To-do list:

• Finish adjusting the description of Mistaken for Romance. The definition for Mistaken for Romance was expanded, so change the description to describe the expanded definition (any type of relationship confused for romantic love) rather than the previous, narrower definition (platonic love confused for romantic love). Sandbox.Mistaken For Romance can be used to draft this rewrite.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Dec 11th 2023 at 11:21:24 AM

Opening and pinging ~Twiddler

24 wicks? But there are still hundreds of wicks that aren't in-universe, then. ~500 subtract ~30. And the description is still fully about audience behavior. Would it be better to migrate the in-universe examples to a new trope?

Also some of those out-of-universe examples have been used as YMMV trope entries. Just wanted to point that out.

I do like that idea as it'd be easier to keep track of valid wicks that way, but...

There's two types of in-universe examples. Characters having shipping goggles for other people, and characters having shipping goggles for Show Within a Show characters. Intuitively, it makes sense for the latter to be listed as in-universe for an Audience Reaction.

How different is the first type from Shipper on Deck?

Yeah. In-universe Shipping Goggles seems to be redundant to Shipper on Deck.

There’s the Community example (VideoExamples.Shipping Goggles) that demonstrates the phenomenon without a character outright supporting another ship.

I think this is more notable as an audience reaction.

Yeah, I don't see this as IUEO at all.

Agreed, shipper on deck seems sufficient for in universe And shipping goggles for audience reaction. Are there any that don't fit if I may ask?

Isn't it already classified as an audience reaction? It's not on that index but it is on Home Page. I feel voting for audience reaction just means keeping the trope as is (assuming we are keeping it as a definition only trope).

Edited by MacronNotes on Sep 30th 2023 at 3:09:04 PM

I think Shipping Goggles used to be audience reaction until it was made definition-only, meaning it's already a definition-only audience reaction.

I don't think in-universe examples are the same as Shipper on Deck. Shipper on Deck is about a character who wants to see two characters together, so is actively trying to make them realise their feelings for each other; it doesn't matter whether they have feelings or not. That's why The Matchmaker is a sub-trope (it's a very specific kind of trying).

Shipping Goggles is about people seeing Ship Tease where none exists, and they don't necessarily ship those two characters together, they just incorrectly get it into their heads that there's something going on between them (correctly seeing ship tease that is genuinely happening will be Ship Tease and/or Everyone Can See It instead). If they do want to see the characters together and believe something should be done about it, they'll become a Shipper on Deck or even a full blown Matchmaker, otherwise, they're just bystanders to a scenario they're cooking up in their own minds (or a real scenario that they're misinterpreting as romantic when it's not).

I don't think there's a parent-child relationship between Shipping Goggles and Shipper on Deck because Shipper on Deck can stem from a variety of related tropes, such as Shipping Goggles, Ship Tease, Everyone Can See It, etc.. I'm not sure they're sister tropes either. Perhaps it's more akin to an aunt-niece relationship?

I do think it's worth having an objective IUEO trope to soak up the current in-universe SG examples, but only if enough examples exist for it to not stagnate as a non-thriving trope in the long-run. If that is the case, I also think it should be renamed to separate it from Shipping Goggles as a real life fan-speak term.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Sep 30th 2023 at 1:16:42 PM

I could see "Romance Filter" as a thing that could be pushed through TLP, separate from Shipping Goggles.

Hmm, good point.

Or Romance Goggles

Edited by Adept on Oct 1st 2023 at 12:25:01 AM

,

for Romance Filter.

OK, TLP draft started

The TLP thread now has at least two people saying, and I'm starting to agree, that the new idea is functionally indistinguishable from Mistaken for Romance. As it stands, the description of the latter is talking exclusively about platonic love, but frankly I don't see why it should be restricted to Platonic Life-Partners and the like: it would probably take minimal rewriting to broaden it to cover this.

Another TRS task I guess, but at least with the existence of the draft, the Shipping Goggles wicks can be removed.

Does that mean the thread can be starred?

Sure, this one's had no activity recently but has been leaning towards "no action".

We could simply clean any wicks for Shipping Goggles to ensure it's not being used as a trope.

Any In-Universe examples can be sent to the draft.

Or we could broaden Mistaken for Romance and put the examples there.

I'm of the opinion of just broadening Mistaken for Romance to include in-universe usages of Shipping Goggles, otherwise Shipping Goggles can be left as is for the YMMV/audience reactions because the wick check and just my own cursory glance at YMMV wicks doesn't show that much rampant misuse.

Yeah, that's another viable option, if the draft is not distinct enough, which I feel may be the case.