Another Troper Wrote:And the Headscratchers for tropes are back, which is cool. I never understood why Fast Eddie wanted them deleted.
I think it might have come from the "we must be more encyclopedic" drive in part, but I'm not sure now. There was also this idea I ran into somewhere that a trope as a general thing shouldn't cause headscratching, which hahahaha, no.
vorticity Wrote:Oh, an idea I had on the "No Lewdness, No Prudishness" name: how about "Safe for Work, Safe for Thought". Or maybe "Safe for Work, Open to Discussion". I'm still thumbing through a thesaurus for the last word.
The idea I'm trying to convey in the second clause is academic freedom, which is a really obvious thing for those of us who went to grad school, but I doubt most people understand what it is. Actually, I doubt most undergrads understand what academic freedom is.
As an idea, it kind of sounds right... but I can see a couple issues.
One, it might give people an expectation that pages will be/must be work-safe. Which could be a tall order for more things than just non-work-safe works.
Other, I'm pretty sure a lot of people will interpret "Safe for Thought" as "will not lead to calls for brain bleach". (Or maybe "will not trigger".) Which has nothing to do with what you're trying to express.
Bob Schroeck Wrote:It's ironic that I'm the one to say this, but the suggestion so far has far too many anime elements.
Well, anime does tend to get it's hooks in everything - though personally, I see giant swords as a video game thing.
DRAG0NFLIGHT, I think that's just too much stuff for one small image. Having a person in it doesn't seem like a good idea to me, and having recognizable characters is a really bad idea.
On the other hand, I think Bobs is over-simple. It doesn't really suggest "tropes" very much. I suggested the things I did because they seem like rather... trope-ey?... things whose general shape seems amenable to sticking out of a pile of stuff.
On 'Administrivia' - yeah, having some of that worked out before putting up the content sounds like a really good idea. (The content guidelines page also seems important, given how a content issue was a big part of why we're doing this.) Also, what are we doing with those pages from TV Tropes? (Are they even part of our data set?) In theory, some would be relevant if only for historical purposes, since they inform our starting position. But it shouldn't look like those are automatically *our* policies.
-Morgan.