There will always be people who are just going to thumb up/thumb down candidates based on how the majority votes without reading the EP. Not much that can be done about it.
I don’t think people need to explain why they vote a certain way in their posts. Feels like you have to justify your vote and that feels wrong. Still remember how I was one of the few people who downvoted Hela from Thor: Ragnarok and some people immediately wanted an explanation.
Lastly, it’s not going to stop people from voting without reading the post. Instead of “Upvote for Dr. Puppykicker, Lord Orphan Crippler and Mr. Jaywalking” it will be “Yes for Dr. Puppykicker, he’s really nasty. Yes, for Lord Orphan Crippler because of what User XYZ mentioned. Yes for Mr. Jaywalking, who clearly passes the heinous standard.”
Edited by NTG on Oct 8th 2022 at 3:42:29 AM
I have been following these two cleanup threads since mid-2018 and learning that they have been locked has caused me to change my perspective on my behavior during my time there. I have been somewhat of a nuisance from time to time, sometimes posting stuff or suggestions people don't agree with (such as needlessly trying to trim entries that were too long). I am also regretful of having accused Acebrock of bad faith since I was snobbish at the time and didn't like that newcomers often kept making mistakes or missing rules and criteria.
Since the threads were locked due to behavior like this, I have lost my confidence in contributing to this trope cleanup effort and I don't intend to participate again if the cleanup threads are restarted. That said, I think that if a participant in the thread feels uncomfortable with how other tropers (especially newcomers) or themselves are acting, then they should take a break from the thread and tell the regulars about it or discuss on how they can improve their attitude and etiquette so they can make more meaningful contributions and treat newcomers with more tolerance. I remember trying to stay away from the cleanup threads after a particularly poorly-thought out post, then 43 stepped in and gave advice on how I can make participation happier for all of us (such as regularly voting on candidates and not pointlessly bringing up personal problems with existing entries).
I might discuss more about the 'personal problems with existing entries' part later.
Humanity is defined by its absurdity, and I am no exception.Exactly. The EP is a thing but explaining votes would make sure that people actually read the proposals, aren't just copying others and actually giving their own opinions, and would overall allow a much better voting system.
Of course, there should be a minimum quality necessary for the vote to be considered, so people can't just get away with "Yes to [CHARACTER] because they are very heinous".
Edited by CapitanoNox on Oct 8th 2022 at 1:25:54 PM
How exactly?
If everyone has to justify why the voted a certain way a person still can look at the last five upvotes and see what the other people wrote. If there’s a candidate whose noteworthy crime was blowing up a bus of school children everyone while post a variation of “Thumbs up for XY, because he blows up the school bus”. How would anyone know that the fifth guy who posts this actually read the whole EP or just read what everyone else has posted a mimic that?
I believe we should thrust that most people in the threat want to actively participate. Because if we assume that notable amount people don’t read E Ps at all, we may as well stop bothering making E Ps at all. There’s no way we can enforce people to read E Ps unless we put in some ridiculous restrictions.
I don’t think people have actively ignored it and simply aren’t aware how much of a problem this could be. Having you reported any suspicions user to ACW? He could check out the users in question and see if there’s a pattern and then have a private talk with them?
Edit: Yeah makes more sense.
Edited by NTG on Oct 8th 2022 at 5:00:33 AM
If we're on the rules of the thread again, I never understood why the CM/MB threads operated on rules that are completely different from the rest of the site. It seems strange to me that decisions are made in less than 24 hours when most (all?) other threads that require consensus have to abide by the 3 day rule (and n TL Pyou need to wait even longer) as well as get a 2/1 consensus instead of just dive more yeas than nays.
Other than slowing down a very fast moving thread, which I see as more of a benefit personally (easier to get your posts in and easier to learn the culture), why shouldn't these threads operate on the same rules as the rest of the site? No cleanup thread needs to move at the speed of light, and I think slowing these two threads down to create more time to deliberate and encourage newcomers to come in and learn can only be a plus for both the threads and the site. Its not like they're going to stop being complete monsters or magnificent bastards if you have to wait a few days to put them up, is it?
My troper wall2:1 seems unnecessary when TLP also uses 5 above. I don't know why we need to change that. This isn't crowners where we have a mass of people voting annomonysly.
Like I don't think that their are enough tropers to make 2:1 fesable if we're also trying to ensure that we also have everyone get a reason for voting on each candidate individually. That seems far too draining for everyone involved. When this part hasn't really been one of the big issues.
Plus like TLP it creates kind of an issue if whatever the issue that was causing issues is fixed but it's been such awhile that it's hard to now change direction to get it to 2:1 as some people have moved on. We remember we count the votes from the old discussion too like in TLP to ensure we get 5 above.
Edited by miraculous on Oct 8th 2022 at 5:29:06 AM
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."

Adding to my previous post, I just read through the last page of the now locked CM thread and I have to say, things like [1]
this exchange, where Lighty accuses Ordeaux of promoting themself right before the thread lock, when Ordeaux was offering to help, while apparently not rising to the point of rule-breaking (otherwise I assume it would have been thumped) definitely does not give people wandering in a good impression of the friendliness and cliquishness of the thread.
Things like what I experienced and what I just posted about here aren't necessarily rule breaking, but they are undeniably problematic and if I was accused of self-promoting when I was just offering to help, I know I wouldn't be happy.
My troper wall