Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask The Tropers
Go To
- Show Spoilers
- Night Vision
- Sticky Header
- Wide Load
WMG.Vegan Artbook. Here's the entry for the "Once they've killed all the humans who disagree with them, the vegans will turn on other carnivores" theory:
There are a lot of animals who eat meat too. To protect the herbivores (whom they've already killed all of humanity for) they'll kill all the omnivores and carnivores. This, of course, will lead to a horrific environmental catastrophe as the predator-free animals eat all the vegetation and then starve to death.
I deleted the bullet point with the edit reason "Removed an irrelevant bullet point that only served to bash vegans". It was restored with the justification that "Except it's not "bashing vegans." The word "militant" is significant. And the link in question IS relevant to the topic." I still don't think it belongs. The page is supposed to be about the work — not whether real-life vegans' attitudes towards predators make sense. Who's right here?
I'm unsure if the "The comic isn't meant to be taken seriously" theory belongs on the page at all. It seems like work bashing. It's not the only case of that I've seen either (WMG.The Legend Of The Titanic has an entry claiming the movie is a false-flag operation to discredit anti-whaling groups, for instance). Similarly, the (good) "The events of Pupa Vegan 319 were all one big frame-up." theory has a natter-y bullet point with work bashing and author bashing.
Edited by MathsAngelicVersion