[001]
BlueChameleon
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sorry about this, but my previous reply just comes up blank for me. I don\'t know if anyone else has this problem?
I don\'t see anything wrong with the main text, give or take one or two exaggerations. It doesn\'t seem to imply anything other than those who \'analyse things for a living\' seem to get an unfair reputation in the media as boring, shallow and sad. The third paragraph was probably a bit OTT about how wrong such a reputation is, but otherwise I don\'t see where exactly the tone suggests anyone who thinks differently is \'obviously insane and wrong\'.
As for the examples, well, there I can see your point. Not all of them suggest it, some are pretty neutral, but this sort of thing has to go:
--> \'TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Life! Reducing stories to their fundamental tropes takes away all the magic and wonder! </sarcasm> \'
I\'ll get right on it.
Last point: I think there might be a misunderstanding here. Perhaps some tropers do feel \'vitriolic\' about it. If it\'s about the mere existence of this trope, well, I\'d agree with you. Sooner or later, you find someone who tends to be a little more analytical and stoic than emotionally awed, and to deny that such people exist would be silly. I think the main gripe, though, is how ubiquitous this trope is, and how it\'s treated as the norm rather than as an exception. No one wants to feel they\'re being misrepresented, do they?
Can\'t say how you feel about it - lost something, gained something, indifferent - but personally I like to think of learning about refraction in rainbows as a double dose of pleasure rather than a halving. Not necessarily the same kind of pleasure, granted, but pleasure nonetheless.
I don\'t see anything wrong with the main text, give or take one or two exaggerations. It doesn\'t seem to imply anything other than those who \'analyse things for a living\' seem to get an unfair reputation in the media as boring, shallow and sad. The third paragraph was probably a bit OTT about how wrong such a reputation is, but otherwise I don\'t see where exactly the tone suggests anyone who thinks differently is \'obviously insane and wrong\'.
As for the examples, well, there I can see your point. Not all of them suggest it, some are pretty neutral, but this sort of thing has to go:
--> \'TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Life! Reducing stories to their fundamental tropes takes away all the magic and wonder! </sarcasm> \'
I\'ll get right on it.
Last point: I think there might be a misunderstanding here. Perhaps some tropers do feel \'vitriolic\' about it. If it\'s about the mere existence of this trope, well, I\'d agree with you. Sooner or later, you find someone who tends to be a little more analytical and stoic than emotionally awed, and to deny that such people exist would be silly. I think the main gripe, though, is how ubiquitous this trope is, and how it\'s treated as the norm rather than as an exception. No one wants to feel they\'re being misrepresented, do they?
Can\'t say how you feel about it - lost something, gained something, indifferent - but personally I like to think of learning about refraction in rainbows as a double dose of pleasure rather than a halving. Not necessarily the same kind of pleasure, granted, but pleasure nonetheless.
to:
Sorry about this, but my previous reply just comes up blank for me. I don\\\'t know if anyone else has this problem?
