• "Ah, Master Wind- what are all the clones doing here?"
    We found out about the control chips in their heads. We've executed Order 65. You're under arrest.
    LegoLad659
    LegoLad659
    If the Jedi were that competent, then Palpatine wouldn't have stood even the slightest chance against four of them in the first place, especially one of the Jedi Council
    This is the final one folks. Thank you for keeping up.

    • Cartoon Elitist Law: If a thread or video is related to a cartoon from the late 90s or early 2000s (ex: an amusing clip from a show) 95% of the comments will be about how much better shows from this era are than newer cartoons and insulting new cartoons (and those who watch them) in various creative ways.
    LegoLad659
    LegoLad659
    Is...

    Is that really specific to cartoons...?

    I want to counter that with an example of something non-cartoon-related that does the same thing, but... I'm drawing a blank O.O
    BackSet
    BackSet
    It's not specific to cartoons but I had just finished reading the comments section on a clip from Batman Beyond when I wrote this one.
    • Statistic Incompetence Law: Any statistics used in an argument will be wrong, either due to poor research or just having been pulled out of thin air.
    LegoLad659
    LegoLad659
    My mental survey says 95% of people say this law is BS
    • Takes One to Know Everyone Law: Any user who claims to hate the human race as a whole will undoubtedly be a large part of the reason why there are people who claim to hate the human race as a whole.
    • Bulbagarden's Law: As the length of an online discussion about video games approaches infinity, the probability of something being compared to EA approaches one. Whoever makes this comparison is deemed to have automatically lost the argument.
    BackSet
    BackSet
    Yes this is a take that at EA.
    • Rule of Randomness: If a forum has a thread purely dedicated to random discussion the thread will:
      • 1. Have a page count in the thousands.
      • 2. Consist almost entirely of in-jokes among the thread regulars.
      • 3. Be completely incomprehensible to anyone who does not frequent the thread.
    • Law of Forced Topic Injection: In any given discussion, whether it's a debate or not, there will be a user who will, no matter what, shoehorn a specific topic into every post they make, even if that topic isn't being discussed.
      • Corollary: Every couple posts this user will attempt to relate another user's post to the topic they want to discuss, usually through Insane Troll Logic.
    • The Get Posts Quick Rule: On any given site the user with the highest number of posts will be most active in the Forum Games subforum, if there is one.
      • Corollary: If posts on the Forum Games subforum do not count towards the user's post count or there is no Forum Games subforum, then the user with the highest number of posts will instead be most active in the random discussion thread, if there is one.
    Kaerri
    Kaerri
    They don't count here :P
    BackSet
    BackSet
    That's why I logged onto TV Tropes and added the corollary personally.
    Kaerri
    Kaerri
    Oh sweet!
    • Law of Quality vs. Quantity: The quality of any given user's posts or contributions is inversely proportionate to the amount of posts or contributions they have made.
    Cue comments from offended people defending the quality of their posts as if I actively attacked them specifically.

    Edit: Yes, I realize the hypocrisy of that statement.
    • Midnight's Law: Any internal critique of a group will be abused by its opponents to attack the group as a whole.
    • Briyella's Law: The more emphasis a proclamed female user makes on their gender, the more likely they are to actually be a catfish.
    • BackSet's Law of Moving the Goalposts: If someone in an argument claims that their opponent took their post "out of context," they will then proceed to provide said context, which will be significantly changed from their original argument.
      • Cherry Picking Accusation Corollary: If the person also claims that their opponent is "Cherry Picking" the argument is no longer salvageable, regardless of whther those claims are true.
    "Ironic. He could save others from death but not himself."
    Wouldn't it just be easier to use force healing, which is a standard part of all Jedi training and, in fact, something I know how to do in the Legends continuity.
    "You are under arrest, 'my lord.'"
    Actually you have no grounds to arrest me, being a Sith Lord isn't a crime and you have no evidence linking me to the Separatists or the Trade Federation. You could have used Dooku as a witness but Anakin killed him. Furthermore, you can't charge me with assault because I can claim self-defense. You were threatening me, after all.
    • The Law of Percieved Superiority: If a user belittles/claims to be more powerful than a Moderator (or worse, an Admin) they are more likely to comit actions that are against the rules and thus, won't last long before getting banned.
    "I will finish what you started."
    Cool, kid, but I'm not really into that stuff anymore. I'm on your mom's side and you're a jerk, so I'm not giving you any guidance. Thanks for sending my son into a heroic BSoD and causing him to exile himself.
    "This was your father's lightsaber, he wanted you to have it when you were old enough. At least, that's what I assume. He was barely alive when I took it from him. He didn't even know you existed but I'm sure that if he did know he'd want you to have his lightsaber."
    "Look sir, droids."
    "Did you actually see that thing come off a droid?"
    "Well... no."
    "Then keep looking. We're imperial stormtroopers, we don't make assumptions based on flimsy evidence."
    • "Just Tv Tropes It": Any online resource frequently used to explain concepts to other forum members will eventually become the default resource for this purpose as people get used to it.
    Getting towards the end, folks.
    • The Law of Wiki Expansion Corollary: As a specialist website/forum gains more pages for general stuff, more people will use the website for purposes other than what it was set up to do/discuss.
    "Grave danger, I sense, in this boy's training..."
    "Oh... Well, I guess I won't train him then. I mean, how dumb would I have to be to go against the recommendation of the wisest and most force-attuned Jedi we have? He can train to be an engineer instead - He's already built his own robot and racecar!"
    BackSet
    BackSet
    "Master Qui-Gon asked me to train him."
    Some bullshit, that is. A padawan, you still are. What was Qui-Gon thinking. A different master, we will assign.
    • Spotlight FallacyLaw: Any community online will become known to the general public by its most abhorrent members.
      • The Troper Tales Solution: Purging sections of the site that encourage unwanted behaviour can allow communities to restore their reputation.
    • Contribution Desire vs. Contribution Ability Law: Any online environment that allows free submitting, especially those that encourage creative thought, will inevitably receive additions that add nothing from people who just wanted to join in.
      • Corollary: Many of these people, with constructive criticism, will mature into making sensible and worthwhile contributions. Some of them won't. There is no way to tell which is which in advance.
    • Law of Loonball Polling: If an online poll contains a joke option, expect it to be one of the most popular choices.
      • Corollary: Members creating polls about national issues on internationally-popular sites will have their results skewed by people sincerely ticking the 'Who even is that person?' joke option.
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top