Regarding the legitimacy of Brandon Rogers and The Nameless One

[Antvasima]

Sir Ovens seems to make sense to me, but again, we should wait for Matthew.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I don't think Youtube Celebrities should be allowed. Ninja Sex Party isn't a legit verse.

 

[Agnaa]

First thing, the comparisons to TOAA and the like are completely flawed. They're explicitly allowed in spite of breaking the rules on author avatars because they're considered a necessary part of a broader cosmology.

Secondly, all this stuff you're saying about Brandon Rogers having a continuity as a story only makes his profile as legitimate as one for the AVGN, Nostalgia Critic, Filthy Frank, and any dozens of other YouTubers that have self-insert plotlines. These profiles break the rule on creating YouTube personalities.

Do not create any joke profiles, as they do not fit into our tiering system. Also avoid creating profiles for fan characters, advertisement characters, YouTube personalities, music videos, memes, stage personas, and the like. If you wish to create such profiles, feel free to do so in the Joke Battles wiki instead.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Brandon Rogers does not have a self-insert storyline.

The story of the Brandon Rogers verse is not about reviewing games, talking about internet trends, or interacting with the viewer with a loose string of a plot tied in. It is an actual show., multiple shows actually, that feature Brandon as a character of himself in only 1 episode.

 

[Agnaa]

iirc Filthy Frank separated his canonical serious lore videos with their own plot, and his non-canon talking about internet trends videos. I know about Brandon Rogers' videos but they seem similar to Filthy Frank's lore videos, and should be treated similarly.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Brandon does MCU style comedy sketches where he makes individual videos introducing characters and then makes these large scale serialisations involving his past made characters. The whole thing can be argued to be similar to the MCU television shows.

So, no, it is not like Filthy Frank where he's playing a persona in both trend videos and lore videos. Brandon plays actual characters and is involved in an actual story.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Actually, Awesome verse profiles have a lot of reasons they could be allowed here, so they aren't a good comparison.

In addition, this "stage persona" rule is pretty obviously ill-defined so that cases can be very arbitrarily applied, as are author avatars. By this logic, no live action characters would be allowed.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Linkara, for example, is actually a fictional internet reviewer being played by a actual reviewer, Lewis Louvhaug. The internet reviewer is actually the profession of the character he plays, and other characters take over for him because in-universe it's his actual job that he gets his livelihood from. The other awesomeverse creators are in a similar situation,

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Furthermore, the awesomeverse isn't made by a single person, but is a collaboration of various creators so nothing in it can be called a self insert.

I also doubt there have never been cases where a creator has a character based on them in a verse that isn't a author avatar, or has been played by its creator. If Stan Lee played a superhero in the MCU, for example, we wouldn't deny him a profile if he was a major character. We're arbitrarily denying a profile because of its origin, which doesn't make sense when we have obscure versions of the Kool-Aid Man or virtually unknown Manhua

 

[Yobo_Blue]

For example, I sincerely doubt anything in this list would be denied, to say nothing of books and video games. Heck, Spider-Man was explicitly supposed to be a vehicle for certain writers like Joe Quesada for a while

 

[Antvasima]

I don't think that we should allow brief self-insert characters from various movie directors. They have no coherent storylines that warrant their inclusions in this kind of wiki.

Also, Agnaa makes a good point, but so does Sir Ovens.

Allowing regular TV or YouTube show hosts that are just playing themselves and are not part of a coherent story is out of the question though.

 

[Blackcurrant91]

So Filthy Frank confirmed returning? :O

 

[CinnabarManx421]

Filthy Frank is still here.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Many movies have directors as main characters however.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Also, none of these characters are "playing themselves" any more then any other actor, unless you believe that they have these powers, personalities, and feats in real life.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

Also, I feel like the "Coherent Story" part shouldn't matter as much for characters, especially when we've got characters like Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, and Felix the Cat who have no real story, they're all just a bunch of characters who star in short animations.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

Also, none of these characters are "playing themselves" any more then any other actor, unless you believe that they have these powers, personalities, and feats in real life.

Also on this, I put a note on Caleb's page that expressly says the profile doesn't cover the real life person, only the character he plays, so I don't know why this part is even under contention.

 

[Antvasima]

I am saying that people such as Adam Connover or The Nostalgia Critic are inappropriate, as they are just themselves, and not part of a storyline. That Adam has special effects does not change this fact.

We are a site about fictional story characters. By your logic we would open the doors for hosts of cooking shows, or news anchors. It is entirely inappropriate. My apologies, but that is final as far as I am concerned.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Extremely incorrect. Anyone familiar with the Awesomeverse knows that there is indeed a coherent storyline with the characters separate from the real-life personas. Saying that they do over and over again isn't a actual counter argument.

How so? I don't believe you fully understand what I'm saying.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

The problem here boils down to "are these chaharacters fictional?" Unless your argument is that these characters are real, ther is logically no problem.

 

[Blackcurrant91]

Then we all agree? that the profiles can stay. That's cool.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

The Nostalgia Critic in particular has three movies which are recognized by IMDB, has a coherent storyline, and includes people from various parts of the Awesomeverse.

