In a scene of the final episode of the TV series Longmire (Goodbye Is Always Implied), the reoccuring character, a Crow Medicine Woman named Marilyn Yarlott (Tantoo Cardinal) is in the Police Station and swipes an inanmate object off of another character's desk. It seems like it was some kind of ...
SPOILERS, obviously.
I watched the movie twice already and I think I have almost everything figured out. The one think though that I still can't understand are these moments where Luv cries:
In the scene where Wallace examines the new replicant model (BTW what does he mean by "new model"?) Luv...
@NapoleonWilson I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "progressive", but I've seen what happens when mods "take a stand" and announce that a large class of questions are going to be declared off-topic, without doing sufficient polling with the community first. Suffice to say, it resulted in the ugliest few weeks I've ever observed on SE, and you really don't want that kind of thing happening here.
@Randal'Thor Well, no polls at least, in contrast to reasonable assessment of the state of the site and its community and a properly reasoned judgment call.
Polling is ass because you don't have to say why they're so awesome and why all the arguments against them don't hold water. You just upvote the 1-line answer that says "Yes, I like quiz shows!".
@NapoleonWilson Oh, I agree that simply asking people to vote for "yes" or "no" is a poor way to go about these decisions. There should always be reasons.
@Randal'Thor Regarding polling...I'm concerned that the results are representative of involved users. We're a pretty small community of regulars but the voting on the last "poll" was way out of proportion to that community.
@Paulie_D If the larger userbase is getting involved with an issue, then that's great, right? I mean, you don't want the small clique of regulars to be able to decide everything.
It's not clear if he's actually after the character and the scene this picture takes place in, which might make a ton more sense than the current question.
@NapoleonWilson If the information doesn't exist in Wikipedia or IMDb, is that enough to make it not trivia? (General query - I'm not asking about the specific question you guys are discussing, which I haven't even looked at in detail.)
That's what usually makes the difference in those cases. Wanna know what car model that dude in that background scene drove or who played that dude in that 5 second scene there? I...don't know.
Tell us why you wanna know that.
@Randal'Thor It depends. If the matter itself is inherently trivial, a little context and motivation doesn't hurt.
@Randal'Thor I know. But it's neccessary for pretty much stuff like "who played that dude over there?".
"Trivia" doesn't mean "everyone knows" (we don't necessarily close easily googlable stuff) rather than "noone cares". They might overlap sometimes, though.
@Randal'Thor It seems okay, I guess. Hard to tell. A little fleshing out surely doesn't hurt.
I know SciFi is a ton more lenient in this regard anyway.
But it might have been okay here as well.
Characters make more sense than actors anyway. Since a character implies a certain degree of significance already.
@NapoleonWilson Hmm, I see. That seems quite hard to define though, since clearly someone cares simply by the fact that they posted the question in the first place.
but I def agree with @NapoleonWilson that the question could be fleshed out more with what sources they are willing ot accept answers from, even if they say both movie and book sources
Hmm, I'm hunting for a meta post about the "trivia" close reason. Relatively recent, certainly 2015 or later. Possibly either asked or answered by @Catija. Well-received answer saying that this close reason is unclear and should perhaps be got rid of. But I'm not finding it ... do any of you guys know the one I mean?
The site has to struggle with many a stupid crap question, I won't deny that. And yes, that's to some degree due to the rather accessible and "trivial" topic it's about.
@Randal'Thor There was one from Catija, largely unanswered, though. But I think you mistake it for another one about the "current-events" one, which got exactly such an answer (from me) and was abolished for the "recommendation" reason.
Here's our current definition of the off-topic reason "trivia" from the "What topics can I ask about here?" help page:
Unimportant trivia that does not add to the understanding or appreciation of the title.
This definition is not very useful as what one person's feeling on whether it "adds ...
As a corollary to Should movie trivia questions be closed?
I'd like to have a discussion about these sorts of questions.
Personally, I find them generally pointless and I don't see why we entertain them here. Most of the time, the specific model/brand of a random item has no bearing on the fil...
I'm generally against close reasons for things like trivia or quality, because it goes against the DV-CV orthogonality that's supposed to be part of the SE model.
I think that the "Trivia" close REASON needs some work. It implies that we're replicating IMDB by answering rather than explicitly saying "This isn't really important!
@Randal'Thor Sometimes it's just needed, though. You can't have half the site's questions downvoted to hell (or even worse, crap not downvoted at all).
Expanding it to something like "Unless the item has some bearing on the plot, period accuracy, meaning (including symbolism, etc), character motivation and the like then these questions are off topic"
The point is, though. Often some context can totally make a question reasonable. But that's the case with many things, first and foremost "unclear what you're asking" ones.
@NapoleonWilson Those aren't properly answerable though, so they don't really fit the SE models. Trivia questions generally are uniquely and objectively answerable.
@Randal'Thor They totally are. Tell us why the movie is awesome. What you're saying is that they aren't uniquely answerable. But then again, you're a Literature user, too.
@NapoleonWilson Fair point, I guess. You'd think people would learn after the first dozen got downvoted to hell, even if they weren't closed. But apparently not.
@NapoleonWilson True, they could work in the SE model if answers were strictly enough moderated. After all, Software Recommendations and Hardware Recommendations exist. But in general they're damn hard to moderate, because you can't stop people from upvoting "watch X, it's awesome!" just because they think it's awesome too.
Similar to how you can't stop people giving one-liners "that's your movie". Because it's the correct answer, right? The asker couldn't care less about details. ;-)
@DForck42 SFF also learned that the hard way. Recommendation questions were allowed once upon a time, but then there were some tough moderation decisions by Gilles et al in the early days and they all ended up getting nuked.
Yes, I'm talking about the answers to identification questions.
While we have a few measures to handle low quality identification questions to some degree, one of the problems of those kinds of questions, even the good ones, is that they encourage bad low quality one-line answers of the kind:
...
@NapoleonWilson basically, finds any open id question that has any answers on it that is the length or shorter of a tweet (280 chars), then sorts the answers by score
The problems with bad answers to ID questions have been discussed at Answering an ID Question, a PSA and How to handle low quality identification answers?, although not with any clear conclusion on how to handle them. I've also discussed, on another site, what I think makes a good ID answer. The ...
I'm talking about Thor: Ragnarok trailer
We know that Thor's hammer can be held only by them who are worthy of it. In the first trailer we saw Hela broke Thor's hammer. But how Hela is worthy of it. She has evil intentions and wants to destroy Asgard.
Not only she held it, she broke it into p...