TV Tropes - Why the hate?

[Ilya Muromets]

IMO, all the hate just boils down to one things: there's no decent quality control. As mentioned, people can just edit in whatever they like for no factual basis. Others co-opt it to tell people about themselves (which is why the site eventually killed the whole This Troper page). And the rest is essentially the stupid subjective crap that permeates from fan sites and fan forums--except now there's several people from a myriad of fandoms ready to either gush or rant about something. The formatting and the "contribute anything" nature also makes it very easy for pages to mutate into eye-killing WALL OF FUCKING BADLY EDITED TEXT.

Yeah, at the heart of it the, qual con on that site is mostly irrelevant. Just barely above your typical image board, at times. Sure, the people who run the site and some of the other tropers do try to do quality control, but since it's a wiki that can just be quickly undone by the next few editors. Not to mention that those guys can be cleaning up and organizing a page one moment, then turn around and post something stupid on another page.

That said, I still regularly go on TVTropes. Why? Well, it can be fun if you don't take it seriously. And buried under all the crap, sometimes there are these teeny tiny tidbits that can be really entertaining. Plus, I've discovered some new franchises I hadn't even heard of thanks to certain entries, and been nostalgically reminded of ones I'd forgotten but used to like a lot.

I guess if all of the crap doesn't get to you too much and don't take it all seriously, it's not so bad. Then again, I'm one to talk. I lost my temper when someone tried to make a moral equivalency argument between the USA and Japan in WW2, and ended up getting involved in a shouting match on the discussion pages. I'm not to proud of that.

[Shroom Man 777]

You know, Reading Shroom's post, I got this terrible feeling in the pit of my stomach. Shroomy isn't a Troper, is he? Because that looked too authentic to be pulled out of anyones ass.

Even shroom's.

Tropes in Real Life:

*This Troper thinks that the above text is right, that Shroomy might be a troper!

*This Troper disagrees and thinks that Shroomy IS a trope!

*OH NO!

*FROD FROD FROD

*This Troper really wants to see Stark's thoughts on the matter as well!

*STRAK STRAK STRAK!

I don't see the hate for it, Professor Shroomiarty. You can always just ignore the "anime" sub-sections in each trope.

How can you ignore something that forces you to abuse your scroll wheel just to get past?

Actually, I don't mind it the animus that much. But it's just that using TVTropes in any discussion at all is pretty shit worthless. Any person who discusses literature or fiction SRS BSNSSLY really doesn't have to mention the site at all, it's completely unnecessary. Why is it so?

Because:

I like reading TV Tropes but I've never yet encountered anyone who treats it as anything but a joke site with tons and tons of goofy in-jokes and references. I always thought it was meant to be treated lightheartedly.

This means that it's pretty much worthless to any SRS BSNSS discussion.

Shroomy, lighten the fuck up. It's a fun way to kill time, and many of the non anime sites are quite informative. there is far more to it then just anime bullshit.

There is far more anime bullshit to it than non anime sites that are quite informative. And my previous post was very fuck up lightening.

IMO, all the hate just boils down to one things: there's no decent quality control. As mentioned, people can just edit in whatever they like for no factual basis. Others co-opt it to tell people about themselves (which is why the site eventually killed the whole This Troper page). And the rest is essentially the stupid subjective crap that permeates from fan sites and fan forums--except now there's several people from a myriad of fandoms ready to either gush or rant about something. The formatting and the "contribute anything" nature also makes it very easy for pages to mutate into eye-killing WALL OF FUCKING BADLY EDITED TEXT.

They removed the This Troper pages? What a shame. That was really fun, pathetic, and at least showed that TVTropes was totally just "for fun" and with no pretenses of SRS BSNSS at all. Fuck it, TVTropes should never have a pretense of SRS BSNSS at all. It'd be far more awesome if TVTropes entries resembled shit from 4chan or from Testing or posts done by STRAK or even yours truly! Seriously! Make TVTropes posts all fucking around, like that encyclopedia dramatica shitwiki or something. Yeah!

