Moral Event Horizon cleanup

I don't think there is any rule One-Shots aren't allowed 20 minutes is enough time for a change of characterization or perception.

The issue is that that one scene is the teacher’s literal only appearance - one episode is a bit different than a scene.

I do agree that specific entry should be cut I was more responding to the general idea.

One shot villains can count if there's an actual point where their depiction changes and it's not just them being a consistent Hate Sink.

Late to Dorothy

Still planning on the HOA stuff, the issue is that the villains I'm concerned about are just consistently nasty throughout their seasons, so I'm not sure if any of the moments actually stand out enough, but I'm still thinking everything over.

Yes to Dorothy. Any more votes for Russ Cargill?

Russ's act.

I'd be careful with listing one shots because they don't have enough impact for us to gauge whether they'd stand a chance for redemption.

What do you mean by one-shots, characters that only appear in one work? That would cut out a lot of candidates/works.

Edited by k410ren on May 9th 2021 at 9:32:42 AM

No, characters who only appear in a single episode, not just a single work

Okay, thanks.

Also, what’s the rules before being able to write an entry? Five more upvotes than downvotes?

No rules. We don't play by EP-thread rules. There's no requirement to discuss characters here, and the EPs are mostly to deal with potentially-confusing cases.

Is this also the place to suggest removals? Because Mayor Toadstool of Amphibia would have to go. From season 1:

• Mayor Toadstool crosses it in "Toad Tax" by stealing the townsfolk's collected tax money, allowing Grime's thugs to threaten innocent frogs into giving their prized possessions by saying they didn't pay their taxes, and then attempts to murder Sprig after he discovered his treachery.

The issue is that Mayor Toadstool later goes through Character Development and comes to genuinely care for the frogs of Wartwood. So in any case, he would no longer be "irredeemable."

If removed, probably will have to take it to Edit Requests since the page had been locked.

Edited by AustinDR on May 9th 2021 at 11:20:46 AM

Yep, you can discuss cuts here. And cut.

As it is required for the characters to have moral agency, it seems we need to cleanup Samurai Jack by rewriting some entries to be about a group's leader and eliminate entities lacking moral agency, including Aku.

I'd also suggest a cut from The Bible:

• Satan has multiple possibilities for the moment when he crosses the horizon:
  • Many people consider him tempting Eve with the fruit as this, as it resulted in pretty much all the evil and suffering in the world. This one only applies to Satan if he is the snake, however, and some people see it as a failed attempt at giving mankind wisdom.
  • What he did to Job. Yeah, he had permission, but it's still a pretty nasty thing to do.
  • Helping the Antichrist to deceive people into worshiping him.
  • Desiring to "sift Peter as wheat," which most likely means he wanted to do the same things to Peter as he did to Job.
  • The Bible implies that he was behind Jesus crucifixion. If so, he was not only Hoist by His Own Petard but Out-Gambitted, because Jesus's death, preplanned by God, opened the one and only way for people to be saved.
  • In Revelation, he is pictured (probably metaphorically) as a red dragon sanding in front of a delivering woman so he can devour her child as soon as it is born.

Given that I've read about there being a valid argument about Satan in the actual bible being Made of Evil, this might have to go.

Edited by MasterJoseph on May 12th 2021 at 11:26:05 AM

Frankly, the impression I have from past Complete Monster discussions on Satan is that Satan does sometimes work as, I quote ~Tropers/{{32_Footsteps}}, as the celestial prosecuting attorney. That sounds like some actions could be excused as I Did What I Had to Do and how many things in the Bible are irredeemable, anyhow?

Isn't there a narrative point where Satan is considered no longer redeemable (i.e. being banished from Heaven or something)? That would make more sense than all of these actions, which occur after Satan becomes, well, Satan.

Should we even be listing examples from the Bible it has a really screwed-up morality system by our standards making us judging something as irredeemable pretty much impossible. I mean some of the crap God pulls would make anyone else past the MEH.

Can I ask a question?

What do we do with examples that are word of god backed but the word of god changed their ,mind later and had the villain redeem themselves after all.

Which is why we need to look at the narrative. MEH moments get judged by the individual character. The actions of other characters don't matter.

Ok, the idea of an MEH entry for Satan is very funny to me, but in all seriousness there’s no point that I can recall in The Bible where Satan isn’t already, well, Satan. The point in time where he would be considered by the audience to no longer be “redeemable” doesn’t take place within any biblical narrative. I think all of those entries should probably be taken out based on the definition of MEH.

There is a point like that, and it's when he fell from grace as Lucifer.

That said, I question his agency. There's some parts in the bible where it's implied he's only evil because God is allowing him to be.

Edited by WarJay77 on May 12th 2021 at 8:52:21 AM

I have heard though that like many things in the Bible that depends on which translation you are reading.

But that’s never depicted in the Bible, and can be presumed to have happened prior to all of the events depicted therein.

Also, as an aside, the serpent in Genesis is never explicitly identified as Satan. However, it became popular to associate the two, and has been for awhile now—I’m not sure what the guideline is for counting something like that towards an MEH entry.

The Depending on the Writer factor is also good to keep in mind re: the Bible when it comes to the “recurring characters.”

Edited by Nightshade92 on May 12th 2021 at 10:10:33 AM

I was thinking of listing Junko Enoshima's MEH crossing as her killing Real!Chiaki by execution as that created the Remnants of Despair. If we NEED moral agency, we can probably cut everyone Danganronpa related aside from Junko as she's the sane killer in the series. But seriously, I'm starting to think this has basically become Complete Monster: The act, meaning if there's even a small chance the character can be redeemed, they can't be listed. As such, no one in MLP counts as the comics haven't shown the Terrible Trio as irredeemable, with each having a somewhat sympathetic motivation to them.

Edited by Klavice on May 12th 2021 at 8:36:28 AM