![]()
I may have miscommunicated. Not trusting ban evaders isn't insularity. Determining who we trust to vouch for a character I'm less sure on.
I’m fine with cutting ban evader proposals on sight & completely reevaluating them if necessary. All it really takes is one other person who’s familiar with the work & character to make another EP, not too different from any other trope example, and it’s worked before.
Edited by PurpleEyedGuma on Aug 25th 2023 at 11:43:59 AM
On one hand, said evader gets to avoid having their candidates re-litigated and on another, the Tropers don't waste their time having to cycle through said candidates again in the process—so gotta weigh the two against each other to see which is preferable. What helps with the case for the latter—where I lean—is that the evader's writeup and what they worked for is still gone in less time with minimal Troper hours spent.
Edited by futuremoviewriter on Aug 25th 2023 at 8:46:59 AM
I agree with Guma and Anon, especially considering the original BE's effortpost is likely to be thumped by the mods. Doesn't have to be "formal" per se, it just has to bring up all the necessary and pertinent info, especially if something was missed.
If it was hollered, then it would be.
Edited by SkyCat32 on Aug 28th 2023 at 3:00:02 PM
Are they? Flower's weren't... The mods aren't going to go through and find things to thump if those things weren't directly reported or hollered.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallJust to clarify, I'm slightly in favor of just letting someone verify the character legitimately keeps and rewriting the entry. All I said is that I see how that could be difficult in practice and would be good with requiring a full reproposal (not necessarily EP, if only because we agreed to not have that format be mandatory), not that I'd changed my mind outright.
Okay, there's something that happens sometimes specifically on the CM thread that we've asked to stop multiple times, and there are people who still do it - while I don't think they mean to be repeating a problematic behavior, it's just something that shouldn't be happening and as of now technically isn't against the rules.
I'm talking about people who react to some of the more, shall we say, dark proposals that handle things like rape and pedophilia with exclamations like "CHRIST" or "HOLY SHIT" or "I think I just threw up". I'm sure it's meant to be funny, but it's led to derails multiple times, and the simple fact is that the CM thread tackles hilariously messed up stuff on a daily bases - if people aren't able to handle that stuff, they shouldn't be posting, especially when we've asked to stop saying stuff like that on a regular basis because seventeen people saying the same exclamations about how gross someone is is far past redundant.
With that in mind, I wanted to propose a new thing to add to the CM thread's OP and wanted to do it here to get some outside opinions.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This thread tackles very serious and dark matters on a daily basis. We will be discussing things like murder, rape, torture, human trafficking, crimes against children, and in particularly dark cases, several of these issues at the same time. We keep a lighthearted air, but all candidates carry the general assumption that these are awful individuals committing disgusting crimes. We ask that if you participate, you do so with the requisite seriousness such dark topics require; exclamations of how gross something is, whether serious or sarcastic, are disrespectful to the topics at hand, and if you cannot handle such topics, please do not participate.
The writing isn't necessarily final but I think it's time to finally put something like this up - I didn't think we'd have to, but stuff like this keeps happening and I think it's warranted.
Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Sep 3rd 2023 at 8:41:37 AM
I'm all for this idea and addendum, myself. While enthusiasm is appreciated, there's an awful lot of "OMG THIS IS SO GROSS WTF WHO WOULD WRITE THIS EVER???" unneeded commentary when particularly dark stories or characters are brought up on CM, and I think something like this would help curb that a lot.
No! That is NOT Solid Snake! Stop impersonating him!There are many regulars who've seen a lot of messed up things in the EPs in the threads over the years and still stick around—and even written those things for their own candidates too, so it probably goes without saying they can probably handle things like that. I can understand why it could be an excessive issue though, especially when someone posts a reaction like that and doesn't have a vote when they do—and admittedly, I'm not one to talk. While the reactions are meant to be part of the fun, I can understand needing to keep the flow of voting and approving going despite that.
STAR, I'll leave it to you and the others who are still currently active though. You feel the gage is inappropriate for the amount the thread gets, you'll find a good way to either regulate it or stop it altogether I'm sure.
There was a particular candidate back in May who we were all excited to discuss because of how unrelentingly evil said character was. I don't recall that particular discussion getting too carried away if you ask me, so that would possibly be a good scenario to judge by moving forward.
Edited by futuremoviewriter on Sep 3rd 2023 at 5:59:19 AM
There's a difference between an occasional joke alongside a vote - I know I've thrown in at least one "hot damn" into a vote, or the occasional "this was made for kids?" or something like that - and the stuff I'm talking about. I'm talking about stuff like "Jesus fucking Christ" (the bold was theirs, not mine), or even just now a CHRIST thrown in just because the candidate was a rapist (which, as said, happens every day). There are ways to keep things lighthearted and even make jokes about how bad someone is without over-the-top exclamations that get to the point of performance.
Edited by STARCRUSHER99 on Sep 3rd 2023 at 9:04:28 AM
Agreed with everything said here although worth asking, what about on the quality of a work?
For example when (I think it was Ravok and Jackie?) did the E Ps for the Gollum game, there were a fair few comments about the game's quality itself. I'm aware it's had a less than lukewarm reception but is that sort of stuff to be toned down as well do you guys think?
What's wrong D-16? Rise up!I’m not as worried about that, honestly. That’s stuff we’re able to manage because of the whole “all posts must include a thread-relevant purpose” rule that cut down on stuff like condolence and happy birthday posts - if those reach a point of disruption, they just get thumped now (and without naming names, it’s caused at least one forum suspension), so I’m not as worried because moderation’s good about intervening when it gets bad. We currently don’t have anything preventing this kind of behavior and I think it’s necessary now.
Agreed on limiting on the "my god this is disgusting" comments, though I'm fine with comments like "holy shit they're bad" as those aren't really insulting
"We'll meet again" | 🏳️⚧️