TVTROPES is STRAK

entries:

BLEACH
* This Troper is thinking STRAK STAK STRAK

NARUTO
* This Troper agrees with the above Troper, FROD FROD FROD

GUNDAM SEED BANANA PEEL
* This Troper SHROM SHROM SHROM

K-ON
* This Troper goes am i rite?

HELLSING
* *I'm a smarmy asshole*?

EVANGELION
* WHO KNEW!!!!

Yeah, at the heart of it the, qual con on that site is mostly irrelevant. Just barely above your typical image board, at times. Sure, the people who run the site and some of the other tropers do try to do quality control, but since it's a wiki that can just be quickly undone by the next few editors. Not to mention that those guys can be cleaning up and organizing a page one moment, then turn around and post something stupid on another page.

They should have more entries where This Troper acts like a smug asshole, going am i rite and who knew and talking about the new LOL Fatty Nerd tropes for fatties. That'd be the greatest thing. Ever.

TVSTRAKS!

That said, I still regularly go on TVTropes. Why? Well, it can be fun if you don't take it seriously. And buried under all the crap, sometimes there are these teeny tiny tidbits that can be really entertaining. Plus, I've discovered some new franchises I hadn't even heard of thanks to certain entries, and been nostalgically reminded of ones I'd forgotten but used to like a lot.

All TVTropes is good for is as a bigass list of literature/TV/animu/series/movie trivia compiled by obsessed shit fans and incredibly bored people with an incredible excess of boring time. And it's done for OTHER obsessed shit fans and other incredibly bored people with an incredible excess of boring time. Also, maybe, some fatties quite possiby.

And that's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

*grabs a handful of molten cheese from molten cheese bucket and gobbles it*

I guess if all of the crap doesn't get to you too much and don't take it all seriously, it's not so bad. Then again, I'm one to talk. I lost my temper when someone tried to make a moral equivalency argument between the USA and Japan in WW2, and ended up getting involved in a shouting match on the discussion pages. I'm not to proud of that.

TVTropes should be treated as a shameful indulgence that one performs with much guilt and keeps secret only to himself, and occasionally sharing it with only few other like-minded people. Like how I PM pornography to Illya Morumets and Crazedwraith on occassion. Neither of these things should be brought up in polite and decent company.

The trope wiki does encourage a form of intellectual laziness when it comes to analysis of literature. It gives the impression that all fiction is made up of interacting tropes, which is basically the only way you can interpret a whole bunch of people making huge lists of of tropes which they 'picked up' while reading/watching any particular story. Rather than discuss the themes behind a story or the motivations of characters or whatever, a 'troper' looks for devices that have been used in other stories before, no matter how tenuous the connection is. Usually the definition for any trope is quite broad so it can refer to characters who are wildly different but have a few familiar traits, which is how you can end up with Char Aznable and Adrian Veidt on the same list of 'Well Intentioned Extremists'.

FROD is right.

One of the reasons why I dislike TVTropes is because of how it treats these "trope" things, whatever the fuck they are. Before reading that fucking website and wasting hours of my life on it, I never even KNEW what the fuck a "trope" was. And now, it's all the rage with internet people. Fuck it.

FROD is right.

I dislike TVTropes precisely because, now, a lot of amateur writers of young age and impressionable brains have it drilled into their heads that fiction is composed entirely of these "tropes" and thus are engineering their fictions based on these pre-conceived shit tropes. They're writing stories according to the tropes they've read, because it's cool. They're basing characters on cool tropes. They're writing scenes, or making characters do XYZ-, because they were enthralled by reading Most Badass Moment of Crowning or whatever and think that this thing is some awesome shit-component to fit into their works.

Fuck that.

Tropes - particularly the worthless "for fun" shit in TVTropes - are NOT a blueprint or a guide to writing fiction, it's not even a decent analysis of fiction at all! The best it's for is as a compilation of useless shit-trivia that's only good for wasting hours on to alleviate boredom! That's it! Nothing more, and EVERYTHING LESS!

