The Walking Dead on TV Tropes

[Talon]

'Chokingly' full of Tropey Delights - Now with Three Times the Calories[tvtropes.org]

My little gift for TWD Season 2 community...made especially for those currently unaware of this penultimate guide to trope telling for TWD!

Naturally don't click on the link unless you have already played the game or don't mind a few mild spoilers...spoiling yourself fully requires a click and drag over some conspicuous looking white spaces so I'll leave that tiny little detail up to you.

[MorningLightMountain]

Although as it is a public database the entries are very much dependant on the opinions of the person who wrote them.

[alexshiro]

How long have you been on there?

You know your... contributions are getting edited out as soon as somebody notices?

[Talon]

Originally posted by alexshiro:

How long have you been on there?

You know your... contributions are getting edited out as soon as somebody notices?

If you mean on the link, then I've never edited the TV Tropes site in my life. If you mean here when you say 'there', then kindly take your paranoia to someone who cares, alex.

As MLM says, its a public database like wikipedia.org but its constantly maintained against endless Jane fanboy editing wars bubbling up in your imagination. If anything, its extremely fair in its assessment and portrayals of the tropes involved and to all characters already without overt favortisim unfairly and disproportionately discriminating one character over the others as a whole...but drawing a rational conclusion based on evidence like this... requires a sense of discernment and judgement you are obviously...lacking.

My condolences.

@Everyone else: Enjoy the link!

It is a gift not a curse...as these scoundrels would have you believe....

So come one! Come all! Savor the wonders and enlightenment of Trope Heaven!

[MorningLightMountain]

Originally posted by Talon:

As MLM says, its a public database like wikipedia.org but its constantly maintained against endless Jane fanboy editing wars bubbling up in your imagination. If anything, its extremely fair in its assessment and portrayals of the tropes involved and to all characters already without overtly favortisim unfairly discriminating one over the others...but drawing a rational conclusion based on evidence like this... requires a sense of discernment and judgement you are obviously...lacking. My condolences.

I don't believe it is a maintained as much as you are clamining although I think it is more now than it used to be as TV Tropes went through some definete clean up a few years ago making it far lighter and softer than it used to be. As there are also some errors on certain pages. For the most part the entries are fairly impartial but not in all cases and there definetly a few in the season two examples which show a clear bias towards a specific character.

[Talon]

Originally posted by MorningLightMountain:

I don't believe it is a maintained as much as you are clamining although I think it is more now than it used to be as TV Tropes went through some definete clean up a few years ago making it far lighter and softer than it used to be. As there are also some errors on certain pages. For the most part the entries are fairly impartial but not in all cases and there definetly a few in the season two examples which show a clear bias towards a specific character.

Why did you feel the need to add disclaimers to my link?

Let the people try it out first and form their own conclusions, I say...

[MorningLightMountain]

Originally posted by Talon:

Originally posted by MorningLightMountain:

I don't believe it is a maintained as much as you are clamining although I think it is more now than it used to be as TV Tropes went through some definete clean up a few years ago making it far lighter and softer than it used to be. As there are also some errors on certain pages. For the most part the entries are fairly impartial but not in all cases and there definetly a few in the season two examples which show a clear bias towards a specific character.

Why did you feel the need to add disclaimers to my link?

Because it isn't as impartial as you claim it to be nor is it as meticulously checked as suggested?

Why do you feel the need to question it? As I'm doing the same as you are providing information regarding a site which contains information on season two. As if you want to allow people to draw their own conclusions all that requires is the link to the specific page that doesn't require any commentary on it.

[Talon]

Originally posted by MorningLightMountain:

Because it isn't as impartial as you claim it to be nor is it as meticulously checked as suggested?

Why do you feel the need to question it? As I'm doing the same as you are providing information regarding a site which contains information on season two. As if you want to allow people to draw their own conclusions all that requires is the link to the specific page that doesn't require any commentary on it.

That is your opinion not empirical fact. It is as impartial as you are likely to find on any subject related to a form of fictional media so what you did was unnecessary.

I feel the need to question it since I personally have never ever clicked on a third party links posted in a forum unless I am given some reasonable assurance about the type of content that link will lead me to and therefore...I added some light commentary to serve as a caption so those who click on the link have some idea about what I'm leading them to, that's all.

As a courtesy, I would like to ask that you leave it up to others without adding commentary of your own on top of mine since this isn't an argument that's worth our time...

[MorningLightMountain]

Originally posted by Talon:

Originally posted by MorningLightMountain:

Because it isn't as impartial as you claim it to be nor is it as meticulously checked as suggested?

Why do you feel the need to question it? As I'm doing the same as you are providing information regarding a site which contains information on season two. As if you want to allow people to draw their own conclusions all that requires is the link to the specific page that doesn't require any commentary on it.

That is your opinion not empirical fact. It is as impartial as you are likely to find on any subject related to a form of fictional media so what you did was unnecessary.

I feel the need to question it since I personally have never ever clicked on a third party links posted in a forum unless I am given some reasonable assurance about the type of content that link will lead me to and therefore...I added some light commentary to serve as a caption so those who click on the link have some idea about what I'm leading them to, that's all.

As a courtesy, I would like to ask that you leave it up to others without adding commentary of your own on top of mine since this isn't an argument that's worth our time...

Yes, it is my opinion backed up by several examples on the Season two entries alone and the character page which contains at least one error that I noticed in the section about Kenny that and my general experience of TV tropes a site I've used for at least five to six years.. For the most part as I already stated it is impartial but not always.

As an additional courtesy then I'd ask you to provide such links without commentary if you want to allow people to form their own conclusions then your one posts would also need to be subject to that. Assurance that the link is clean is one thing which is all it needs.