How should we handle Stonetoss?

A huge dispute on the webcomic Stonetoss is clogging up the ROCEJ violation thread. Said webcomic is an editorial by an anonymous author who has racist, homophobic, and alt-right views, and exists primarily to promote those views. The user who created its page has been suspended, but we are still unsure what to do with the page. On one hand, it has more than three tropes listed, so it meets our policy of having a works page, but on the other hand, we cannot discuss those tropes without mentioning the author's viewpoints, and are not sure how to objectively state that they are harmful.

Please continue the debate here, not on the ROCEJ thread.

Edited by ccorb on Aug 17th 2020 at 7:52:58 AM

So...to continue this?

I've made my argument it should be cut. Stonetoss is, to put simply, neo-nazi/alt-rigt propaganda and I'm not sure there is a way to 'sterilize' it to any degree. Take this cartoon:

• Beat Panel: "Crematoria" has an empty panel before the punchline, a rarity for this comic.

The article doesn't say what Crematoria is. It doesn't say what the joke is. The joke? Is "The holocaust didn't happen, the only victims were German." Other comics deal in Transphobia, others in Nazi apologia, homophobia, racism and more.

Having this on the site only serves to promotes neo-nazi propaganda and antisemitic conspiracy theories. The work exists for it, it's inseparable from it. Someone can read a 'neutral' page and go into a pipeline about holocaust denial, etc. This isn't promoting reasoned debate, it's just free propaganda.

Other comics on the page deal with George Soros theories unironically. For those to make sense, one would have to look those up and find out those (also antisemitic) conspiracy theories.

Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 17th 2020 at 4:56:15 AM

That's just a horribly written example in general. If we rewrite it, I'm sure there's a way to discuss what the comic is actually joking about. Right now it's a ZCE though.

Anyway, my thoughts this whole time have generally been "yeah, Stonetoss sucks and his work sucks and we shouldn't be promoting him"- I just don't consider a work page to be inherently promoting. I feel like we should have the page for the purposes of documentation and awareness, not promotion or anything of that sort.

That's why I think, if we can't stick 100% objective, we just do our best to not get too ROCEJ-skimming, and that we lock it as soon as the cleanup is done. Then any potential editors need to go to the locked pages thread, or preferably the ROCEJ thread / this thread, and we can determine if the addition is apologia or not.

We tried to curb that by making a rule to not link to his website as to make it less easy for readers to access his work. I believe naming specific comics was also an attempt to make it clear we're not the ones adding these bigoted ideas to the page, they're just exactly what happens in these specific works...though I think giving the name of every specific comic doesn't help matters if we don't want people to find them.

I think another way to help would be to take the ROCEJ notes that are commented out (specifically about not linking to the site) and put them in the description proper, to make it loud and clear that this work holds ideals that contrast with the wiki's intentions and should not be promoted.

Edited by mightymewtron on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:04:57 AM

But even then, my fear...the existence of the page is still going to promote it to a degree. By discussing the works...almot all of them (and I mean almost all) contain some form of horrible bigotry or conspiracy theory. It's still going to be a risk for people to look it up, and I don't quite see that we can leave large explanations for literally every example.

Like or beat panel...do we leave a lengthy note that "PS the Holocaust happened and this is nothing but propaganda?"

another example:

• Blackface: "Calling the Kettle Black" has a transwoman yell at a man at Halloween who clearly has a blackface costume with such skin and cheeks that his caricature is offensive.
• * Rage Against the Reflection: In "Stop Hitting Yourself", a transwoman shouts "Stop killing trans people, you Nazi!" and punches a mirror, causing it to shatter.

This is pretty clearly transphobia. Pretty awfully at that. Do we leave edits explaining why this is wrong each time?

If we can't link to the site, mention any comics by name, or discuss the comic in-depth at all without giving publicity to neo-nazi propaganda...

....is it really something we should give pagetime to?

Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 17th 2020 at 5:06:56 AM

Purge the examples,we acknowled it exists but we don't trope it

We don't allow no-example pages anymore.

For what it's worth, I was thinking about adding Artistic License – History to describe the Holocaust parts, to make it clear that no, he's not accurately describing the Holocaust there.

Edited by mightymewtron on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:09:34 AM

Keeping this on the site is telling advertisers "We support the expression of hate speech and we want people to read this webcomic, which consists of nothing but xenophobic editorializing." Now, what if someone complains to Google about this page and we get a Third Google Incident? That would tarnish our reputation as a wiki that exists to discuss the various tropes in popular culture.

If we decide to keep the page, that's a great idea to show we are against his views.

Edited by ccorb on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:15:45 AM

Yeah, but, it's still kind of allowing a neo-nazi propaganda comic to be placedthere with free airtime so to speak and it's not the only one. The message of the comic is "innocents were incinerated at Dresden" (which is true), but it's used in a way to deny Nazi war crimes. It requires a lot of explanation for why it's offensive.

Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 17th 2020 at 5:17:00 AM

If it requires a lot of explanation to explain why a comic is inaccurate and/or offensive, then it's our responsibility to provide that information. I say we take as many opportunities as we can to objectively point out the factual inaccuracies in the comic. Not because I want to use the page to complain about the comic, but because otherwise we risk misinforming our readers.