Please reading five of the entries and Shroom adding his usual embellishments are all he did. Hell, his entry was short and to the point thus inadmissable for a trope. He needs at least 40 other entries with back and forth that no one can make heads and tails of with a dash of spoiler hiding.

And we should all feel glad we destroyed another bit of Shroom's sanity with him having to read an hour of that place .

It takes more than a shit-shitty bunch of shit-shits written by shit-shits to shit-shit me, you shitty piece of shit-shit.

And at least it gives me another source of shit-shit to vent my shit-shits to, for shit-shittening.

Fuck TVTropes.

[Ghost Rider]

Please reading five of the entries and Shroom adding his usual embellishments are all he did. Hell, his entry was short and to the point thus inadmissable for a trope. He needs at least 40 other entries with back and forth that no one can make heads and tails of with a dash of spoiler hiding.

And we should all feel glad we destroyed another bit of Shroom's sanity with him having to read an hour of that place .

It takes more than a shit-shitty bunch of shit-shits written by shit-shits to shit-shit me, you shitty piece of shit-shit.

And at least it gives me another source of shit-shit to vent my shit-shits to, for shit-shittening.

Fuck TVTropes.

Your shit-shitting is weak cockmonger! I demand a fish and two bongs as repayment!

Besides to get the full hilarity, realize that trope is nothing more then another way of saying cliche or an embellishment of a sung part in Mass during the middle ages.

If it was the second part, I'd say the site would be far more entertaining.

[Shroom Man 777]

At least reading all those shitty trope entries in Church Latin would be cooler, yes.

[Akhlut]

At least reading all those shitty trope entries in Church Latin would be cooler, yes.

How does one say "FROD FROD FROD" in Church Latin, BTW?


Anyway, on to the topic at hand: I don't think the hate is directed so much at the site, in and of itself, as the people using it as a reference or referencing its title pages for arguments, much as Blayne, now banned, did. I mean, there's a vast difference between going there and reading shit for shits and giggles and going there and referencing the site for arguments and/or insults.

Although, I do agree heartily that aspiring authors should only look at it for humor value and should ignore it when actually trying to write something. Good fiction isn't about stringing together dozens of cliches and trying to shoehorn in Crowning Moments of Whatever, just so people will masturbate to your awesome characters, but about actually writing realistic and engaging characters. There's a reason that The Old Man and the Sea is such a beloved book versus a shitload of fiction, fan or original, put out on the internet today. Turns out that if you make a realistic, engaging character and write about him, it will making a lasting, entertaining story, whereas if you just make characters so that cool things can happen to them, most people won't give a shit.

[Shroom Man 777]

At least reading all those shitty trope entries in Church Latin would be cooler, yes.

How does one say "FROD FROD FROD" in Church Latin, BTW?

They do it when people start convulsing, speaking in tongues, handling live rattlesnakes, and generally when it's in the fun part of those medieval masses after the albinos from Opus Dei flagellate themselves and stuff.

[Shinn Langley Soryu]

On the face of it, TV Tropes may seem like a logical outgrowth of Joseph Campbell's work in comparative mythology, but there are just so many things working against it, like the fact that people simply like to see patterns and connections in everything. It's how conspiracy theories work, it's how shit like seeing the face of the Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese sandwich and hearing Satanic references when playing Led Zeppelin records backwards comes about, and as FROD mentioned, it's how these tropers go about looking for literary conventions, plot devices, motifs, character types, media trends, and other things. To modify one of Shroom's examples, K-On! has precisely jack shit in common with Naruto, Bleach, Gundam SEED, Hellsing, or Evangelion other than the fact that they're all animus and mangoes, but hey, if you can link Char Aznable and Adrian Veidt together on the most dubious of pretenses, who knows? You can probably get away with saying that Mio Akiyama, Tsunade, Orihime Inoue, Lacus Clyne, Seras Victoria, and Asuka Langley Soryu all have some kind of trait in common or something equally crazy if you think about it enough, but please, for the sake of your sanity and mine, don't.

