Misused: What An Idiot

I don't mind your idea Ferot, but I disagree on the proposed name. It's not people conflating stupidity with a character being unsympathetic. It's people finding stupidity to be unsympathetic. To "conflate" is to imply there's no actual correlation, but being stupid is an unlikable character trait.

Jerks Are Worse Than Villains exists because despite being irrational from a narrative perspective it is a valid and understandable reaction.

"Conflated" was meant to convey legitimate dislike of idiocy even if it should be narratively irrational (many WAI ignore intended mitigating factors). I'm open to any names that better convey such.

Also, if stupidity is inherently seen as unsympathetic, how is WAI different than Unintentionally Unsympathetic?

It's not inherent, there's a lot of lovable idiot characters, but their idiocy has to be written well. That's why I kept pointing out that a lot of the unsympathetic cases are ambiguously intentional- either the writer wanted you to cringe, or they wrote a dumb character on accident. That's when you get into issues of unlikability and a lack of sympathy- when a character's idiocy detracts from the overall likability of that character. But it can also just make a character hard to root for in the moment, as the audience is more likely to scream at them than root for them in a single scene rather than overall. And, of course, it's subjective over how much idiocy an audience member can take before they dislike the character- Patrick Star is a good example of this, as for years he either seen as a great character or a sociopathic idiot weighing the show down, depending on what season you were on.

Edited by WarJay77 on Dec 24th 2021 at 9:37:17 AM

Endearing/well written stupidity exists. But What An Idiot is effectively never used for those moments, just to complain about what they think are unendearing/badly written moments.

If the idiocy is well written, than it is expected, even if only in hindsight, as it follows the characters traits and narrative logic. Thus all well written idiocy fails the You'd Expect criteria thus WAI is only used for complaining.

WAI thus seems like the intelligence equivalent to Unintentionally Unsympathetic, and garner similarly negative audiences reactions. WAI being treated as UU with the Unintentionally part treated as optional or harder to enforce (due to audience dislike of idiocy impending efforts to separate intentional from unintentional) would explain the problem it's having.

Any WAI examples not redundant with established stupidity tropes can be moved to UU if it's seen as such a detraction. Intentional stupidity audiences reach their limit on is not WAI as WAI is specific moments.

I'm now for cutting it or making in-universe only, moving to Darth as a compromise if need be.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Dec 24th 2021 at 7:57:55 AM

Isn't there a phrase "so stupid it's impressive"?

If the audience thinks the way a character decision played out in one scene was so absurd they want to jump in and resolve it themselves, it could be something like So Dumb Its Painful To Watch. Cringe Moments? In that context it reminds me I do sometimes want to yell "but why" at what some characters are doing.

We had that, it was called Wall Bangers, and it attracted such negativity it had to be axed even from Darth Wiki.

WAI is attracting such negativity the rule that's supposed to prevent similar issue (doesn't apply when audiences should expect poor judgement) is being too oft ignored. And it seems not a meaningful reaction (audiences think x did something stupid when they did something stupid) or distinct from speciosity stupidity tropes.

Long term, I'd say creating a idiocy equivalent to Jerks Are Worse Than Villains to note the audience dislike stupidity get is the best bet. But that's so different then WAI I'm not seeing value in keeping WAI given as I've stated it's redundant with Unintentionally Unsympathetic if audiences see stupidity as unsympathetic (if/how stupidity and unsympathetic should be treaded as separate might make a useful/constitute replacement for WAI).

Current possible fixes (not necessarily mutually exclusive):

• Cut it due to complaining/not distinct from stupidity tropes.
• Mandate all examples use the You'd Expect/Instead format. (Pro: what we're currently doing. Con: might not adequately curb complaining given it's current problems.)
• Prohibit off-page examples (Pro: keeps pages while removing uses fitting more specific entries. Con: no other tropes/YMMV do that so at odds with precedent.)
• Make/new trope to only apply to unintentional stupidity. (Pro: would make constructive and distinct from other stupidity tropes. Con: as disused might be hard to separate intentional/unintentional stupidity.)
• Make/new trope in-universe examples only like Trope Namer. (Pro: lets us save the term and some examples. Con: might be redundant with existing tropes.)
• Make a super-trope only to be used when other Stupidity Tropes do not apply. (Pro: preserves examples until something more fitting is found. Con: might be inappropriate to have a non-trope YMMV as a supertrope.)
• Make/new trope for more specific audience reaction to stupidity like "Idiocy is Worse Than X"
• Move/rename to Darth Wiki or Just For Fun. (Pro: preserves it for those inclined. Con: might attract excess complaining/toxicity.)

