NATTER ALERT!

How much of this entry on WhyFandomCantHaveNiceThings.Web Original can be cut? A lot of it is describing irrelevant stuff that didn't actually lead to something getting taken away from the fandom. I can't even tell if anything was taken away because of the fandom at all.

• Rule 34 (the site) pulled toddlercon images off of their servers thanks to pressure from their hosting company Dreamhost. The following April, after they had completed a move to Dutch servers, the site put up a fake FBI warning for April Fools' Day, and claimed Lolicon and Shotacon were about to go. This was helped along by the website E-Hentai actually having to do this at the same time. The response when the veil was lifted was a hacker taking over Rule 34 and replacing everything with pictures of tigers (both tanks and animals), then his penis, and finally three straight weeks of DDoS, which obliterated a server and made the site run like crap for years. Interestingly, the second April Fools' joke went completely unnoticed due to the furor over the first, with a total of three comments over the following week about it. The second 2010 April Fools' joke? Aliasing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles to Big_Green_Talking_Turtles, Baxter's infamous line in the first season. Was lampshaded later when the site ran a vote for what missing features from the move were to return. This being the internet, the joke option won, and so everything was turned into Atari Jaguars instead, continuing the big cat theme the troll had started.^note In reality, their code was on that dead server, and their coder was chased off during the first April, so there was no one to repair them anyway.

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 4th 2021 at 11:46:33 AM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

The entry could probably be shortened in some way. Maybe remove some of the unnecessary information and try to figure out what the entry is trying to say. Or cut it if the entry really is indecipherable.

...They pulled what? Why would they even have that in the first place? What is wrong with people?

Is that what the entry is saying? Absolutely nuke it then, we do not endorse, condone, or allow pedophilia. I cannot believe I even have to say that.

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Mar 4th 2021 at 12:01:58 PM

TRS Queue | Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall

Yeahhhh, that entry kind of sounds like it's framing PORNOGRAPHY OF TODDLERS as the nice thing fandom can't have.

Absolute destiny... apeachalypse?

Reposting this because I was buried.

Found three examples on Ice Age's YMMV subpage:

• Ass Pull: Diego's survival in the first movie has NEVER been explained to any adequate degree beyond, "Well, shit, this is a kid's movie so we can't really have him die." (Although according to the creators, Diego actually did die in that scene and came back, but that just makes things even more confusing. He was originally going to die, until his voice actor suggested they have him live in the end.)
  • If one takes Diego's Defrosting Ice King status into account, then the filmmakers might have meant it in a metaphorical way. The "villainous disciple to Soto" Diego had died, and came back a changed tiger.

---

• Critical Dissonance: Although the first film did get a fresh rating of 77% on Rotten Tomatoes, many critics did complain that the movie felt too similar to Shrek and Monsters, Inc.. However, the audience enjoyed it more, as it was a box office success and it's usually seen as being the best of the franchise. The second and third films also fall into this category. Despite both films receiving mixed reviews, both sequels received generally positive reviews from the general public and were massive blockbuster successes, managing to outgross the first film, with the second film having the biggest opening weekend out of the entire franchise with the third film remaining as the highest-grossing film in the franchise. However, most people debate on whether which sequel is the better one. Even Continental Drift was hit with this, it received mixed reviews from critics, but earned an A- and a 62% from audiences on Rotten Tomatoes.

---

• Uncanny Valley: The CGI in the first film can be this for some, as it hasn't really aged very well.
  • The humans in particular are pretty off-looking. There’s a reason why Roshan eventually became a Memetic Loser, though he at least is the most endearing example, as the other humans, um, well...
    • That being said, to be fair, it's more justified than most examples considering that these humans are most likely meant to be Neanderthals or some other early hominin rather than modern-day Homo sapiens.
  • Soto’s pack haven’t aged well either as they, despite being highly stylized, look less consistent compared to Diego as he keeps appearing in the series, coupled with Shira’s introduction in the fourth film. Soto himself escapes this as he does look similar to Diego, and Lenny to a lesser extent in that he’s actually a scimitar cat whose proportions besides his inaccurately larger size are pretty much the right ones for his species.

---

What do I do with this trio?

he/him

The Critical Dissonance entry I think could just be cut. Each of the sequels has their own YMMV page, with a CD entry as appropriate... and while the first film has a difference between audience and critical approval, this is not unusual. In this case both audiences and critics generally agreed that its "A pretty good movie," So I'm not seeing the dissonance...

Edited by underCoverSailsman on Mar 4th 2021 at 11:26:26 AM

Done.

he/him

Uncanny Valley does not really fit the actual trope.

"Listen up, Marina, because this is SUPER important. Whatever you do, don't eat th“ “DON'T EAT WHAT?! Your text box ran out of space!”

This is on Riverdale under Older Than They Think:

• Many people assume that Jughead was always asexual. While the original comics did have him as a "woman hater", he has had love interests including a time traveling descendant of his best friend, and his sexuality has only been confirmed in his reboot solo series.
  • Asexuality is only about sex, though. Having a love interest doesn't automatically make a character non-asexual unless the relationship is exlipictly sexual. It's the Aromantics who don't do romance (but who might do sex). It's also to note that Jughead's every relationship in the comics hasn't been very long and he could've dated not because he was particularly interested but because he thought he had to.

The subbullet isn't wrong but is meaningless in this context. If people think Jughead is Ace, whether or not he fits the literal definition isn't relevant.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Also wouldn't Jughead's asexuality be Newer Than They Think?

And yeah, the way the reboot comics depict Jughead seems to be equating asexuality with aromanticism. (I wonder if that's a tropeworthy concept, BTW?)

