Something just hit me

1234689

Comments

  • imagei will watch the heck outta this pumpkin patch
    Tnu, I'm not a spooky "authority".  I'm a literature student from England who found TV Tropes and liked it, dicked around and got into silly arguments and shitposted and did all the exact same daft things everyone else did, got a PM from an admin I hardly knew at the time asking me to help out, and said yes.

    The other TV Tropes mods could tell you similar stories.  We're not exactly the Mafia, here.
  • Wh y should the majority be ab le to decide for the minority? It's essentially mob rule.
  • imagei will watch the heck outta this pumpkin patch
    You'd rather the minority got to decide for the majority?

    That would kinda fuck up the crowner system, just a bit...
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:07:15
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    ^^It's not so much a majority thing as it is a moral / strategical thing.

    ^also that.
  • That's called "Democracy", Tnu.


    Y'know, that thing everyone always complains TVTropes isn't.

    Now can we cool down here? I come to this site to escape the "SA is right/SA is wrong" nonsense on TVT.

  • It's not a simple dichotomy your suggesting either an ochlocracy or an oligarchy. To me neither is better then the ot  her.
  • Who gives a fuck about SA? Srsly.
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    Yeah. Let's cool down.

    And to be honest, so do I (even though said nonsense has barely come up here).
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:09:16
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    To be fair Spain no one's talking about SA.

    Woah, ninjas.
  • I'm with Naney the only decent person i know who goes there is Josh Sawyer.
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    Can we please not veer the discussion to be about SA?

    (Not speaking in any position of authority, that would be abuse.)
  • To be fair Spain no one's talking about SA.

    My bad.

    But anyway, the main thing seems to be that we can all agree that there are some messed up people on TVTropes but not whether or not them being messed up is reason enough to ban them.

    I just don't see how that's an issue that even *has* a solution. 

  • ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    ^^Sorry, wasn't trying to.

    ^I know this is going to sound really mean and judgmental so I apologize in advance but I think paedophilic content is enough for a ban
  • Does anyone mind if I bring something up som eo  ne mentioned earlier?
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    ^^Not your fault.

    ^What is it?
  • I actually don't disagree, at least not in principle, but then we have to define what "paedophilic" means. Because it doesn't mean the same thing to everybody. Outright child porn has been banned as long as the site's existed, it's an issue of fence stuff like KnJ and where we draw the line.

    I mean, there are people who would think I'm a pedophile for watching Lucky*Star (as I've brought up before). Do you think they have a point? I certainly don't, but I'm sure some do.

    It's one of those things where it's very hard to get a clear answer.

  • edited 2012-01-11 01:16:38

    From what I read on the KnJ page struck me as though it was Deconstructing Lolicon.
  • Someone a while back brought up the notion t hat a possible criteria for bannign was being condescending. Or that that was or is used as a criteria. In my time and experiences on the wiki at least I never recalled that being the case.
  • It well might be--I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've never seen it--but I'm just using it as an example.


    I don't know, guys. Can I ask an honest question here? Is anyone just totally sick of talking about this, but feels like they for some reason *need* to? Because that's how I feel.


    Someone a while back brought up the notion t hat a possible criteria for bannign was being condescending. Or that that was or is used as a criteria. In my time and experiences on the wiki at least I never recalled that being the case.

    That's not against the rules no. Mostly because condescending-ness is hard to quantify.

  • edited 2012-01-11 01:18:39
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    ^^^But the intent doesn't really affect the result. The result is that it seems to be watched exclusively by paedophiles (maybe it isn't but it seems like it), and you don't want them on a site.

    ^I... kind of.
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    ^^I keep feeling that way.
  • I think this is just turning in to Humans Are Bastards at this point.
  • I mean let's be straight here, why do we care about this?

    I'll be frank, I care because I don't want to be called a pedo just because I'm sitting on the sidelines not doing anything. I don't want to be called a supporter of so-and-so or such-and-such just because I'm not actively opposing its opposite. It's gotten to the point where I want to tear my hair out over this but it just feels unavoidable.

  • edited 2012-01-11 01:21:04
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    ^^...How?

