Tv Tropes and Idioms bans me from telling the truth

I edited their articles about the Master. Basically the article said that the Delgado Master and Jon Pertwee were always meant to be in love, and presented it as a fact.

So I naturally tidied it up and included how they were originally intended to be brothers instead. You might think what's the point, but I think it's wrong to let what are supposed to be objective, factual websites visited by millions every year spread disinformation about the Classic era, just to try and make it tie in with Remake Who.

Rewriting of the past is always a mistake. I wouldn't even do it to make Classic Who fit better with itself, by say writing that they always intended to have the Doctor regenerate in a few years as far back as An Unearthly Child.

My edits were instantly udone. I tried again, they were undone, then I left a message saying this was ridiculous as it was denying facts. I was then banned from editing.

So I took it up with the message forum, I was told that I was editing with an agenda (you can fucking watch Jon Pertwee, and Barry Letts who co-created the character SAY that they intended them to be brothers on the Planet of the Spiders DVD.)

When I brought up what Pertwee said, and told them to seek the DVD out, they then said that didn't matter as there is a consensus on this website that they were lovers.

I then pointed out that someone had undone my edits and called me a misogynist, and they weren't banned, (as the claimed I was also banned for being rude) after which I was then banned completely from the site for good.

To me this shows a complete abuse of power, and that sadly Tv Tropes and Idioms can't be trusted for anything if they are willing to rewrite the past to placate some horny shipper fans. It also shows you how far New Who fans are willing to go to rewrite the past and the toxic hold shipper fans have over franchises.

Jesus Christ, these people are out and out loonies.

iank wrote:Jesus Christ, these people are out and out loonies.

Here is a link to the thread that got me banned permanently.

TV TROPES FORUM

It's hilarious that Missy "fans" are so fucking deluded they are actually going around rewriting that Roger Delgado wanted to shag Jon Pertwee on what are supposed to be objective, factual websites. Remember this isn't Gallifrey Base. This is a website visited by millions of people that is used as a resource. It's actually quite a big deal if it rewrites the past like that. Not to sound melodramatic, but that is the first step. Where will it end? We can just rewrite anything we want too, and even if there are objective facts to disprove it, fuck you.

(This is why I despise Missy fans more than Jodie fans.)

Who knows where this will end, but all I will say is all Hiver regulars and anyone passing by, NEVER read TV tropes and Idioms again. They simply cannot be trusted.

burrunjor wrote:
Who knows where this will end, but all I will say is all Hiver regulars and anyone passing by, NEVER read TV tropes and Idioms again. They simply cannot be trusted.

Never heard of them till you mentioned them. That was painful to read.

Rawkuss wrote:

burrunjor wrote:
Who knows where this will end, but all I will say is all Hiver regulars and anyone passing by, NEVER read TV tropes and Idioms again. They simply cannot be trusted.

Never heard of them till you mentioned them. That was painful to read.  

They've always been cunts to be honest. Very biased, and very inaccurate.

They actually said that John Lennon was never acclaimed until after he died. John Lennon!

However the lies they spread about the Master are much more harmful as this isn't just some arsehole who doesn't know anything about it, and demonstrates their ignorance. If I wanted I could easily correct what they wrote about John Lennon (I didn't as I thought it was funny that someone could actually write that online!)

This is someone who is intentionally lying about something as part of an agenda (ironically) If you dare to correct them and actually write the truth, then you'll be banned. It is actual 1984 stuff. Obviously it's on a tiny scale, and about something fairly irelevent.

Still that's how it starts isn't it? If other what are supposed to be factual websites start taking that attitude, who knows where it will end up? He who controls the past controls the present.

PS here is another article they did about the Master.

(This wasn't the one I edited, as this one is an interpretation article, it was just their descriptive one about the Master which should have been more objective I edited.)

Doctor Who: Foe Yay: TV Tropes Link

When you read shit like that, you realise the damage the Fitzroy Crowd have done to the franchise, far more than the 89 cancellation. They've brought these half wits to the franchise and now it's a task of Herculian proportion to wrestle it back from them.

I don't hate TV Tropes (I actually find it to be a hilarious site) but I do hate the mindset from people that think TV Tropes is a legitimate source for criticism, and whenever they watch something that has a trope, people will just knock it down and pretend to act more clever than they actually are. Like, newflash, media has tropes, and for the most part, tropes are not a bad thing

Good thing I'm a 'shipper, they've left my Thraham hints up

I think I've only ever shipped Four and Romana, and on audio, possibly Eight and Mary Shelley.

