Rename You Can Never Leave: You Can Never Leave

Single Proposition crowner made and hooked. Page tagged. Someone who thinks it doesn't need to be renamed needs to add their reasons, and "Well, I didn't misunderstand it" isn't an acceptable reason.

Thanks, Madrugada. I was still trying to sort through the tutorial.

I have a shortcut for making them. I can use the crowner hooker to make a new one and hook it at the same time, or to just hook an existing one...

Someone who thinks it doesn't need to be renamed needs to add their reasons, and "Well, I didn't misunderstand it" isn't an acceptable reason.

Added. But a question: so when did an unjustified "I didn't get it" become an acceptable reason? Whatever happened to ideas like "is this actually being misused"?

Why wait for something to be misused? If you wait until there's sufficient evidence of misuse, you end up with a whole lot of links to fix and a more difficult time on the rename.

Obviously you don't want to overturn classic and well established names for no reason, but I think clarifying this one is a good idea.

Obviously, the crowner will show who people agree with :)

Obviously, you're missing the point. Misuse is a concern we use for renaming things (supposedly), which would suggest you can't just wave it off. Not to mention, why talk about "waiting" for misuse, as if a many-months-old entry had just been set up yesterday?

Misuse is a factor, but I don't understand it to be the only factor. If a trope name can be improved and there's consensus on improving it I see no reason not to. If the name is entrenched, then people will vote against the rename.

I'm not looking for a big argument or anything. The crowner will decide it, not a verbal sparring much between us. :)

Misuse is not the only criteria. It's the one that's easiest to "prove" and the one that causes most of the older names to be changed. But it's not the only one. You might want to take a look at When To Rename A Trope: it's got a list of things that are valid reasons to propose a rename.

The very first one is "Tropes which are just plain poorly named. The title Spoon Speaker, for example, literally has nothing to do with the trope it once described." The sixth one is "Titles that sound like they ought to be Exactly What It Says On The Tin but aren't. The Viral (Villain Forgot To Level Grind) and Projected Avatar (Fighting A Shadow) are examples that got axed. Often the old name will be repurposed for the trope it originaly sounded like on the tin, as was the case with Klingon Promotion and what it used to be: Dying To Be Replaced."

Give it a read. It will increase the likelihood that you'll be able to make an argument that actually holds water.

Why are there two options in the crowner, both of which are "Rename You Can Never Leave," one with a list of reasons, and one with no list. Doesn't this confuse the vote?

I think I made one without realizing it, then made a second with the pros and cons. By the time I noticed, the short one had 7 votes, and the longer one had none. so I left them both.

I have given it a read, Madrugada. My first question in this thread was to ask which of those reasons applied.

I don't believe the two you cite apply, nor any of the others listed on that page.

I do get that you don't like the name, but I was myself hoping for a reason that "held any water". Instead, we're at "fourteen or so random people dislike it", which is fair enough, but no call for either of you to be snide.

It's not the first time there's been a computer glitch. We can always just add them together at the end.

It's the exactly what it says on the tin but isn't reason that this one violates. It's a famous line, but for meaning something completely different than the trope it describes.

edited 5th Jul '10 7:03:45 PM by shimaspawn

@Semiapies I sincerely wasn't trying to be snide. I think the first one cited is always going to be debatable. I don't think it applies in this case because the title isn't completely off.

The second one cited is right on the money though. When a trope sounds like one thing and is another. Obviously the trope's intended meaning is within the scope of the phrase "You can never leave" but so are other things, and when enough tropers feel like one of the other things leaps more readily to mind, we can try and come up with a phrase that includes the trope more specifically to the exclusion of ideas that are not the trope.

That's my understanding. They may just be 14 random people, but they seem to agree. Do you have a reason you think the current name is good? I absolutely understand that the burden should be on the person arguing for the change and that seems to be what you're relying on, but there's no judge to determine that. There's only popular sentiment and it seems to suggest the burden has been met. Do you have a counter argument?

edited 5th Jul '10 7:09:08 PM by Visla

If "obviously" the name includes the trope, then it certainly doesn't sound like one thing and mean another, Visla.

My reasons are the ones I put in the arguments against renaming on the crowner. I am not reflexively against renaming tropes, but I'm unconvinced on this case. I've found my objections greeted rather rudely; whatever. Barring a dozen or two random objectors over the next couple of days, it'll change; fine.

edited 5th Jul '10 7:42:10 PM by Semiapies

Sheesh, now who's being snide :(

When I said it obviously includes the trope what I meant was "You Can Never Leave" describes the situation in the trope. It also describes a locked room or various other things. The point wasn't that it lead obviously to one result, but that I wasn't going to argue it was misdescriptive. My point is that it accurately describes more than one thing. Now that's going to be unavoidable with all the ambiguities in the English language, but I think some of the suggestions made earlier do a better job of honing in to what the trope means.

I don't understand ire over it and I'm sorry if my use of "obviously" seems snide to you. I don't mean it in a condescending manner. I just mean it to concede a point and I hope this clears up what I meant.

I want to suggest Mandatory Life Tenure.

A name that is much too broad invites misuse and misunderstanding.

This was already accumulating questionable examples, like the number of missions to fly before being send home constantly being increased in Catch-22; that wasn't a deliberate case, it was a necessity of the war; and the Warhammer example, which is already four lines deep in Natter debating whether being allowed to retire from the military and sent out as a colonist counts or not.

Additionally, the page quote (since removed) that it was named with is not in any way an example, and it is from a widely-known song. We can eithe rget a clearer name on thios trope now, or come back in six months and rename it, and scrub wicks.

Should we move the description to the one with more votes and remake the other into "ignore this"? The problem with adding the two together is you can thusly vote twice, skewing the results.

Just so everyone knows, after checking the examples, I only found one (The Prisoner) that seemed like it didnt fit. So it doesn't seem to be being misused. This doesn't mean the title isn't potentially confusing though.

"A name that is much too broad invites misuse and misunderstanding."

I will note that that is actually a decent reason. I kinda wish it had been given when I'd asked, but hey.

Visla: thank you. Sorry to be snappish back to you, in turn.

How about a motto Based on the Aryan Brotherhood?

Blood In Blood Out.

Blood In Blood Out is a work, though...(quite a good film, I thought).

edited 6th Jul '10 12:52:16 PM by MoCellMan

I think we can move on the alternative name crowner now, as 23x is pretty clear on renaming.

I only made it yesterday, at 3:40PM forum time. It's not even been up for 24 hours yet. While I seriously doubt that it will reverse, closing it that quickly opens the name change up to a justifiable charge of having been "rushed through".

I personally like the idea of any crowner getting at least three days from creation before being declared up.