How much longer before putting to a crowner? Todays discussion on how audiences tend to see stupidity as the same as unsympathetic did help bring to like the issues with WAI, so there might be more worth discussing.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Dec 25th 2021 at 9:58:41 AM

I think it's good enough (the cons in "format" and "off-page examples" look swapped?). I think it's time to let the crowner run just to see the direction this may be going.

Ah, true.

Edited by Amonimus on Dec 25th 2021 at 6:30:58 PM

Like I said, we need to split the Darth and JFF option up, and we need to determine the rules of what a Darth Wiki version would look like. We can't have any ambiguity.

So What An Idiot is supposed to be Audience Reactions to moments of stupidity that can be highlighted as examples of bad writing? I never thought of it that way—I thought of it as Tropers coming up with alternative ideas that they believe would be better decisions—so I guess I'm part of the problem. To quote the main page:

With this new knowledge, I can see why a clean-up is a good idea. The Laconic page for What An Idiot says, "A character makes a mistake so dumb it makes them unsympathetic once they face the consequences", but the full page doesn't mention anything about audience sympathy. It is possible that Tropers (myself included) either didn't realize or forgot this detail.

Not sure if I've written anything helpful or important to moderators, but I wanted to express my opinion on the matter.

That's what I always thought too; that it was about people spotting a better alternative than what was actually done in the work. Particularly if said alternative makes what actually happened look dumb by comparison.

The title and formatting definitely doesn't make that clear. You see a WAI example with the formatting and it seems to be a trope for complaining about "obviously dumb" things a character did. If it's about the audience coming up with good ideas, then things like "You'd Expect" take on a different meaning, but also imply the other solution is "obvious".

A trope about the audience thinking they know better than the characters is a workable idea, but only if the idea is presented not as the characters being dumb but as the audience collectively preferring their own version of how things should've played out.

The problem is that currently, the "You'd expect:" sections are often filled with ideas that can either only be thought of in hindsight or have no precedent for a character having knowledge of them. And trust me, whenever the moments get averted, people list these aversions under Ass Pull instead for some reason (but the desperate reparations for that are another story).

Hit it on the head. In most cases, if the character wasn't already meant to be an idiot, it's a hindsight observation the audience has because they have more information than the character does, making it like the Fridge tropes in a way.

Feeling like the current use is split between fan-lampshading of dumb moments and brief FixFics.

If the complaints about such idiocy are widespread enough to be legit, if can be moved under Fanfic Fuel, Memetic Mutation or it's subtropes, or Never Live It Down if it explains the unfair exaggeration.

Many WAI can be moved to Fridge where they can be addressed constructively as opposed to complaining.

That's one of the problems. The intensity of the dislike idiocy garners means they're, in spite of the You'd Expect' rule, putting examples ignoring in-work context that means you should/would not expect better. This ("Audience Hindsight/Intelligence Bias/Myopia"?) might be a valid replacement for WAI and covers a more unique phenomenon (WAI is redundant with all objective stupidity tropes), but I worry if it's complaining about complaining.

But it an trope/YMMV is attracting such negative reaction (Internet Backdraft), or even gushy (Some Anvils Need To Be Dropped) that they are unwilling/unable to follow the rule that keep it from being just complaining/gushing, that's when we cut them or no longer allow examples.

What the Hell, Hero? without the in-universe examples only rule would be such complaining (and redundant with Designated Hero / Unintentionally Unsympathetic) we'd never allow/quickly ax it. What An Idiot is WTHH applied to intelligence without the in-universe rule. That's why I say cut or make in-universe only.

Should "Make Flame Bait/no longer allow examples" be added to the list of possible fixes?

Should the Darth Wiki/Just For Fun move have their rules decided on before or after being put to crowner? Note the problem with WAI is they're not adequately following the You'd Expect rule, so I question if the move/new rules will fix that.

Edited by Ferot_Dreadnaught on Dec 25th 2021 at 2:24:15 AM

Isn't WTHH about a hero doing un-heroic things and not poor decisions?

I think flamebait can be a crowner option, not sure if it gets supported. Also as mentioned, split moving Darth and JFF as two options, and also add something like "more strict requirements", which need to be figured out now.

For requirements, I think it's the format if not picked separately and giving an exposition that the characters had all the information they needed and still didn't follow through a smart decision.

Edited by Amonimus on Dec 25th 2021 at 2:01:50 PM

Re: Splitting the Darth and JFF options:

I agree with doing that, but I'd like to point out that a page can be both at the same time, as with Crappy Trope Definitions and Tropes That Will Never Happen.

Also, the part about no other YMMV items prohibiting off-page examples isn't true. And the Fandom Rejoiced is supposed to work that way, even if that requirement is often ignored. I'd change "no other" to "few other" in the pro/con list.

