Needs Help (New crowner 21 June 2021): Unwinnable By Insanity

That is fair. However, from what I recall the numbers haven't changed in a good few days—it doesn't seem to have been attracting more voters. So, is there some means by which we might get a few more eyes on this, and thus perhaps a few more votes?

Try an ATT bulletin.

Not having done that before, that I recall, do I just make a post there asking for eyes on the crowner? Or is there more to making a bulletin than that...?

Search for "crowner" on ATT; the existing TRS-related posts are a good reference point for how to word TRS bulletins.

Ah, good idea, and thank you! I'll hopefully remember to do that tomorrow, then! ^_^

[edit] Okay, I've done so!

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jun 28th 2021 at 9:58:08 PM

Posting this comment to make public that I voted for Unintentionally Unwinnable.

Thank you for that. ^_^

Well, we're up to 29 votes on the leading option, and that option is very much in the green, at 28 : 1!

All other options are in the red.

Thank you for calling the crowner! ^_^

As to the sandbox, I'll likely take a shot at it sometime soon if no-one else gets there before me.

Good thing I make a habit out of announcing what's being called. The bibble bobble bug struck again.

Otherwise we'd be lost as to what was decided.

I won't be able to do much, since I have work and a bunch of other TRS threads at the wick-moving phase.

I don't know what you're talking about: the crowner is quite clear in that the voting concluded with significant consensus in favour of BibbleBobble! ;P

All right, I've put down a first draft in the sandbox, I believe. What thinks the thread?

I'd be clearer about how the damage death loop is similar to Cycle of Hurting, but the name makes things pretty clear.

What about this? "In being a state that is hopeless but continuing, somewhat akin to the Cycle of Hurting."

"a cycle" instead of "the cycle", because Tropes aren't definite singulars, otherwise good!

I disagree on the "definite singular" point: there is only one trope named "Cycle of Hurting", after all. And in this case, I'm referring not to one specific instance of the trope, or even a hypothetical instance, but rather to the trope as a concept.

Hmm... How do you feel about removing the article entirely?

Wait—the article? As in the new "Unintentionally Unwinnable" page...?

Or do you just mean that last sentence, regarding "Cycle of Hurting"?

Either way, what is your reasoning?

(I'm currently opposed to both.)

Or do you mean something else entirely...?

"Article" here seems to mean the grammatical article (a/an/the), making the sentence "In being a state that is hopeless but continuing, somewhat akin to Cycle of Hurting."

^ - Yes, that. thanks!

Ah, of course! That does make more sense! Sorry for so misreading! ^^;

Hum... I did consider having it as you suggest, as I recall, but I honestly prefer it with the article. To my mind it adds a little bit of drama to the reference, which seems appropriate to the trope in question—I think that it conveys a bit of the inescapable nature of the Cycle.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jul 6th 2021 at 11:23:38 AM

Well, it's so minor, and the only thing we're dis-agreeing / -cussing on...

I'm fine with you leaving it. So, what now?

Add examples then move to Main?

Fair enough!

As to what's next, I presume that we sift through the examples from the two source-tropes and merge them into the sandbox. I'm not sure of what the best method for this might be; it seems like some sort of script might be devised to fold them together, perhaps.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jul 6th 2021 at 5:23:48 PM

Changed it in the sandbox to "Comparable to Cycle of Hurting, another state which is continuing yet hopeless." Think that works?

I uhhhh guess we should get to work on those examples?

Edited by wingedcatgirl on Jul 15th 2021 at 10:26:02 AM

I think this is the first time we've used "comparable" in a Description, but whatever.

I'd remove the non-sub-paged examples on Unwinnable by Insanity first, then tackling sub-pages after?

I do keep wanting that definite article in there.

That said, I think that your formulation is better than my previous. And further, I don't want to block the matter for much longer, so I'm happy to go what you've written.

Heh, indeed. I think that I should try to set aside some time and energy to work on that. ^^;

That seems like a sensible approach, indeed.