900 wicks are a good argument against it, because as we all know, this sort of work tends to backlog endlessly.
Has someone descriptions up for Evil Aristocrat and Aristocracy Is Evil?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
We should probably do a crowner first, although I'm not sure whether it should be single-proposition or not.
Single Prop, unless someone has another option worth discussing.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
"The difference is simple: one is a broader setting/political statement trope, and the other one is a type of villain. As for splitting the wicks, it might take some time, but on its own that's not much of an argument against it. "
Exactly. One can believe that aristocracy is an inherently evil institution without believing that any given aristocrat is evil simply because of his birth. Likewise one can believe a given aristocrat is evil without believing aristocracy is evil as an institution. In fact we have examples of both. Mark Twain pretty clearly believed aristocracy to be evil, at least if you take Connecticut Yankee to express his opinions. But he had heroic aristocrats like the Prince in Prince and the Pauper. Likewise, Medieval romanticists didn't believe aristocracy was evil but had black knights, evil kings and the like.
I agree; it should be split into aristocracy is evil and evil aristocrat. Except evil aristocrat should be a supertrope. It would contain God Save Us from the Queen!, The Emperor(most emperors are evil), The Evil Prince, and so on.
Are these all aristocrats? I doubt it.
Also, before any split, we need to have descriptions and examples available.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Hurler of Swine
Has anyone made any progress on this one?
Gentleman Troper!
Apparently it needs a decision on whether this should be split.
Personally, I don't think that having two separate tropes for "Aristocrats Are Evil" and "One Aristocrat Is Evil" (aka Evil Aristocrat) is all that helpful. I would expect them to become heavily misused for one another.
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
Yeah, I don't feel the tropes are very different.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Hurler of Swine
I think the current name is a bit misleading, and that the difference between aristocracy as an institution being evil and one particular aristocrat being evil is sufficient for two tropes.
Hi
Re-clocking; this one's going to stick.
Gentleman Troper!
I suggest that anyone who wants to split the trope should demonstrate consensus for that action, and if we lack that consensus we should not take that action and lock the thread.
Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
Hi
No action appears to have been taken, and the clock's up; locking up.
The difference is simple: one is a broader setting/political statement trope, and the other one is a type of villain. As for splitting the wicks, it might take some time, but on its own that's not much of an argument against it.
If this is followed up on, I recommend redirecting the current name to the Aristocracy Is Evil trope, as it sounds closer and we'll want to keep the inbounds.