TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Wiki and Forum Policy - General Discussion

Go To

Note: The thread currently has a limit of one post every two hours for non-mod users. Currently, this is hard-coded by the admins, but there are plans to give mods the ability to toggle it without admin intervention. After mods are given the ability to do that, the time limit may be further reduced or removed entirely.


This thread is for discussing the following topics:

  • Questions and clarifications about the site's rules and policies pertaining to wiki editing, forum posting, trope launching, and so on.
  • If you have an idea for a thread on another part of the forums but aren't sure if creating it would be allowed, feel free to ask here.

This thread is not for any of the following:

  • Reporting complaints or concerns about specific moderation decisions (e.g. suspensions and thumps). Report these directly to the admins via the contact form. Selecting "The Staff" sends your message to the admins only, without making it visible to moderators.
  • Queries about thumps applied to your own forum posts, including contesting the validity of a thump. Reply to the relevant moderator via PM for these matters.
  • Ban appeals (use the "Edit Banned" thread in this forum).
  • Reporting problems or requesting moderator action in the wiki or forums (use Ask The Tropers or Hollersnote  or specialized threads such as "Locked Pages").
  • Queries about locked On-Topic Conversations (OTC) threads or banned discussion topics. OTC has its own moderation discussion thread here, and the latest statement on the locked US Politics thread and other banned OTC topics is here. Bluntly, when certain OTC threads and topics have repeatedly caused problems, we're not going to provide forum space to discuss them again until the moderation toolkit is equipped to handle those conversations.
  • Cut List challenges and queries (they have their own thread here).
  • Requests for changes to the site's code or discussion about such changes, as mods cannot change the code; only the admins can do that. Please direct tech requests to Query Bugs or Tech Wishlist (for bug reports and suggestions for feature additions/changes, respectively), and take other tech-related discussion to the Changelog thread.
  • Crowner actions. Please use the holler function instead.
  • Discussion about changing or implementing policies. Please use Wiki Talk for that. (Asking whether it's OK to make a specific thread is acceptable; using this thread in place of such a thread is not.)
  • Asking about the whereabouts of inactive mods (or other inactive users) before they return, if they return at all. Use the Absent people thread for discussing inactive users.

Posts that use this thread in place of the sections listed in the bulleted list above are off-topic.
We're aware that the Edit Banned thread has a Non-Indicative Name, due to it also covering non-editing suspensions. We're not sure whether the name for that thread can even be edited without breaking the special coding that keeps posting restricted to mods and suspended users, so we're leaving it alone for now, because better safe than sorry.
(Edited Mar 28 2024, adding bullet about OTC and amending layout a little)

Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 11th 2024 at 3:20:25 AM

Irene (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#8051: Mar 5th 2023 at 10:28:31 AM

Well, I just spoke of it having some pretty big inaccuracy, but that may see fixes. So for now, I, imo, wouldn't allow it till we're sure if it can be accurate or not.

Shadow?
Malady (X-Troper)
#8052: Mar 5th 2023 at 9:16:12 PM

Bing Chat vs. Chat GPT? Power of Search?

...

Anyway, I'm here to ask about post source-view UR Ls? I remember seeing a mod post one, but the option isn't in the drop down, so anyone got a copy of the right URL parameters to see?

Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Twiddler (On A Trope Odyssey)
#8053: Mar 5th 2023 at 9:19:55 PM

I'm not aware of that ever having been a thing. Also this isn't a moderation question.

alnair20aug93 🍊orange fursona🧡 from 🐾Furrypines 🇵🇭 (Long Runner) Relationship Status: Chocolate!
🍊orange fursona🧡
#8054: Mar 6th 2023 at 2:36:31 AM

Right. Back to the mini-modding thing, I found this thread about it.

Edited by alnair20aug93 on Mar 6th 2023 at 6:36:38 PM

ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔|I DO COMMISSIONS|ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#8055: Mar 6th 2023 at 12:45:47 PM

I'm staunchly agaisnt any use of AI programs for it. Tropers should write it themselves or just not write it.

miraculous Goku Black (Apprentice)
Goku Black
#8056: Mar 6th 2023 at 12:52:22 PM

Uh honestly that sounds like a bad idea. When we could just encourage para phrasing. Or using a plagariasm checker on your stuff be for you make the page.

