TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Rename (cleaner definition; gathering name suggestions): Rid Me Of This Priest

Go To

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#501: Nov 18th 2010 at 2:52:30 PM

[up] All of those are too broad, too vague, too confusing, or too not this trope. That includes the current redirect which includes a huge amount of not this trope.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
SilentReverence adopting kitteh from 3 tiles right 1 tile up Since: Jan, 2010
adopting kitteh
#502: Nov 18th 2010 at 4:27:19 PM

@Black Humor: With When I Said Get Rid Of Him I can at least go "Huh?" when I see the title and then "Oh, I get it." when I read the description, rather than "How does this title make any sense?" after reading the description like I do now.
Funny, I get the exact same feeling with Will No One Rid Me Of This Priest, although I still think the priest should be gone.

Fanfic Recs orwellianretcon'd: cutlocked for committee or for Google?
BlackHumor Since: Jan, 2001
#504: Nov 18th 2010 at 6:29:41 PM

Actually, "That Wasnt An Order" sounds pretty good to me.

Why would it be too broad?

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#505: Nov 18th 2010 at 6:50:33 PM

First off, it makes the trope sound like something military. Second off, it's been shot down for various reasons about a dozen times during the course of this thread all ready. I'm not going to reiterate them all here.

edited 18th Nov '10 6:51:14 PM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
neoYTPism Since: May, 2010
troacctid (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#507: Nov 18th 2010 at 6:58:52 PM

That Wasn't a Request sounds like it would be implicitly followed by "...it was an order!"

Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#508: Nov 18th 2010 at 7:01:55 PM

^ And is used that way often enough such that it's usually used where in context, the "it was an order" can be implied without being said.

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#509: Nov 18th 2010 at 7:04:26 PM

That wasn't an order makes me think of the opposite. It wasn't an order, it's a request. I can't force you to do this, but I'd like you to. The two statements just happened to be linked like that. They're often flip flopped.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
tbarrie Since: Jan, 2001
#510: Nov 18th 2010 at 8:44:27 PM

The fact is that everyone decided we needed to change the name.
I don't remember that vote being unanimous.

Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#511: Nov 18th 2010 at 8:48:03 PM

<Mod Hat ON>

We are not going to rehash whether it needs to be renamed.

We are not going to rehash the names that have been voted down on the Alternative Titles Crowner.

<Mod Hat OFF>

TheInferno |Y| = |X| Add 5 from probably on Earth Since: Jul, 2010
|Y| = |X| Add 5
#512: Nov 19th 2010 at 11:45:27 AM

See, this is why we need to end this. Let the bloody thing rest in peace, it's been here for months, stinking the place up, and the only thing we can do now is argue about things the mods say we aren't supposed to argue about.

We've got a leader by three points, if the lead doesn't change by Monday, we should changeover the name. We've got 247 votes on this thing already. If someone comes up with a name that we can agree on, then we can do the whole shebang over again.

LACONIC: We have two choices.

  • Do something
  • Leave it sitting in bureaucracy.

Or three, if we have a miracle and someone comes up with a good name, we change it to that.

edited 19th Nov '10 11:47:10 AM by TheInferno

"The fact that your food can be made into makeshift bombs alarms the Hell out of me, Scrye." - Charlatan
Stratadrake Dragon Writer Since: Oct, 2009
Dragon Writer
#513: Nov 19th 2010 at 11:59:34 AM

+3 points, out of nearly 50 votes. That means about a 53% majority. You could get better results from a coin flip.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:00:48 PM by Stratadrake

An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.
Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#514: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:18:29 PM

You forgot # 3: Lock this one up as "inconclusive", and come back to it in three or six months, when we can see how well it's been doing.

Which is my inclination right now.

TheInferno |Y| = |X| Add 5 from probably on Earth Since: Jul, 2010
|Y| = |X| Add 5
#515: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:20:59 PM

It's better than a 50% majority. I don't know, I just don't want to be here this time next year because we can't figure out another name that people can agree on. We've got a single thing in the positive, which is better than what we had with our last crowner, which had a top net vote of 0.

At the very least, if we get to December 31st, 2010 11:59 pm, and we haven't come up with anything, and the one that is in the lead is still in the lead, can we change it over then? Please?