The TV Tropes administration warns that the site will ruin your life if you spend too much time there. That should say enough.

[Sarevok]

Tvtropes is one of the best things to come out of the internet in recent years. Its funny, enlightning and often true.

[Formless]

its just something that fanboys blatantly ripped off from the That Guy With the Glasses website

I'm not really sure you can call something "ripped off" if it openly acknowledges the origin of the term, has a paragraph explaining said origin, a picture from the website of origin, and a url to the video it came from. NC & Co coined the term, they're just continuing to use it.

What part of "blatantly" didn't you understand? That is precisely what I meant. Just because you can cite who it came from doesn't mean it wasn't ripped off.

[Sarevok]

and this "ripping off" somehow matters because ?

[Formless]

It just shows how intellectually lazy and uncreative the users of said wiki are. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Anguirus]

With the exception of a few of our more hardworking members in History and SLAM who actually do hard work and cite things...where exactly do we get off calling their site frivolous? I love this site and I get intellectual stimulation out of it, but there are days when it's just "here's today's news + echo chamber."

I go here to amuse myself, which is the same reason I go to TVTropes.

[Formless]

Try again when someone actually says that its frivolous, and not stupid.

[Bakustra]

With the exception of a few of our more hardworking members in History and SLAM who actually do hard work and cite things...where exactly do we get off calling their site frivolous? I love this site and I get intellectual stimulation out of it, but there are days when it's just "here's today's news + echo chamber."

I go here to amuse myself, which is the same reason I go to TVTropes.

It's not necessarily about frivolity. I would actually argue that more frivolity would make the site better, although that would only be a tiny increase, since it's buried under the weight of the pedants (weeaboo and otherwise) who have co-opted the site. The problem is that more and more of the site has become seen as serious and used seriously or cited seriously by people. That is something that has even cropped up on the site itself. Something can be frivolous, or it can be serious, but it can scarcely be both. When you try to merge the two (note that frivolity is not equivalent to humorous) you end up with a general failure. Frivolous is literally an antonym of serious; the two are more akin to sodium and water than to the cliched oil and water. While you yourself admit that you find this site intellectually stimulating, I would like to make a comparison (those who are cynical of/embittered towards technical analysis may put their coats over their heads or otherwise obstruct their eyes now).

The founding role of this site was about artistic analysis; a curious and unusual method of analysis, and one that would be no doubt looked down upon by traditional analysts (though I have been surprised before), but analysis nonetheless, and, more importantly, deep analysis. While traditional methods focus on plot, theme, and character, and technical on setting and events, they both go beyond the surface level, essentially revealing the hidden faces of the work/world. While people may disagree with these hidden faces (but let us not talk about bitter Jerry Pournelle fans now) and whether they exist, they are still entertaining diversions that allow us to see the work in a new light. While the benefits of artistic analysis are too obscure to really discuss here, the point is that the methods of deep analysis used in traditional and technical analysis stand in direct opposition to the methods of shallow analysis that characterize TVTropes, and shallow, facile analyses are the one thing that serious analysts hate above all else. (The aforementioned may uncover their eyes at this point)The analytic methods of TVTropes seem to consist solely of making over-broad categories and then proceeding to somehow stretch them, something which would be remarkable if they didn't make it so boring. This is ignoring the categories which they invented from whole cloth, but then again, such means may be appropriate for "tropes".

What is a trope, after all? TVTropes seems to define a trope as a "trick of the trade for writing fiction", something which is dead wrong, almost mass-murdered wrong, but perfectly, grotesquely encapsulates the attitude that Ford has been talking about. They then say that tropes are "are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations" which is still wrong, but only so when you delve into the site a little more. Well, the definition they use is interesting, because it implies that tropes are deliberately inserted into works by authors, which puts some of the moderately bizarre parts of the site in new light (The very bizarre parts are truly inexplicable by psychology's finest). This also reveals the site to subscribe to the conspiracy mentality, wherein there are no coincidences. Apart from the site, I have only heard "trope" used to describe common literary conventions with a hint of cliche, but not necessarily unsalvageable or damning aforethought. That seems to be the definition being used by other people, rather than a "trick of the trade for writing fiction", so I shall go with that. Let us take a random page such as this one. This is, as the redirection in the URL indicates, a vague category roughly corresponding to the concept of the one-sided battle. I find this idiotic in the minimum, and I will explain why, but first let's look at some of the examples.