...Anyway, since this thread has been open for several more days than just three, are the proposed crowner entries listed in this post ready to be put in an actual crowner, with the changes mentioned in the paragraphs above?

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 25th 2021 at 8:19:55 AM

Let me summarize with the suggestions that came after it, if I haven't missed anything.

• Actions:
  • Cut.
  • Cut and Redirect to Idiot Ball.
  • Cut and Disambig between Idiot Ball and select other Stupidity Tropes.
  • Super-Trope to Stupidity Tropes / Contrived Stupidity Tropes.
• If kept:
  • Regulate to follow the You'd Expect/Instead format.
  • Regulate to provide an explanation that the characters had all the information required and could have gone with the best option, but inexplicitly decided not to, resulting in From Bad to Worse.
  • Move to DathWiki.What An Idiot.
  • Move to JustForFun.What An Idiot.
  • Mark as In-Universe Examples Only.
  • Mark as Flame Bait.
  • Mark as No Off-Page Examples.
• Split potential:
  • TLP a new trope for cases of unintentional stupidity.
  • TLP a new YMMV trope for frustrating moments.
  • TLP a new YMMV trope when a character is no longer taken seriously / liked because of a poor decision-making moment of theirs.
  • TLP a new (Fridge?) trope where a troper could explain how would they resolve a dangerous situation.

Edited by Amonimus on Dec 25th 2021 at 5:38:09 PM

We wouldn't be moving it to Sugar Wiki under any circumstances- did you confuse it for Just for Fun?

yes.

Yes. WTHH is about heroes called out for unheroic things. WAI would be the stupidity equivalent (characters called out for doing idiotic things). And your retirement of all the facts. It should also explain how their character flaws/other intended mitigating circumstances supposedly shouldn't have caused them to make such a mistake. My concern is if they currently aren't following the rules we have will this make them more inclined to?

And the Fandom Rejoiced disallows off-page examples because it's Sugar Wiki. That would also happen if we move WAI it to Darth/JFF. A conventional trope/YMMV I don't know of prescient for.

Maybe we should have a (perhaps non-binding?) crowner to see where we stand and narrow down the options to focus on. Options:

• Cut it due to complaining/not distinct from stupidity tropes.
• Add stricter/more enforceable rules. (Pro: keeps and fixes popular concept. Con: might be ignored given existing rules are being inadequately followed.)
• Mandate all examples use the You'd Expect/Instead format. (Pro: what we're currently doing. Con: might not adequately curb complaining given its current problems.)
• Prohibit off-page examples. (Pro: keeps pages while removing uses fitting more specific entries. Con: few other tropes/YMMV do that so at odds with precedent.)
• Make/new trope to only apply to unintentional stupidity. (Pro: would make constructive and distinct from other stupidity tropes. Con: as disused might be hard to separate intentional/unintentional stupidity.)
• Make/new trope in-universe examples only. (Pro: lets us save the term and some examples. Con: might be redundant with existing tropes.)
• Make a super-trope only used when other Stupidity Tropes do not apply. (Pro: preserves examples until something more fitting is found. Con: might be inappropriate to have a non-trope YMMV as a supertrope.)
• Make/new trope for more specific audience reaction to stupidity like "Idiocy is Worse Than X" (Pros:Turns into a unique non-redundant reaction. Con: might be complaint about complaining.)
• Move/rename to Darth Wiki. (Pro: preserves it for those inclined. Con: might attract excess complaining/toxicity.)
• Move/rename to Just For Fun. (Pro: preserves it for those inclined. Con: might be to complainy for Just For Fun.)
• Make Flame Bait.

Anything else to add (options, pro/con lists) or that I missed?

I thought I'd mention that if we move this to Darth, we'd already be limiting wicks to other Darth pages (aside from indexes). The option for forbidding off-page examples is for if we don't move this to Darth and/or Flame Bait.

While I would prefer an outright cut, moving to Dark Wiki is probably the next best option. Keeps all the inbounds while barring examples from plaguing YMMV pages.

There are too many options to bother stating how I voted specifically, but I'll say that I supported every one that keeps this off YMMV pages.

Edited by Karxrida on Dec 25th 2021 at 7:01:45 AM

If we moved this to Darth, we'd end up doing the same thing as what we did with Most Annoying Sound (i.e., removing all non-Darth wicks except for indexing).

Also, we'd remove it from the YMMV index if we moved it to Darth, since that was what was done with Most Annoying Sound (since the two are mutually exclusive, though Darth isn't mutually exclusive with Flame Bait).

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 25th 2021 at 9:06:18 AM