I might've a little shipped Eleven and Clara too.

I just had a look at this. It's hard to believe that they are serious - this is fucking awful. They even make out like the War Chief is hot for the Doctor....

The War Chief in "The War Games" is all over the Doctor, with lines such as "We are two of a kind" and "We need each other"

I could go through all their original series examples and take them apart, but it's just not worth the time. They take stuff out of context like this example from Mark of the Rani:

The Doctor: The Rani IS a genius. Shame I can't stand her. [pause] I wonder if I was particularly nice to her she might... no. No, of course not.

As I'm sure everyone here knows, all the Doctor wants from the Rani here when he says this is for her to show him how to set up a remote control for a Tardis, that's it.

Fendelman wrote:I just had a look at this. It's hard to believe that they are serious - this is fucking awful. They even make out like the War Chief is hot for the Doctor....

The War Chief in "The War Games" is all over the Doctor, with lines such as "We are two of a kind" and "We need each other"

I could go through all their original series examples and take them apart, but it's just not worth the time. They take stuff out of context like this example from Mark of the Rani:

The Doctor: The Rani IS a genius. Shame I can't stand her. [pause] I wonder if I was particularly nice to her she might... no. No, of course not.

As I'm sure everyone here knows, all the Doctor wants from the Rani here when he says this is for her to show him how to set up a remote control for a Tardis, that's it.

I know it's complete and utter fucking insanity. The most hilarious part for me though was reading that Paul Cornell a guy in his 40s attends shipping panels for the Doctor/Master.

This wasn't even the article I edited though. It was their main, factual one about the Master that they brought that shit into. It's fine if they want to have a deluded article that's just about their insane and infantile interpretation's of True Who stories, but to present that as fact, and then ban a guy who actually tries to bring up the real facts is proper 1984 stuff.

Best of all was the way they accused me of having an agenda! What agenda is that? The one that Jon Pertwee, Roger Delgado, Barry Letts, John Nathan Turner, Anthony Ainley and Terrance Dicks all had for the character THEY created and maintained over 20 years.

It makes me sad when I look at the fans DW got compared to other franchises. Batman got Paul Dini, Godzilla got Gareth Edwards, we got the Fitzroy Crowd.

EXCUSE ME, but you are completely wrong about Paul Cornell! Completely. Way off-base.












...He's in his 50's.

Most shippers are harmless. If it makes the show more entertaining for them then why not? Some take it way too far, though

Pepsi Maxil wrote:Most shippers are harmless. If it makes the show more entertaining for them then why not? Some take it way too far, though

The point is that these people are rewriting factual articles to completely change a characters history to suit their agenda.

Not everyone who watches New Who will watch True Who. Many of them will just get the characters history from online sources and TV Tropes is one of the biggest online sources alongside Wikipedia.

With this in mind the people who changed factual articles about the Master to include these lies are trying make out that the characters history was different. This is where the insanity of "Missy was more faithful to Delgado" comes from.

We need to challenge them to preserve the original series. If it's known that Missy was such a huge deviation, then there is more of a possibility that someone will think "let's go back to the proper Master." Also it annoys me the way that Moffat is getting away with it because of these idiots.

Look at Jared Leto? He get's raked over hot coals for his Joker. I'm no fan of his Joker, but at least he was a proper version of the character. Missy literally did nothing to try and stay faithful to the character, yet get's praise from some lunatics? Once again the Fitzroy Crowd are not being held to the standard of other writers and producers. Jared Leto get's judged as a poor Joker, Missy is praised, JNT get's told he's trying to appeal to lowest common demoniator by having celeb guest stars, whilst RTD is praised etc.

Added to that the fact that they used such bullying tactics as smearing people who just want to write the concrete facts about a characters history as homophobic, having an agenda, (ironically) shows how dememnted they are.

I'm not saying this applies to anyone here, but I think that a lot of the reason people go easy on shippers is because it's perceived at least to be a female dominated area. (It actually isn't as this thread alone shows, and it's ironically the male shippers like Mofftwat that have ruined the franchise, still that's the cliche.)

People don't want to appear sexist by attacking a supposedly female dominated subgenre. However to not criticise something stupid, and infantile just because it's mostly women who do it is sexist IMO, as it's not holding them to the same standard. It's literally "AWWWW that's cute women like this stupid, infantile thing."

