Misused: Why Fandom Cant Have Nice Things

Why Fandom Can't Have Nice Things is a weird trope. The definition of it is much stricter than the name would imply it is. It's for creators who are heavily involved with interacting with the Fandom, take that away when they start misbehaving. However, it is often used for any instance of taking stuff away from misbehaving as the Why Fandom Cant Have A Nice Wick Check revealed:

• 13 are correct
• 33 are some other measures taken
• 3 are complaining.
• 28 are uncertain
• 4 are ZCE

I'm not sure what to do fully I am thinking the definition may be to narrow but what do you guys thing.

Opened. I agree the name's broadness leads to misuse, but I'm also not sure if the other instances of fandom misbehavior are worth cataloging.

I agree. In fact, I think the subpage for TV Tropes (which has no valid examples) is a mess, especially because it comes across as referring to Please Elaborate, Troper Tales, Fetish Fuel, Complain About Shows You Dont Like, and Wall Banger as "nice things" when they most certainly weren't.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 5th 2021 at 1:01:18 PM

Whether or not they count as "nice things" is pretty subjective, depending on nostalgia and personal preferences. But otherwise, I think that taking things away from the misbehaving fans should count.

It does make me think if a rename could be useful as well.

Personally, the title sounds more like a rhetoric question rather than "and here's why". I'll throw these on the table for now: Toxic Fandom Backfire, Punishing Creator, Taking Toys Away From Fans.

I think a rename would be a good idea regardless of what we do with the definition.

Edit: I was ninja'd when I was writing this, so editing this to say that the name suggestions would be fine if we expanded the definition, but I don't think they'd work if we kept the definition the same.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 5th 2021 at 1:07:50 PM

Yeah, a rename sounds good.

Regarding the definition, I think 5 paragraphs of "the ways" the fandoms offend the creator are redundant. The only part of the page that actually shows (not fully) the trope is: "Someone in the production known for interacting with the fans stops doing so because fans", which could be expanded on instead. Also, the page quote sounds more like Dear Negative Reader or lacks context.

I agree. Now that you mention it, the description's length might have been making it harder for readers to tell what the definition is.

I have had that same issue not just with this trope but others so yeah that is likely part of it.

"Creator does something with the intent of punishing their fanbase" seems to be the core here, and the current definition is probably a bit too narrow. I say expand the definition.

Also, I don't think the name is an issue.

Edited by Karxrida on Dec 5th 2021 at 12:16:19 PM

Expanding the definition would be the best course of action for me.

I support an expanded definition as well. I'm indifferent towards the name, but if a rename is eventually decided, I'll be open to choose a suitable option.

Agreed.

Though the current name is good for me, I am open to a rename.

I support with both the expanded definition and a rename.

I agree with Karxrida that the core idea of the trope is "creator takes something back to punish undesirable fan behavior" and the definition should be expanded to fit this.

Also, the name does not strike me as something of concern.

The name is at odds with the current definition, but not the proposed redefinition (aka the actual in-practice usage). If we decide not to redefine it, we should rename it.

Expand the definition, but not rename at the same time per

That is a fair point.

Agree with

Yes to the above

I agree with expanding the definition. "Nice things" in this context refers to something that the fans think is nice, even if the creators do not, and rarely have I seen actual issue taken with that language^note the exception was when someone added that mass TLP trolling incident to the TV Tropes subpage and people didn't think it was a "nice thing," but that wasn't misuse for not being a "nice thing" (though it wasn't), it was misuse because nothing substantially and permanently changed to punish the perpetrators — it was enforcing rules that were already in place, so I'm unsure if we need a rename.

Edited by mightymewtron on Dec 6th 2021 at 6:46:40 AM

I always thought of nice things as being more of just anything taken away.