How Can We Change the Bronalaysis Community?

[Jeremiah 1,586]

So.. after the the Tommy Oliver 'leaving' argument rages on i want to point out that ToonKriticY2K made a video disscusing what he thinks should happen next. I suggest you watch the video before leaving any comment on this thread, and here is a link on the disscussion on an another thread with the similar 'issue': https://mlpforums.com/topic/130427-tommy-oliver-rage-quits-the-fandom/page-11#entry3830648

 

[The Coffee Pony 1,390]

Candy Star beat you to the punch already

 

https://mlpforums.com/topic/130443-how-can-we-change-the-bronalaysis-community/

 

And I will repeat what I said there

 

 

We can't. Everyone has their own way of having fun and enjoying the show and honestly I don't care about nor do I see why we should change the way they see the show. Everyone has a different viewpoint, that's the way people are, there's no point in trying to change them. We can debate but we can't force someone to change their views.

 

Take Quivit, for example, (Sorry for naming you specifically, man, just need to use an example.) he takes a hard stance on the show and takes it very seriously and analyzes it in detail. That's the way he is, that's how he enjoys the show, that's how he has fun and that ain't going to change nor do I why he should. I don't agree with him but I'm not going to force my views down his throat. And on the other side of the spectrum I'll use myself as an example, I'm laid back and am pretty lax when I view a show or movie. I don't analyse the show in great detail and I really don't care about the minor inconsistancies or hiccups. As long as the episodes fun or tells a good story that's good enough for me. Even when I enjoy something I'll admit it has flaws, hell I can even enjoy stupid movies as long as they're fun. But when you make very major inconsistancies or completley butcher things, like how Star Trek Into Darkness completely disrigarded Star Trek lore or when Transformers Age of Extinction completely butchered Optimus Prime's character, then that's when I take issue and will go all out in tearing it apart. That's how I am, ain't going to change. Is my way flawed? Probably, I don't care, you don't have to agree with it nor am I going to force you to share my view point. Seriously people, have your own views! Let people enjoy a show how they want to enjoy it! It's a friggen TV Show, no need to go up in arms and hurt anyone just because they have a differing view.

 

Besides, echo chambers are boring.

Edited June 8, 2015 by The Coffee Pony

[Jeremiah 1,586]

oh well.... time to close up shop

[Jeric 46,854]

oh well.... time to close up shop

Nope, I'm posting here because I get notifications of new topics in Sugarcube and not Media. -_-

 

I actually discussed this issue with tooncritic offline and in the comments of his vid. I think embracing format changes and more group analysis sessions (panels) would go a long way

[Shanks 10,816]

I think we really need to take a middle ground between being overly critical and over forgiving. Not every flaw in an episode makes it a bad episode per se but that dosen't mean they should be ignored entirely especially as certain things have a bit of an annoying trend to them. On the other hand not every episode that has one or two good things in it is a good episode. Not every change in the show means the shows ruination but not everyone criticizing a said change automatically means they have turned hater and not every change is necessarily for the better or has been executed properly.

 

What needs to be remembered though is not every difference of opinion needs to be an all out war/drama. There are some fans who frankly take themselves a bit too seriously and it is not just a few in the analysis community either. The "analysis community" as it is often called is a small part of the community, one that granted has  some importance but that cannot possibly speak for all fans everywhere. Even if I got heavily involved in "analysis" aside from making the occasional thread or blogpost on here (as in making youtube videos and stuff) I would still make it very clear that I speak for myself and myself alone.

[Dark Qiviut 22,444]

I wrote two answers in Candy Star's thread, so I'll C&P them here.

 

Make the BAC more approachable. Sometimes because of how popular certain reviewers are, it's difficult to communicate. But it also puts the BAC on a separate island and, thus, help enforce its cold reputation. Even SQ was on an island for a while until he started AtF videos for the comics. Dr. Wolf and Byter are among the few to actively approach other fans.

 

Stop attacking fans. I simply don't mean just T_O's arrogance to his watchers and passersby. Mr. Enter has this problem of bashing people who use strawmen arguments, and he sometimes counterargues with strawmen of his own like his Twilight's Kingdom review and some Animated Atrocities. Less attacking the person and more attacking the argument, and make sure your argument is sound. MisAnthroPony's awful "Rant" series is a collosal failure because he cyberbullied members of the analysis community, and he's starting to regret it. FNGR (who's banned from here) attacked MAP and Rift Cafe analysts by using ableist slurs, including "autistic," under a dummy account. Jerry Peet bashed DigiBro and scapegoated the fandom. Even Josh Scorcher isn't immune, getting into a nasty argument with T_O a while back in the commentary.

 

Explain your position more. ILKPaL is considered an analyst, but it's less "reviewing" and more expositing and joking. This makes her comments feel really, really hollow. The same for people like The Voice of Reason and Mr. Enter, as their thoughts are summaries, the latter a recap with some thoughts sprinkled in. Drowning in Horseshoes, SQ, and TBBAP are pretty good at explaining, the latter more in explaining and joking among at least two people. It's one reason why I devote a ton of time writing reviews; lest I can really deeply explain something, then everyone's time is wasted. Take your time to explain.

 

Keep each other, and yourself, accountable. Sometimes the BAC can look like a clique rather than a community for reasons I don't fully know. But if there's logic you disagree, post it and explain. If the opinion is bullshit, then explain and keep other members and yourself honest. If your opinion is full of holes, expect criticism of your opinion whether they're positive or negative.

 

Don't create controversy. It's a reverse standard, but hear me out. This was rather subtle from season three onward, but it's now becoming more into the limelight since he revealed how some enjoy it. It's really daft to enjoy and try to create controversy. The second you do, then your thoughts, whether they're positive or negative, no longer feel sincere. Instead, they come off as very, very forced. "Intentional controversy" lacks honesty; if you're going to say, say it, but mind what you're saying, and make them feel genuine. I want to see your thoughts and review of the work's quality be real. If you're intentionally creating controversy, you're no better than an Internet troll.

 

Quit with the fallacies. This relates to one of my earlier points about T_O's ad hominems and MrEnter's strawmen and ad hominems from earlier. Even ToonKritic had this problem with his video by using the "fanboy stereotype" voice. It's not the fact the show is perfect. Part of the reason why some bronies are very defensive is the way the BAC approaches itself beyond just the videos. The friction isn't entirely on the BAC or the surrounding brony fanbase. The issue is at least two-way, and fallacious arguments have plenty to do with it.

 

DON'T attack the writers! We saw this with Mr. Enter attacking Fullerton and Williams before he smartened up, but it isn't only him. VoR did the same by acting overly snarky when reviewing Merriwether Williams's content. Remember, they're human, too. It's one thing to tear apart the work. When you attack the person, kiss your integrity goodbye. When I reviewed the EQG Holiday Special, I was praised for my resolve of not even mentioning the Ted Anderson controversy. Part of the reason why is because my anger over Anderson's politics should have no bearing in the review. I'm reviewing the comic, not Anderson's politics. If I leaked my anger of Anderson's misandry into my review, then my review lacks any integrity. It's one of my favorite reviews for this reason alone.

 

 

[Jeremiah 1,586]

Thanks for the replies but i thought this topic would get locked or closed down or something....

[TheJLeeTeam 914]

Maybe to be more accepting of changes. I feel like Mr. Enter does a good job doing that. And not to crave more dark, serious episodes to much because it's not the main tone of the show. I feel there's a good amount of dark, epic, serious moments as it is.