If coherent storyline was necessary for profiles, many profiles on the wiki would not exist. This rule exists solely for the sake of hypocrisy, which I should note makes us more of a target for trolls, as they will see it as proof of our incompetence or corruption.

 

[Antvasima]

Again, the difference between a self-insert Youtube personality without a storyline and a cooking show host is very thin, and goes outside of our main jurisdiction, which is fiction.

Characters that are clearly fictional have been treated with a bit more leniency, yes, but I am not sure if advertisement characters such as the Kool-Aid Man should be allowed either. And accusing me of being a corrupt hypocrite, just because I think that we have to draw the line somewhere to avoid being swarmed with nonsense, is extremely exaggerated and unfair.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

I don't think he was accusing you, I think he was just saying people can use stuff like that to attack outr site and our staff.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Ant He wasn't accusing you personally, he was making a point about a rule being hypocrictical in nature. Can you please try to understand what someone is saying before commenting about him.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Again, the difference between a Youtube personality without a storyline and a cooking show host is very thin, and goes outside of our main jurisdiction, which is fiction.

Characters that are clearly fictional have been treated with a bit more leniency, yes, but I am not sure if advertisement characters such as the Kool-Aid Man should be allowed either. And accusing me of being a corrupt hypocrite, just because I think that we have to draw the line somewhere to avoid being swarmed with nonsense, is extremely exaggerated and unfair.

I would agree, if it weren't for the fact that most people in YouTube are explicitly more fictional and outlandish than a cooking host.

Trolls do not care about logical thought or fairness, Antvasima. You know that better than any of us.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

@Ant He wasn't accusing you personally, he was making a point about a rule being hypocrictical in nature. Can you please try to understand what someone is saying before commenting about him.

This is, in fact, the case.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Advertisement characters are not allowed as of now, but the Kool-Aid man I referred was one from a obscure video game.

 

[Antvasima]

@Cinnabar

Well, in that case we shouldn't care about how some bitter people with a grudge think that we should run this wiki. Our current standards have worked very well for vastly building it in popularity, and gradually improving its structure and reliability.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

@Cinnabar

Well, in that case we shouldn't care about how some bitter people with a grudge think that we should run this wiki. Our current standards have worked very well for vastly building it in popularity, and gradually improving its structure and reliability.

Yes, but we should definitely not be lenient and stagnant. Not addressing problems simply because we've gotten by before is rarely a good decision, as any historian can attest to, and simply staying the same will rarely address problems that can build up over time and become more detrimental.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

Have we reached a consensus on keeping The Nameless One and Brandon Rogers on the site?

 

[Blackcurrant91]

yeah I think so.

 

[CinnabarManx421]

Yes, preferably we should leave the discussion of the Awesomeverse to it's own Thread.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Regardless of whether or not trolling will entail, hypocrisy and double standards aren't something one desires in policy making, as they can lead to nasty dissent and internal divides.

 

[Antvasima]

This is not a problem that is building up and becoming more detrimental. It is a working regulation that offers stability to this wiki by acting as a bulwark against a massive swarm of nonsense. Getting rid of it would be an extremely bad idea.

And if we are talking about history, the breaking down of stability and cohesion of society through drastic change (and/or influx of massive cultural differences) has broken down civilisations in the past as far as I am aware.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Arguments against Brandon and Caleb used many aspects related to the Awesomeverse. I was simply explaining why it was really a example of why they should be allowed rather than why they shouldn't.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

This is not a problem that is building up and becoming more detrimental. It is a working regulation that offers stability to this wiki by acting as a bulwark against a massive swarm of nonsense. Getting rid of it would be an extremely bad idea.

And if we are talking about history, the breaking down of stability and cohesion of society through drastic change (and/or influx of massive cultural differences) has broken down civilisations in the past as far as I am aware.

It is building up. This thread is a example of it beginning to occur. More and more people are becoming aware of this rule, and due to its lack of clarity and definition it has become a major point of contention.

Large scale violence has occurred from the smallest of offenses. Even soccer/football games have been used as a excuse for widespread bloodshed. All I'm saying is that being stagnant is by no means a better solution than revisions outdated policy.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

The political angle is just a small portion of the issue with this. I trust I don't have to prove that hypocrisy in general is bad, do I?

 

[Antvasima]

Regardless of whether or not trolling will entail, hypocrisy and double standards aren't something one desires in policy making, as they can lead to nasty dissent and internal divides.

It is impossible to be absolutely consistent, especially as there are many staff members with conflicting views, and I am too busy to be committed and focused on properly keeping track of everything.

If you expect absolutely coherent and perfect systems from humanity, you are going to be very disappointed. Society, as everything else, is very complicated.

That does not mean that we are driven by hypocricy when trying to figure out sensible rules and standards on a case by case basis.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

As I've said, we do not have to address every little thing, and we definitely don't have to do it at the same time. Things do have to be changed, and mistakes have to be corrected. That is a simple fact. We should not be averse go making changes simply because they would take a long time or be slightly problematic. If we did things simply based on what would be best for the wiki in our own viewpoint, then many rules regarding staff behavior and behavior in general would be much stricter.