Ronin Warriors features Lady Kayura who, while physically being 12 years old pummeled the heroes more than any other villain. She was the fourth strongest character in the show, the others being Talpa, Ryo with his Inferno Armor, and Anubis and was ultimately second to said Super Mode.

Yeah. That has little to do with the actual page. It is the second example presented.

Samurai Deeper Kyo has this happen in half the battles. They work really well.

What works very well? The characters? One-sided battles?

Several battles in Honor Harrington, mainly because the Manticorans have the best tech in known space. One incident involved [REDACTED]

This is an entry only noteworthy for the fact that it and its two bullet points are ninety-percent spoiler text.

Partially subverted in Redwall. Villains can sometimes be killed by accident or after a really long fight scene. Villains that are experienced fighters (Ungatt Trunn, Cluny the Scourge, Feragho the Assassin) can put up a real fight and sometimes even kill the protagonist, causing their opponent to invoke Taking You With Me. Other creatures that are reputed to be great fighters (Princess Kurda in Triss) will normally be killed either by accident or when their skills are actually called upon to be tested. And some, like Gabool the Wild and Mokkan the Marlfox, die by an accident or when they're in a position to not fight back.

So apparently subverted means that "this only happens sometimes". This actually makes perfect sense if you assume that this is deliberately inserted in every case, and that authors are constantly thinking about tropes. So as a result, every time a trope doesn't show up, it's a "subversion" or an "aversion"! I have a sickening feeling tropers subscribe whole-heartedly to the grassy knoll. (For any tropers following along, that was metonymy! It's a legitimate literary device, common to poetry but an occasional guest to literature. Hopefully you'll understand that and learn something, because I doubt you will do so from the rest of my post.)

There are many, many more, but these four serve well enough as examples. While you could find good examples, somewhere, maybe I find the entire page founded on a flimsy pretext. All manner of physical confrontations, from wars to fistfights, become boiled down to "Curb Stomp Battle". They are stripped of any context, any meaning beyond the gross surface. However, this ignores the possibility of a one-sided battle having a purpose, at least beyond showing off how "badass"/"skilled" a character is, which, though legitimate, is one that they managed to recognize.

[Stark]

It just shows how intellectually lazy and uncreative the users of said wiki are. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's really the issue. As Ford says, it's lazy and forced because people say 'oh that's so true' without actually bothering to try to understand what or why that is so. It's 'information' that is basically valueless (hardly surprising since it's basically a list).

For what its worth, years and years and years ago, tvtropes had a far, far higher level of quality. Halflife 2 and Final Fantasy 7 didn't show up as an example of absolutely everything, for one. That people don't think it's usefulness has decreased as its signal to noise ratio has become worse is just daft.

[adam_grif]

What part of "blatantly" didn't you understand? That is precisely what I meant. Just because you can cite who it came from doesn't mean it wasn't ripped off.

That's stretching it, a lot. TVTropes is a catalog of this shit, written by people who circle around in those sorts of communities. It's no more "ripping it off" than ED would be for acknowledging that certain memes exist, or the dictionary is for including commonly used terminology. It's never claiming to be original, is openly acknowledging where it came from, and is just a wiki page explaining what NC was talking about, providing huge lists of examples. "Rip off" has a lot of negative connotations which don't apply in this case. Under your loose definition of the word, referencing material for an essay and using terms coined by anybody other than yourself is tantamount to ripping off.

It just shows how intellectually lazy and uncreative the users of said wiki are. Nothing more, nothing less.