I'm still of the opinion it should be purged out.

Unfortunately while I don't really want the page on the wiki, there isn't consensus to cut it at this moment, so I'm just trying to think of ways we could deal with having it up without feeding into propaganda.

Edited by mightymewtron on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:20:45 AM

Like I said, I just think documentation is important and if we need to make it abundantly clear that TVT does not support these views and that His opinions are conspiratorial at best, it's not a promotion, unless someone already agrees with the work- and then it's not giving him any new readers, just being found by people who already read the work but wouldn't have the ability to edit it- since every solution here would 100% involve a page lock. And enforcing the idea that we aren't promoting the work would make it clear to his unironic, equally insane fans that their ideas and beliefs aren't welcome here except for the purposes of documenting them in a work-based context.

I mean, we have pages on other propoganda works, don't we?

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:26:46 AM

Then I say we make it more clear in the description than quickly mentioning "oh yeah he's controversial for his alt-right views."

"Note: This comic frequently features ideas rooted in bigotry and conspiracy, and as such is incredibly controversial. To avoid advertising the comic and running into problems with advertisers and other tropers, do not provide a link to Stonetoss's website and be aware of the Rule of Cautious Editing Judgment." Or something.

But this is an active and continuing propaganda effort. By listing it, people can see it and still seek it out. The disclaimer seems a weaker statement to cutting it.

What do we serve from listing Neo-Nazi propaganda? I haven’t been able to figure this out. ‘Because it exists’ doesn’t seem good enough.

I have my doubts this page was made by someone in good faith and the edit history is super troublesome. We can’t list anything there without citing the comics themselves

Edited by Lightysnake on Aug 17th 2020 at 5:41:50 AM

ROCEJ links are discouraged as a general rule nowadays.

As I've explained, documentation of these things is vital. Pretending works like these don't exist don't stop their views from existing. Acknowledging the works and how they spread their propaganda and the fact that they are propaganda is more helpful than brushing it under the rug with a "nope, too horrible to discuss here".

Making a more strongly-worded disclaimer would help. As much as I want to stick to the raw facts, I can see how doing so would allow too much wiggle-room, so something like -

"Note: Stonetoss's works are intended for the purposes of propaganda and belief-spreading. He promotes Nazi-esque viewpoints and our trope list is going to reflect such beliefs as accurately as possible. However, TV Tropes does not intend to promote his works, and we do not share his beliefs- this is simply for the purpose of documentation."

- might work.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:46:25 AM

The reason there are still DVDs of offensive Looney Tunes cartoons and why Mein Kampf is on sale is so students and history buffs can analyze it and discuss their history. Right now, this webcomic demonstrates a horrible movement that circulates online and in person right now, and having a page on that webcomic tells people that it exists, and encourages them to Google it.

Since we're likely going to keep it, that disclaimer will properly tell tropers, casual viewers, and advertisers we do NOT support his views.

Edited by ccorb on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:50:11 AM

Frankly, I disagree. Replay forming is a vital way to stop nazi propaganda. The second you give them equal airtime as a point of view, they win.

Nazis cannot he constructively debated. Leaving the page up just encourages more terrible propaganda pages.

How would it encourage Googling?

I'm seriously asking; how would a page that makes it explicitly clear the work is Nazi trash lead to people Googling it? People who agree with the guy probably already know who he is.

Hell, if it does get Googled, a lot of people might be doing so to try and spread more awareness against the comic and it's views, or to see if our claims are accurate, or something. It wouldn't necessarily lead to an audience- worst case scenario he gets more clicks onto one or two comics.

I guess I just don't see how having pages on these works is such a terrible thing. If we're extremely clear the works are propaganda and spread horrible viewpoints, that's not us attempting to argue with the Nazis, it's us criticizing their works and opinions, and a work like Stonetoss needs people to criticize it.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:53:37 AM

I saw your proposed disclaimer and it works.

Sounds good to me.

Is this a valid trope entry about the Holocaust denial comic?

• Artistic License – History: "On Second Thought" depicts a hippie strawman shutting up a man spouting Holocaust denial rhetoric, questioning how there would be enough gas to kill six million Jews. However, this falls flat because the victims of the Holocaust were not all killed by gassing in extermination camps. Those placed in concentration camps died of starvation, exhaustion from being overworked, or unsanitary conditions. Additionally, Zyklon B gas was not the only way prisoners were killed in extermination camps; they were also shot to death.

Edited by mightymewtron on Aug 17th 2020 at 8:58:07 AM

There's Racial Holy War and Ethnic Cleansing though...

Edited by PrincessPandaTrope on Aug 17th 2020 at 7:55:52 AM

Sounds good to me.

I think it's easier to trope older works based on propaganda because a) they're usually not even trying to deny being based on Nazi ideas like Stone cheekily tries to do, and b) they're older and thus not as prone to active debate as Stonetoss's ongoing comic, which appeals to the modern online Neo-nazis and edgelords.