I clearly have no problems with a female dominated fandom. I'm part of several. SomeCallMeEnglishGiraffe and others thought I WAS a woman because I'm part of so many female led fandoms, Paloma Faith, Xena etc.

Yes obviously you get just as many nasty, shallow elements in male fandoms (like those cunts who made a remark about Colin Bakers baby, the men who bullied Pearl Mackie as being "too ugly" to be the companion before she had even started etc.) That's the point men and women are humans, and humans in general suck.

Paul Cornell however doesn't treat women as humans when he says such insane crap as "the female side of fandom is always more intelligent" UGH pathetic and proof that he actually isn't a part of any female dominated fandoms or else he'd see that they have just as many faults as male led ones.

I sent them a message complaining about the user who banned me abusing his power, but they either ignored it, or if they did respond I can't read it.

Either way I'm still banned. Going to give up no obvs as it's pointless, but it does show the toxic hold these bullies have over fandom. It makes me wonder fi we will ever get anything resembling True Who, and I don't even mean a proper sequel to it. I just mean anything like True Who that is so unapologetically sci fi. These idiots it seems will latch onto any franchise, demand it go their way to satisfy their infantile interpretations and drag everything down to lowest common demoninator.

Shame, shame.

Shame indeed.
Revisionism is perhaps the worst kind of vandalism. It’s only natural they’d be assholes about it, since it’s only through these lies that these jumped up nobodies can appear like authorities to whatever little group they align themselves with.

The First Doctor wrote:Shame indeed.
Revisionism is perhaps the worst kind of vandalism. It’s only natural they’d be assholes about it, since it’s only through these lies that these jumped up nobodies can appear like authorities to whatever little group they align themselves with.

I got banned from Galifrey Base again.

They didn't even tell what post it was.

They just sent me this notification.

Gallifreybase wrote:
You have been banned for the following reason: You get far too close to open bigotry. Rein that behaviour in, or never return.. Your ban will be lifted on Apr 26, 2020 at 12:00 AM.

I don't even know what I did LOL. It must just be an opinion I expressed.

burrunjor wrote:I got banned from Galifrey Base again.

They didn't even tell what post it was.

They just sent me this notification.

Gallifreybase wrote:You have been banned for the following reason: You get far too close to open bigotry. Rein that behaviour in, or never return.. Your ban will be lifted on Apr 26, 2020 at 12:00 AM.

I don't even know what I did LOL. It must just be an opinion I expressed.

Your post on Saturday that dared to point out - with evidence - the SJW smear campaign against Moffat has "edited by moderator" at the bottom, so I can only assume it was that.

What they really mean by "bigotry" is "making factual statements the left finds politically inconvenient".

Banning members gives these people a dopamine release. They love the pleasure they derive from being in a position of power.

ClockworkOcean wrote:

burrunjor wrote:I got banned from Galifrey Base again.

They didn't even tell what post it was.

They just sent me this notification.

Gallifreybase wrote:You have been banned for the following reason: You get far too close to open bigotry. Rein that behaviour in, or never return.. Your ban will be lifted on Apr 26, 2020 at 12:00 AM.

I don't even know what I did LOL. It must just be an opinion I expressed.

Your post on Saturday that dared to point out - with evidence - the SJW smear campaign against Moffat has "edited by moderator" at the bottom, so I can only assume it was that.

What they really mean by "bigotry" is "making factual statements the left finds politically inconvenient".

That's it, what moderator was it?

That is absolutely pathetic. Fair enough if I'd slagged off Islam or something. I know that isn't bigotry as Islam is a religion, but still I can see why maybe they wouldn't want to get dragged into a debate about religion on a DW forum.

That however wasn't even controversial. It was even handed, pointing out that this happened with right wingers, Mary Whitehouse's in the 70s and now it is happening again.

Jesus Christ way to show how they know that is true, but just can't answer it.

I've also noticed now that they keep leaving responses to my posts too, but I can't respond.

I'm not annoyed though. To me this just shows them up as the cowards they are. I went to confront them even when they dogpiled on me, yet none of them were brave enough to debate properly here.

Furthermore even when it was 7 on one they still lost as they had to resort to banning me to stop me bringing up an inconvenient truth for them.

As if there was any doubt, but they have been exposed as the cowards they are.

PS I just joined a Buffy board recently and I must say I am having a nice time there. Tanman is right that Buffy fandom seemed a lot better than DW fandom.

I'm able to say things like I didn't like the Buffy/Spike pairing without people jumping down my throat.

It's the Buffy Boards I'd recommend joining.