    ^I don't think anyone would call you a paedo. :/
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    ^^...why would that happen?
  • It's pretty much become "people are sick sick fucks blah blah incest blah blah pedophiles".
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:22:33
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    It's not talking about most of humanity, just a small pool of people. That in no way constitutes "Humans are Bastards"
  • What? Being labeled a pedo because you're not actively trying to drive out anyone who might even have the slightest chance of being one? It's happened before. 

    *sigh*

    I just can't care about this anymore. I know it's selfish and rude of me, but I just kind of want everyone to stop talking about it. 

    Am I alone here? Or am I not making sense?

  • You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
    Is anyone just totally sick of talking about this, but feels like they for some reason *need* to? Because that's how I feel.
    I get that. It's frustrating that these discussions never accomplish anything, but I keep going anyway because I want to see things improve.
  • ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    Okay, everyone wants me to shut up so I'll stop.
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:24:45
    ^^^ Not at all
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    I have tried to care about this sort of stuff, but some of this stuff frustrates me and I can't think of any solutions.

    Anyway, it would probably serve you well to step away from this thread, Superglobe.
  • Vociferous: I'm not talking to or about you in particular, I mean this subject in general.

    I get that. It's frustrating that these discussions never accomplish anything, but I keep going anyway because I want to see things improve.

    But that's the thing. They won't improve. Even if we ban every pedophile and racist and whatever, the "TVTropes has issues that need to be addressed" crowd will still find something new that's "wrong" with the site. I mean seriously, I think our issue at this point is actually that we're too self-critical, we're always talking about the problems we have with the wiki, the forums, and whatnot. When's the last time any of us said anything we liked about the place? 

    Anyway, it would probably serve you well to step away from this thread, Superglobe.

    Is that a suggestion or an order? I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I'm just asking for honest opinions.

  • ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    I think he's only saying that because he knows you don't really like the topic much, so I guess a suggestion.

    Anyway, I know it's a moot point, but I still think paedos and racists are people you wouldn't want on a site.
  • I like that I can talk about being A CRAZY HOMICIDAL LUNATIC and no-one notices.

    Some tropers are pretty cool, and I'm lad I can be openly gay and kinky there.^w^
  • Watch whatever you damn well please. No on e has the right to tell you how to live so long as you do not directly initiate force or fraud on anyone el se.
  • Anyway, I know it's a moot point, but I still think paedos and racists are people you wouldn't want on a site.

    I know, and I sympathize. As an idea, it's great, but it's so hard to put in to practice.

  • edited 2012-01-11 01:31:18
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    Oh. It seems we are in agreement then.

    This is unexpected...
  • How do you tell if someone is a Paedo?
  • So long as they don't try to use force or fraud against anyone to herm their person or property None of my business what they think. That's the bauty of it 9I don't havew to like them if I don't want to.
  • But.

    But. 

    Butbutbut.

    Thats. What I've said. In every. Single. Discussion. This topic has come up in, Vociferous.

    ;_;

    ;__;


  • How do you tell if someone is a Paedo?

    In general? You don't. You'd have to guess, therein lies the problem.

  • If you can't tell, why ban?
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:35:35
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    Well excuse me for not being able to parse things correctly 100% of the time, GAWD.

    Naney: If they make it obvious, you don't need to, but otherwise I guess you don't. If they aren't making it public on ever online discussion they take part in, they're probably much less at risk for doing something terrible.

    You don't just ban people you think are a paedo with no evidence, duh.
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:35:31
    You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
    In general? You don't. You'd have to guess, therein lies the problem.
    Which is why, in practice, your policy would be less "ban pedos" and more "ban people who express approval of pedophilia."
  • If you ask the Media eveyrone is a Paedophile.
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:35:58
    ~*tasteless*~
    大學的年同性戀毛皮

    aaaaa
    What CA said. Same with rape, murder and things of that nature.
  • edited 2012-01-11 01:36:45

    I don't think even most Paedos approve of Paedophilia.



    MURDER? 0w0
  • Best policy is to just not trust anyone and treat absolutely every o ne with scrutiny.
  • Yes, but what counts as "approval of pedophilia"?

    I can name only a handful of people who would willingly say "it's okay to be a pedo". And none who would defend an active pedo. 


    Beyond that, you have to get into "well this person implied" and "this person watches x, y, and z, so they MUST" and things like that. And that is not something I want to be involved in.


    Well excuse me for not being able to parse things correctly 100% of the time, GAWD.

    I wasn't yelling.

Sign In or Register to comment.