"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."
Mrph1 he/him from Mercia (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: This is not my beautiful wife!
he/him
#8057: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:07:13 PM

We can't stop tropers using AI to assist their writing, but I don't think we should endorse it. And they remain responsible for what they've posted - including any plagiarism and mangled grammar - either way.

Irene (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#8058: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:10:06 PM

It's still a tool at the end of the day. Using a tool to write something isn't a problem whatsoever in itself.

What is can be legality issues(none of which exists), copy paste problems(which there is no evidence this actually happens, but something to keep an eye out for in the future), and accuracy(the one thing we've seen actually become a problem).

I'm for banning it, but only because of a clear problem it has. I don't care to jump the gun in any possible way for "it could become a problem", cause that's not how a tool or ruleset should ever be looked at. But we know said tool is not able to always be accurate, which is a no-go for this wiki. The rest are ultimately problems that do not exist in any clear form and thus, aren't a very good reason to ban something.

But yeah, if it can't be accurate, it's impossible to use as a reliable tool. I'm for letting it be used if it later gets updated, assuming the two other potential issues don't become a real situation. I think they will, but that's not enough of a reason to matter at this time. Besides, that could be wrong too. They may never become illegal nor copy paste a thing, but still have accuracy issues only(now you see why I refuse to jump the gun. Pure evidence only in proving a tool is unusable).

Shadow?
STARCRUSHER99 The Moron from one of my unhealthy obsessions (Captain) Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Moron
#8059: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:13:36 PM

I mean, don't we already ban grammar plug-ins because they can accidentally change text on the site without the user realizing it? Or am I misunderstanding that? Cause if that's the case, then we already ban a tool people use for writing. I could be wrong though.

WarJay77 It's NaNo, Bay-beeee! (8,356/50,000) from My Writing Cave (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
It's NaNo, Bay-beeee! (8,356/50,000)
#8060: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:15:01 PM

I disagree. It's not just about accuracy. The bot would have to:

  • understand context
  • understand the meaning and nuances of hundreds of tropes and to identify them
  • understand TVT formatting

Every edit should be made by a human who understands what they're doing and is willing to spend time and effort. Not by a robot.

Edit: And yeah, grammar plug-ins are discouraged. I don't think they're text changers but they do get things wrong a lot and tell people to change what they shouldn't.

Edited by WarJay77 on Mar 6th 2023 at 4:16:46 AM

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
wingedcatgirl mys. minty from the silly dimension from lurking (Holding A Herring) Relationship Status: Oh my word! I'm gay!
mys. minty from the silly dimension
#8061: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:17:25 PM

Consider a rule like this: "You are responsible for the text you add to this wiki, regardless of any tools you may have used. If it's incorrect, incomprehensible, or plagiarized, you don't get to blame ChatGPT for giving it to you — it was your decision to use ChatGPT in the first place."

We don't need to "ban AI". We just need to make it clear where the buck stops.

Suddenly I'm... still rotating Fallen London in my mind even though I've stopped actively playing it.
AegisP Kindhearted SSSSSNAKE Man Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
Kindhearted SSSSSNAKE Man
#8062: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:21:00 PM

[up] This post is awesome and I agree with it.

As long as this flower is in my heart. My Strength will flow without end.
Irene (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#8063: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:26:56 PM

It appears to be discouraged for Grammar Checkers like that, but anything that strictly changes the text on said page like a Nannybot would do is banned(Grammarbots do exist too). Grammar Checkers are not the same thing and are not banned at all. I mean, I would be okay with banning them, but as of now, that's not the case from what I can find.

The tool ultimately cannot be accurate at this time, so that is the core issue. I consider context to relate to the accuracy factor, mind you, as it doesn't give all the information needed(thus, isn't accurate enough). ...It's not the entire same thing as context alone, but I've seen it able to give tons of information too. But the context is never accurate, and with a crapload made up?

There's no way it should be allowed till they fix the accuracy issue. It can work fine for a summary, though, since context is more about straight examples, but it's still a fairly new thing. It may eventually become a better tool to use, but definitely not at this time.

Shadow?
Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#8064: Mar 6th 2023 at 1:28:56 PM

It all comes down to the simple principle. If your input it automated, it's still on you to proof-read it before submitting, and you'll be responsible if something's off.

