I don't appreciate the personal attacks I'm starting to see from you towards me. That's not conducive to proper debate.
I don't see where I was engaging in any personal attacks, but I know that text-only communication can be rough and uncertain at times. If you got that impression, I apologize.
That said, I was talking about this conversation with my girlfriend earlier and when I mentioned the tag, she immediately started thinking of characters like Sailor Moon and others whom we tag the tag with. So obviously at least someone not affiliated with AP knows what we're talking about when we say Crybaby without knowing our guidelines.
Sailor Moon would actually more fit the crybaby designation because she
whines and complains a lot. That's why. She doesn't fit in with Soun Tendo.
That said, yes, we have a definition for the tag that we decided on because that's the trope we want covered. Crybaby happened to be the best tag that we could come up with and is popularly used to describe such characters elsewhere, from what I can tell by some quick Google searches. We've stated our methods to you yet you don't seem to believe us.
Oh, I do believe you. I believe you feel you came up with the best you could think of at the time. But have any of us reached perfection? Do we arrive at a point and then say, "Nope, not getting any better. Gonna stop development right here" ? Just because you have something, doesn't mean you shouldn't honestly consider a possible improvement. I hope you can understand why this shouldn't be a valid argument, otherwise there can be no changes to this site. Why? Because we should just all assume that if the site is using it, it was picked for good reason and thus shouldn't every be changed.
I understand you like the definition and word. I really do. I'm just trying to let you know that it is unintentionally saying things about characters that you didn't intend. I do it myself, say and do things that I don't intend to be negative. Just like this conversation where you think I am personally attacking you, when I'm not. I don't think I'm being negative. You do. You don't think the term is negative. I do.
Which one of us is right?
First, words can have many definitions. Just because a word is used does not mean all definitions apply simultaneously. Take the word
plane for example.
...
You are too focused on definition number 2 and seem insistent that that is the only way the word can be used. However, our use of the term deploys use of definition 1, not definition 2.
"But wait," you might say. "That definition says 'especially a child' in it. Few of the characters tagged are children or act childish!" And indeed it does say that. But there's a concept in English known as a parenthetical phrase. Refer here:
http://www.uhv.edu/ac/newsletters/writing/grammartip2006.08.29.htm
"Especially a child" is a parenthetical phrase, denoted by its enclosure by commas. While the information in relevant, it is also not essential. It's merely a modifier to the sentence. Thus the definition can be read as such:
a person who cries readily for very little reason
So using this definition, our use of the term Crybaby is completely justified.
Class dismissed.
The problem is context. When you say "plane" in a sentence, it is generally understood which version you would be referring to, based on the context of the conversation. Tags have lack a lot of that context, and so we have to determine what people default to. So it's a bad analogy. This conversation has been about what the term implies about a character based on general understanding. I've provided links to the term in actual use, and they all say, "whiner and/or complainer."
And I know the two definitions. My argument was never "you are wrong" but that "you aren't taking into full account the meaning of the word to where you apply it, based on how people will refer to it." Words have power and meaning. If I call you a crybaby, am I just saying you are cry a lot? Or am I saying you are a whiner? One of the threads I linked to, has someone in a game forum starting a thread where he says he used some expletives in chat, and someone said they were offended by it and were going to report him. The thread starter called this guy a crybaby because he was complaining. And then people int he thread called the thread starter a crybaby for complaining about someone else's complaining. That was the word in actual use.
Nowhere in that thread were any real tears shed. The implication is "You are whining and complaining like a baby." Not "you are actually crying like a baby." While crybaby can refer to someone who cries easily, it is generally seen as a negative that someone is whining and complaining. You want the former definition, I get it. The problem is that the word is implying something else about someone that you may not intend. Words have power.
And google searches for pure number value aren't very worthwhile, especially with those numbers you gave that were separated by only a few ten thousand. Google searches can amount to millions quite easily, so the numbers are statistically significant. Meanwhile, I provided half a dozen links to how crybaby is generally perceived and used in the general populace. I can get more, as I am just waiting to see if that is what is wanted. I'll probably find a dozen more the next time I get a chance.
Here is your ultimate test: call someone a crybaby. Go ahead, do it. Do they get upset? Do they think you are saying that they cry a lot? Or that they complain and whine a lot?
Here's a simple way to look at it, with one big word, and I'll say in advance I don't mean this as an attack or a negative on anyone: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!"
What did I just do? How did you interpret that?