Dude, it's a website about categorizing recurring archetypes, themes and motifs in fiction. Being unoriginal is the point of the website. This trope certainly exists, so it's only being "lazy" in the sense that they used the same name as NC did. Unless you're meaning to imply that if somebody notices and acknowledges that a trope exists somewhere that isn't TVTropes, that they should be barred from mentioning it at all?

[Formless]

What part of "blatantly" didn't you understand? That is precisely what I meant. Just because you can cite who it came from doesn't mean it wasn't ripped off.

That's stretching it, a lot. TVTropes is a catalog of this shit, written by people who circle around in those sorts of communities. It's no more "ripping it off" than ED would be for acknowledging that certain memes exist, or the dictionary is for including commonly used terminology. It's never claiming to be original, is openly acknowledging where it came from, and is just a wiki page explaining what NC was talking about, providing huge lists of examples. "Rip off" has a lot of negative connotations which don't apply in this case. Under your loose definition of the word, referencing material for an essay and using terms coined by anybody other than yourself is tantamount to ripping off.

This goes far and beyond simply recognizing that the term exists, this is using a term you didn't come up with as if it were your own, then throwing a small citation around as if that makes it any less intellectually bankrupt. Just because they're a fucking wiki doesn't mean it can't be a rip off.

But if you really insist on being such a moronic pedant, how about you explain the Plot Tumor page? It was directly inspired by Mike's Brainbug essay, but does not mention this fact anywhere in the main text. You have to go into the examples for the term "brainbug" to ever show up:

Incidentally, "Brain Bugs" is sometimes used as an interchangeable term for Plot Tumors; whether or not this is influenced by Wrath of Khan is up for question.

Of course it is, you fucking retards. It was even mentioned in the (now archived) discussion page that it came from Mike Wong's essay, where he clearly jokes about channeling The Wrath of Khan.

You don't call that a little bit suspicious that they never bother to admit up front who came up with this idea first? That's even less credit than they give the NCC.

It just shows how intellectually lazy and uncreative the users of said wiki are. Nothing more, nothing less.

Dude, it's a website about categorizing recurring archetypes, themes and motifs in fiction. Being unoriginal is the point of the website.

"Dude," that's exactly the goddamn problem. Need that spelled out for you?

This trope certainly exists, so it's only being "lazy" in the sense that they used the same name as NC did. Unless you're meaning to imply that if somebody notices and acknowledges that a trope exists somewhere that isn't TVTropes, that they should be barred from mentioning it at all?

I'm saying, dumbass, that TVtropes makes no pretense of intellectual integrity. Its literally a place where fanboys get off on regurgitating what smarter people then themselves came up with without giving the slightest hint of originality or intelligence. Fuck, "Big Lipped Alligator Moment"? I cringe every single time I hear that phrase, even especially when its uttered by the NC. You know he only uses it because the fanwhores from TVtraps expect it.

[Isil`Zha]

I just find it amusing to browse around...

The examples are what I end up spending the most time on. Not sure why, it's not like I use it for a reference guide or anything.

[adam_grif]

This goes far and beyond simply recognizing that the term exists, this is using a term you didn't come up with as if it were your own, then throwing a small citation around as if that makes it any less intellectually bankrupt. Just because they're a fucking wiki doesn't mean it can't be a rip off.

It's the first thing on the freaking page, at the top, in the page quote. The picture of the TGWTG crew doing the BLAM is the page picture, and finally it is explicitly states the term's origin a few paragraphs in. If you think this is equivelant to passing it off as their own creation, you're either an idiot or deliberately baiting for a response.

But if you really insist on being such a moronic pedant, how about you explain the Plot Tumor page? It was directly inspired by Mike's Brainbug essay, but does not mention this fact anywhere in the main text. You have to go into the examples for the term "brainbug" to ever show up:

This is a far more valid example actually. I've just done a dive into the page history, and the Trek examples don't show up until the 6th revision of the page. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the people who originally launched the page, since "an element of a show that was once minor coming into the forefront" is a very broad thing and it's plausible that other people noticed it. But whoever added the trek examples was certainly just cribbing from the essay, given that they bring up the exact examples he uses.

