misuse.

Edited by rjd1922 on Apr 20th 2021 at 11:47:55 AM

Found this on StockParodyJokes.Anime And Manga:

• Due to the controversial behavior of some of the people involved on both sides of the Vic Mignogna controversy, Funimation's talent pool is often depicted in parodies as a Dysfunction Junction.

Does this seem like a ROCEJ violation to you guys?

EDIT: Also found this on YMMV.Funimation:

• Broken Base:
  • Funimation's response concerning the allegations surrounding Vic Mignogna. Some feel that not only was the firing a knee-jerk reaction on Funimation's part due to how quickly everything transpired, but it was hypocritical of them to do so when in the past other voice actors were accused of similar behavior. Not helping matters is that some of the company's other voice actors were also caught up in the controversy for antagonizing Mignogna and his supporters, or for coming out and staying mostly neutral on the matter. Others feel that they made the right decision to fire him as it would have been a PR nightmare to keep him around, and that as a company contracting his services, they have the right to stop contracting him if they wish. It should be noted that Mignogna was never accused or convicted of a specific crime. Due to these factors, this is obviously a hot button topic.

Edited by PlasmaPower on Apr 21st 2021 at 1:41:50 PM

i think if those entries are to be kept they need to be rewritten to get rid of the blatantly loaded buzzwords like "that ilk" and "overly-PC tumblrites", and admittedly i've never heard anyone use "shitlord" as an actual insult toward the alt-right

is that first one even a "stock" joke or just an in-joke? the second one seems valid enough, the controversy is still a major topic when discussing him, but on the other hand it does feel like it was written in response to the initial allegations and never updated with regards to time passing. edit, and honestly reading over it, kinda reeks of victim blaming too with how it primarily takes vic's side and the "never convicted of a specific crime" part

Edited by NoUsername on Apr 21st 2021 at 2:27:10 PM

Do we allow Broken Base for real events/people?

Edited by TheMountainKing on Apr 21st 2021 at 3:05:20 PM

I don't think so.