Edited by Amonimus on Mar 6th 2023 at 12:29:10 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
Awesomekid42 (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: It was only a kiss
#8065: Mar 6th 2023 at 2:59:03 PM

I don't think using AI for the write-ups should be entirely forbidden persay. It's not exactly plagiarism when, as mentioned before, the user is still putting in the information, and it's not like it's taking the write-up from an actual person who wrote it. And it's not as if users get paid to make effort-posts and write-ups, so I don't think it does any real harm persay. But even the most advanced text AI's have been prone to non-sequiturs, misinformation, or making up works that don't actually exist.

As long as the user takes the responsibility to make sure the write-up is actually accurate, then it's fine. I don't think we should recommend the use of AI, but so long as it's accurate and reads well enough, as all write-ups should be, I don't think it should be entirely forbidden.

Edited by Awesomekid42 on Mar 6th 2023 at 9:55:39 AM

chasemaddigan I'm Sad Frogerson. Since: Oct, 2011
I'm Sad Frogerson.
#8066: Mar 6th 2023 at 3:22:56 PM

Personally speaking, if someone uses an AI write-up as the starting point and takes the effort to build upon it, I'm generally more okay with that. So long as they don't rely on it as a crutch, it can at least give a decent structure to build your paragraphs on.

Using it to get out of writing in general is more of an issue, especially when it comes to accuracy and grammar. It's the equivalent of relying on someone else to write a summary of work; but they've never actually seen it, and are relying entirely on synopsis and plot summaries from other sites to do so.

GastonRabbit C'est la vie. (he/him) from Robinson, Illinois, USA (General of TV Troops) Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
C'est la vie. (he/him)
#8067: Mar 6th 2023 at 9:59:50 PM

I feel like this conversation might be better suited to Wiki Talk than this thread. (Not posted with the mod hat on because I'm not 100% sure.)

I got a rock for Halloween.
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#8068: Mar 7th 2023 at 4:54:24 AM

Gonna also note Crazy hasn’t posted for almost two months. We had a discussion of stripping inactive mods of their status somewhere in there, and him hightailing it really isn’t sitting well. If he’s available in the mod chat, he should be posting his explanation and ending that. If he doesn’t do that soon, his modship should end

Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#8069: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:12:03 AM

While Figteer is on a break, I'm in general interested if Crazy has said he's taking one.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
themayorofsimpleton Short-Term Projects Herald | he/him from the Island of Koridai (Captain) Relationship Status: I won't say I'm in love
Short-Term Projects Herald | he/him
#8070: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:19:26 AM

[up][up] I mean TBH he could literally just be on a break. I know for a fact he had a long break like this last year before all this drama—I honestly don't think it's drama-connected.

Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall
MacronNotes (she/her) (Captain) Relationship Status: Less than three
(she/her)
#8071: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:23:29 AM

Stripping inactive mods of their mod status wasn't something that was agreed upon.

All we know that crazysamaritan told the moderation that they were busy with real life in January and they haven't been active since then.

Macron's notes
Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#8072: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:27:31 AM

okay, real life is always important

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
Mrph1 he/him from Mercia (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: This is not my beautiful wife!
he/him
#8073: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:30:51 AM

[up][up] I think I was the person who asked about that one (as it's something I've seen on other sites), and it was impractical because the admins would need to intervene?

However, I think there was also an acknowledgment that if a long-absent mod reappeared, the other mods would probably catch them for an initial conversation.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#8074: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:36:44 AM

Then we should be discussing an inactive mod losing their status. The mod team was far more interested in defending one of their own at all costs than addrsss a real pertinent issue with the views of one of them that was problematic.

Fighteer and Septimus at least announced a break after acknowledging their issues. Crazy lied, then he ghosted. After promising a statement was coming that the mod team has seen that we haven’t. He’s shown himself completely unsuitable for the job

MacronNotes (she/her) (Captain) Relationship Status: Less than three
(she/her)
#8075: Mar 7th 2023 at 5:40:25 AM

The admins would have to intervene but ultimately demodding mods that have been inactive in a certain amount of time isn't something we do.

We have about 14 mods that have been inactive for years if one of them ever decides to be active again, we would help catch them up.

Macron's notes

Total posts: 10,940
Top