... but this has nothing to do with the BLAM page.

I'm saying, dumbass, that TVtropes makes no pretense of intellectual integrity. Its literally a place where fanboys get off on regurgitating what smarter people then themselves came up with without giving the slightest hint of originality or intelligence.

Not going to dispute that.

Fuck, "Big Lipped Alligator Moment"? I cringe every single time I hear that phrase, even especially when its uttered by the NC. You know he only uses it because the fanwhores from TVtraps expect it.

Ungh, you're telling me. I can't believe NC and NC have fans at all. They go on and on for hours about how unfunny and shit the movies they're reviewing are, but they're fucking horrendous and unfunny themselves. Whenever the Critic goes "in character" or does a celebrity imitation I want to fucking shoot myself.

[Sarevok]

Formless how long has that stick been inside your ass ?

[Formless]

This goes far and beyond simply recognizing that the term exists, this is using a term you didn't come up with as if it were your own, then throwing a small citation around as if that makes it any less intellectually bankrupt. Just because they're a fucking wiki doesn't mean it can't be a rip off.

It's the first thing on the freaking page, at the top, in the page quote. The picture of the TGWTG crew doing the BLAM is the page picture, and finally it is explicitly states the term's origin a few paragraphs in. If you think this is equivelant to passing it off as their own creation, you're either an idiot or deliberately baiting for a response.

Nice way to completely miss the point. Simply taking someone else's ideas without adding any substance of your own, then proceeding to throw the term around liberally (like every trope page in existence), goes beyond merely paying homage. That's ripping off. It doesn't matter that they admit upfront where they got the idea from. That's honest, but still lazy and unoriginal.

You act like I'm accusing them of plagiarism. I'm not.

I'm saying, dumbass, that TVtropes makes no pretense of intellectual integrity. Its literally a place where fanboys get off on regurgitating what smarter people then themselves came up with without giving the slightest hint of originality or intelligence.

Not going to dispute that.

And yet you make exception for the BLAM page, even though it is a perfect example of regurgitating other people's ideas without a shred of originality. Why?

Formless how long has that stick been inside your ass ?

How long have you been functioning without a brain?

[Sarevok]

Its ok formless I will rip off the stick that got stuck inside your asshole. Then you can understand ripping off an original source does not suddenly cause the original source to lose value. I never heard of this silly person you claim that invented the trope. But on the tvtropes he did get his credit where credit is due. So what is the problem here ? What harm is tvtropes is causing here ?Or is it because tvtropes makes you so angry your asshole clenches tightly around that stick causing bleeding from your anus ?

[Formless]

Its ok formless I will rip off the stick that got stuck inside your asshole. Then you can understand ripping off an original source does not suddenly cause the original source to lose value.

When did I say it did, shit for brains? Was "it just shows how intellectually lazy and uncreative the users of said wiki are" too fucking hard for you to grasp the first time I said it to you, or are you just here to troll?

[Sarevok]

Tvtropes is a silly site dedicated to humorously deconstructning works of fiction. Its not a peer reviewed journal published by english department professors. Why get so riled up about it ? If yoy dont like it then dont read it. You would have a point if tvtropes claimed to be something actually meaningful like wikipedia. But it does not. Its another site like urbandictionary where members break down plots of games, movies, books etc. How much do you expect from such a site ? There is no pleasing people like you who summarily dismiss everything as intellectualy dishonest even when it credits the orginal work. Just exactly what do you want ?

[Stark]

Its ok formless I will rip off the stick that got stuck inside your asshole. Then you can understand ripping off an original source does not suddenly cause the original source to lose value. I never heard of this silly person you claim that invented the trope. But on the tvtropes he did get his credit where credit is due. So what is the problem here ? What harm is tvtropes is causing here ?Or is it because tvtropes makes you so angry your asshole clenches tightly around that stick causing bleeding from your anus ?

Why does it have to cause harm to be stupid, worthless and/or lame?

Oh right, because you like it.

Saying 'if you don't like it don't read it' is not actually a defence of its content, despite what you may think.