TLP Community Issues

That's a good idea. Many perfectly valid drafts may have a much harder time to be launched because they didn't have a good start and got bombed before the user could see and correct its problems. And if it is a troll or something, the draft could only be launched in two and a half more days anyway, so there still is some time to be bombed.

Edited by good-morning on Feb 2nd 2022 at 4:29:16 PM

If a draft is an obvious troll, can't the mods intervene regardless of the number of bombs/hats?

Yeah, in those cases we just discard the draft unilaterally.

This draft was created today. It has no examples, seems to be dedicated to bashing one movie, and already has ten bombs. I don't think it can be salvaged.

On that note, people are getting a bit too snarky and bomb-happy again. Not just that draft, either; the ursine fiction draft also attracted a lot of popcorn.

I do wonder if telling people not to bomb a draft is having the opposite effect. It's clear that people either don't read or ignore those comments. The only thing those comments do is bump the draft, bringing more attention to it.

Personally, I only respond to the bombs if the drafts are already bumped to the top; since they're up there anyway my comment doesn't bring any new attention to it that wasn't there before. But, I think the real problem is that people are attracted to the big red bomb number like people are attracted to horrible car accidents. More bombs means more negative attention, which means more bombs.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 4th 2022 at 6:46:23 AM

Yeah, at this point I don't think we can fix things by telling people to behave, because those comments just get ignored. I think there needs to be a change in how the system of bombs and hats works.

I mean, ever since 5T, dogpiling and popcorning has been against the TLP Guidelines. Technically, if people do it often enough, it's a rule-breaking offense and can be enforced that way... but it does feel extreme.

I guess I'd rather do something to limit the amount of hats and bombs that can be added. Earlier in this thread we discussed having a period of time after the draft is first created where no bombs or hats could be added. Another idea I like it limiting the ability to give bombs or hats to people who have contributed to the draft (i.e. given examples, left feedback).

Oh, I want to limit it, too; a cap (no more than five bombs than there are hats and vice-versa) would be very helpful. Once you're above 5-8 bombs with no or almost no hats, it's entirely pointless.

Maybe have the hat cap adjustable by the sponsor/adopter, in case they don't feel confident to launch with 5 net hats (set up to 30 or something) and are not sure the comments are readable or are afraid of rogue launching... IDK, it probably wouldn't hurt. At least, I agree bombs can be limited.

Edited by Piterpicher on Feb 4th 2022 at 1:52:54 PM

The only real reason I want to limit hats is to cut down on the potential for socks, and because you never really need so many hats, even if they're comparatively harmless.

Pretty sure that TLP socks are a dead concern by now... And I mostly thought of this in case someone lacks confidence and would rather have approval of more people than 5. A mature editor probably wouldn't abuse an increased hat cap.

Edited by Piterpicher on Feb 4th 2022 at 2:01:18 PM

Like I said, it's really not that big a deal when it comes to hats, I just think a cap would be useful there too so that random drafts don't just collect random hats from day one, and because nobody needs 20+ hats and zero bombs.

Either way, technical stuff is for this other thread. This thread really is just about fixing culture and making sure people don't act up.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 4th 2022 at 8:16:11 AM

from what I've observed the more you tell people to not do the thing, the more likely they are to do it. people don't like to be scolded in general and the anonymity of the internet + dropping a bomb makes the threshold for actively going against what someone was told that much lower. put bluntly, i don't think scolding people is helping/is fueling it in the opposite direction.

unfortunately until either/both the bomb/hat cap and "draft grace period" are implemented, I'm not sure what else to do besides getting mods to discard drafts faster. Like if a draft reaches a 1 o r 2 hats vs. 10+ bombs ratio, the draft could just be discarded to avoid dogpiling

ETA: will also say from the hitchcock draft it seems clear to me that bombs and hats are thought of very differently than the strict "this draft isn't ready to launch/this draft is ready to launch" that they are intended to be used to indicate. the majority of people use them to mean "this idea is (or isn't) tropeworthy regardless of the quality of the draft". Similar, but different enough that I think it helps explain why people seem so gung-ho either way.

Edited by amathieu13 on Feb 4th 2022 at 9:20:07 AM

TBF, Bombs have a duel purpose of also meaning "discard this", especially since you can't discard without having 5 bombs. So they're not really being misused.

On that note, they aren't actually anonymous anymore. Mods can see 'em, and if you go into someone else's TLP history (as discussed here), anyone can see what someone hatted and bombed. So people can definitely be held accountable if they spam bombs, but since it's rare I'm not sure people realize that.

I wouldn't call it misuse either, just offering it as an explanation as to why we see "over" bombing and hatting. People are seemingly using the accumulation of bombs to indicate this idea is REALLY bad and no one should waste time fixing the draft because no amount of fixing is going to salvage the idea; and hats to mean this idea is pretty good, should someone ANYONE take the time to work on the draft.

and seeing a users hats/bombs only works if we have a specific user in mind. for the majority of people that may just pop in and out of the TLP that doesn't disincentivize them from dropping a vote either way and leaving, is the point I was making

Edited by amathieu13 on Feb 5th 2022 at 11:31:33 AM

Question: if a draft hasn't had activity since December and I bomb it and post a comment explaining why, does that count as unnecessary bumping? Because I've decided this draft's concept is an inherent complaining magnet and I don't think it can be salvaged, and I just changed my hat to a bomb for that reason.

Am I allowed to post a comment saying that?

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Feb 5th 2022 at 1:14:50 PM

It's a decent bump IMO, because you're giving feedback as to why you think it should be discarded, which is productive.

Edited by mightymewtron on Feb 5th 2022 at 4:20:35 AM

Yeah, that's probably fine. We just don't want bumps on ancient drafts that say "I bombed this".

Thanks all. I'll post a comment outlining my concerns.

So, why, lately, on much-bombed drafts, do people keep saying "start over with a new draft, there's too many bombs on this one?"

It feels like a way to get out of dealing with the bombs. Ursine Fiction has a comment about this now, and that's an index. There's not even really enough there to rewrite to start over a new draft about it, the way adjusting a trope description and concept would. It would just be an entirely different draft.

Well, that's been a mentality in the past too, but usually because the bombs came at an early point in the draft's history without ever being removed, and a clean slate was assumed to be more likely to succeed in cases like that.

Nowadays though, it's just... "This obviously unfixable draft has too many bombs, but so we should just start over entirely to try again" even if it's bombed because the concept is bad. (And even if the concepts were good, Trope Idea Salvage Yard is right there...)

people disagree on whether or not a draft idea vs the current execution of a draft is the issue, with the TLP tending to operate under the idea that most drafts (if they're not stubs and often even then) have something salvageable about them. so instead of telling a person to give up or kill an idea even if it seems unsalvageable to others, many say to discard and re-propose after OP addresses some of the issues.

i personally disagree with this (i think many ideas are fundamentally flawed and should just be discarded to disencourage similar drafts/avoid cluttering the TLP even more), but ppl have made launched tropes from seemingly terrible drafts in the past and it does encourage newcomers in particular to "try, fail, and try again"