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 5th 2021 at 10:58:58 AM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

I'm not going to say that concept isn't tropeworthy, but I don't know that it would really work in practice.

In my mind, most of the characteristics or behaviors that would clearly distinguish between asexuality and aromanticism would only be found in situations involving (or building up to) a sexual encounter. Outside of those situations, I don't know how you'd address that distinction without going out of your way to do so.

Obviously, asexuality and aromanticism are two different (albeit related) concepts, but many concrete behaviors or characteristics that might signify one can also be used to signify the other. I don't know that there's an effective, intuitive, and unobtrusive way to differentiate them without tackling the issue head on. And not every story is going to do the latter — be it disallowed for whatever reason, or simply outside the scope of the story being told.

Apart from that concern, there's the usual concern of "are there enough examples", speculative troping, fighting over examples, etc.

More to the point of the topic, for the Ice Age Ass Pull entry I'd cut everything past "Well, shit, this is a kid's movie so we can't really have him die."

Nothing past that really adds anything to the entry except word count.

Found in Yu-Gi-Oh! SEVENS:

• Americans Hate Tingle: In part due to the lack of Rush Duel cards in the west and part because of a difference in demographics the show is quite popular among younger Japanese fans while the generally older western fans are more mixed to negative on the show. Notably compared to previous series the franchise wiki and tv tropes itself are slow to update and create pages for it, which primarily comes from more invested western fans while the younger japanese fans the show mostly gains are not the ones who'd provide these updates.
  • This seems to have been averted as the show went on - many fans now find the anime to be Actually Pretty Funny due to it avoiding the immature humor that's been noted as a big problem for younger-skewing Yu-Gi-Oh! anime, and the duels, while nowhere as intricate as those of the previous two series, have clearly defined rules and are easy to follow, which was the stated goal of the producers.

Are the bolded lines even needed in this entry?

Read the letter Cricket!

Whatever you do, that second bullet points needs to go. If the show really is becoming more popular in the West, that info should be mentioned in the first bullet point. And don't use the word "averted" since YMMV can't be Played With.

Alright, I merged the entries and removed the aversion. Thanks!

Read the letter Cricket!

The natter on Watch It for the Meme is really bad. Here's one example I especially hate:

• "You're Winner!" Really, the meme is the only reason to even touch Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing.
  • Actually, the reason is that it is memetically bad and buggy, what with infinite reverse acceleration, no collision detection, the fact that it's impossible to lose...

he/him

If I expanded the Most Wonderful Sound entry on YMMV.The Mandalorian like so, would it look like natter to someone who wouldn't know that I wrote the whole entry myself?

• Grogu cooing "Patu!" beginning in Chapter 10 sounds adorable, and hints that he's matured during his adventures with Din, even if one can only guess whether it means anything in his language.^note "I'm hungry" sounds like a plausible guess, considering Chapters 10-12 all have him say it while trying to eat.

Reposting since buried.

From YMMV.Wolfwalkers

• Fourth Wall Myopia: Even when taking the Oliver Cromwell's real life actions against Ireland into account, it is very easy to forget that much of the conflict came about due to the fact that the Wolfwalkers is considered a superstition In-Universe by the majority of the townsfolk and the story is told from the girls' point of view. As far they know, their livelihoods are being constantly threatened by Savage Wolves, as the attacks on the woodcutters and peasants early in the film show. It doesn't help that wolves usually don't land themselves on a wanted poster and warrant the need for a specialized hunter in the first place if they didn't actually do anything dangerous to the townsfolk, implying that the attacks are indeed a constant in their lives. If the wolf pack is anything like the wolves of Paris, we would have been cheering for the soldiers. Though it's also implied the need for deforestation is a recent one due to English occupation: English lords and soldiers brought more hungry mouths than the Irish ancestral farms could feed, creating the need to clear forests for more farmlands, which created the conflict with the wolves to begin with. (Much like how the real-life "savage wolves of Paris" only attacked after human mismanagement of farms and local game trashed the local ecosystem and drove the wolves to starvation.) It helps that in-universe the Irish resent the English colonizers as much as the wolves, and clearly want the English gone if they can't clear out the wolves since the Irish farms can feed the Irish or English but not both... and the English "Protector" shows he has no intention of leaving.

This is one user refuting another. How do I clean this up?

Edited by Morgisboard on Mar 24th 2021 at 3:18:53 AM

Found this a while ago on SilvaGunner:

• Canon Discontinuity: There's no acknowledgement on the channel that the original Bean rips or the 9/11 rips, as well as the events surrounding them, ever happened (Though the rips were reuploaded to Flustered Fernando). The fans also like to prefer to act like those rips/events never happened, either.
  • Actually, this video includes them in the lore, including the removal of the 9/11 rips.

he/him

Cut the whole example. If it was acknowledged in canon then it's just straight up not Canon Discontinuity. Repair, Don't Respond.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Done.

he/him

Morgisboard: I personally don't think the bolded section really refutes the first section so much as it just adds to it. I personally don't think it's pertinent to the task at hand — if anything, it'd go under Analysis, not Fourth Wall Myopia — so I'd cut it.

So like the whole example or just the bold?

Bold.

i'm not sure if this is the right place to put it, but recently a lot of the sonic games had a The One With link added to the top of their description. it seems to have been spearheaded by one particular user who added it to the "main" sonic games, GeneralGigan, and then others followed suit with carrying the joke to other sonic pages. is that okay, or should it be removed? it isn't really harmful or anything, but doesn't really add anything either, which is why i'm bringing it to the natter thread. i'd prefer to remove it, if i'm being honest, because it just feels very in-jokey.