EDIT: [up]I don't really like it since we've been at this two months... at least it's better than nothing. I'd prefer to change to the one in the positive and then bring it back up in a couple of months.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:22:38 PM by TheInferno

"The fact that your food can be made into makeshift bombs alarms the Hell out of me, Scrye." - Charlatan
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#516: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:21:29 PM

I too want this to end but not with no change. The best consolation I can offer is Takahashi Couple to Belligerent Sexual Tension, which went through two intermediate names but settled on the right one eventually.

edited 19th Nov '10 12:24:51 PM by Elle

Twilightdusk Since: Jan, 2001
#517: Nov 19th 2010 at 12:30:04 PM

We let it sit for a month before because we couldn't agree on weather to rename or not and people (myself included) were stacking the odds through phrasing of the crowner. We have consensus that this needs to get changed, now the problem is what to change it to. The worst case if we just go with the current leading vote is that we reconvene later to discuss if that new name has helped the page at all. we know that keeping the current name will not help the page. Even if we decide it needs revisiting, any change is better than no change, because it's something that might help vs. something we know will not.

SilentReverence adopting kitteh from 3 tiles right 1 tile up Since: Jan, 2010
adopting kitteh
#518: Nov 19th 2010 at 2:43:29 PM

↑↑If those two intermediate names were worse than the original one, then I think it serves a precedent for this case. I'm sure once our heads are all level again in four or six months, we will can see that it just suffices with fixing (but I mean actually fixing) the historical quote.

In the meantime, if it goes for an intermediate worse name, the current winner of the crowner is the best of all the choices. It is far less ambiguous than the "Poor Communication Kills Super-Trope Title Bin" fixtures that are being wanna-reraised from the negative ones.

edited 19th Nov '10 2:44:42 PM by SilentReverence

Fanfic Recs orwellianretcon'd: cutlocked for committee or for Google?
TheInferno |Y| = |X| Add 5 from probably on Earth Since: Jul, 2010
|Y| = |X| Add 5
#519: Nov 19th 2010 at 3:13:42 PM

Nice work at sliding in the "we will can see that it just suffices with fixing (but I mean actually fixing) the historical quote." line. tongue

That said, if that's how it ends up in a few months, that's how it ends up. I agree with the intermediate name step.

"The fact that your food can be made into makeshift bombs alarms the Hell out of me, Scrye." - Charlatan
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#520: Nov 19th 2010 at 8:44:01 PM

No amount of time is ever going to confinve me that the full quote is a good title. Will No One Ever Rid Me Of This is the most I will concede to, and the only reason I didn't put it on this crowner was that it was in deep negatives in the last one, and I voted it up then. Every "close to the original quote, but fixed enough that I could live with it" option I offered got voted into the deep negatives.

If I say any more I might get in trouble for bringing up topics that Mada has told us not to.

edited 19th Nov '10 8:46:45 PM by Elle

BlackHumor Since: Jan, 2001
#521: Nov 20th 2010 at 5:36:09 PM

I vote for Madrugada's suggestion; we just don't have any kind of consensus on any of the names.

(Incidentally, this kind of thing was the root of my suggestion a while ago to vote for the new name FIRST and THEN vote for the rename.)

edited 20th Nov '10 5:37:51 PM by BlackHumor

Twilightdusk Since: Jan, 2001
#522: Nov 20th 2010 at 5:50:25 PM

[up] The problem with that order is that the second vote will be opposed both by people who don't like the name and people who don't want it renamed in the first place. In a vote like this that was fairly close in terms of if it would be renamed or not, that would be enough to block any "Rename to <name>" crowners.

BlackHumor Since: Jan, 2001
#523: Nov 20th 2010 at 5:52:34 PM

Maybe, but at least it would be blocked entirely instead of getting stuck in the mire like this.

But this isn't the topic; if you want to talk about it I can remake the thread in Wiki Talk.

rodneyAnonymous Sophisticated as Hell from empty space Since: Aug, 2010
#524: Nov 20th 2010 at 5:54:01 PM

New crowner with only the first few options? Or is that flagellating a deceased equine?

Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel. Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.
BlackHumor Since: Jan, 2001
#525: Nov 20th 2010 at 5:55:04 PM

This is a new crowner with only the first few options.

AlternativeTitles: RidMeOfThisPriesttake2
20th Apr '10 12:00:00 AM

Crown Description:

The Definition that the name needs to fit is as follows:

A person says something he does not mean literally; he does not mean for it to happen. Someone else hears the statement and interprets it as an order or request. The person who heard it acts on it, believing it to be the genuine desire of the speaker. This results in something the person who made the statement did not want or expect. Upon learning that the non-order was carried out, the person thought to have issued it is displeased.

  • The speaker does not
    • have to be alone when he makes the statement,
    • have to believe that no one heard him say it.
  • His awareness of or lack of awareness of the person who heard him is irrelevant.
  • The result does not have to be death or even serious harm.
  • The relationship between the person speaking and the person acting is irrelevant.
  • The statement does not have to be phrased as a rhetorical question.
  • The statement does not have to be made in anger or frustration.

Total posts: 609
Top