Um, alright, let's use the old tried and true House of Anubis then. In season 2 especially, the conflict was literally impossible for the heroes to win because the villain was an Invincible Boogeyman capable of murdering them horribly if they did anything they didn't like. And the other villains were either their own teachers and thus in a position of authority, or a man proven to be insane and influential and not easily stopped. Basically, all of their conflicts were "unbalanced" because the protagonists are literal children just trying not to die, and from a strictly logical standpoint you can say that working for the boogeyman is cowardice (because they did it to save their own skins), but it was also a literally unwinnable conflict and they had no choice in the matter.
Just one example of an unbalanced conflict where the solution doesn't amount to "strategy wins".
I don't see the point of this exercise though since an entirely random TV show nobody but me cares about anymore has no relevance on the tropes Starfleet uses. Can we stop derailing this discussion to poke holes in every argument made and just focus on the damn trope in question?
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallAt this point...
I suggest (Not making demands) suggest a final vote is in order.
- Because up to now, the case only seems to be going in circles (issues and explanations are simply being repeated over and over ind different yet similar formatting)
- Much Facts have already been separated from fancy, or opinions, as given form both sides, and evidence has been given from the very story itself.
In my opinions, it is beginning to look as if the consensus is ruling in favor of removing the "Dirty Coward" segment as it is being proven that it does not properly fit said description regarding Starfleet's actions.
Again, I suggest a final vote be held.
Edited by DakariKingMykan on Jun 1st 2022 at 6:44:54 AM
[I don't even know what that question means, fam.]
What I meant is, if Informed Attributes—that is, attributes that the narration claims a character has but isn't shown to have—are a thing on this website, then why not Uninformed Attributes—that is, attributes that the narration didn't claim a character has but is shown to have?
[Starfleet aren't portrayed as villains. They can't be troped with villain tropes if they're not villains.]
I'm extremely certain that certain tropes aren't exclusively for heroes and villains. I'm gonna need to ask the mods about that...
Oh and someone brought up something regarding a different event in the fic and I feel the need to ask: Does it count as Dirty Cowardice if it's brought on by magic?
Edited by N.Harmonik on Jun 2nd 2022 at 8:46:41 AM
So I've been thinking about if a negative trope applies to a character if it's unintentional and remembered another example on this site, that being Knuckle's father, Locke, from Sonic the Hedgehog (Archie Comics). Without going into too much detail, under Ken Penders' writing, he was supposed to be someone who did bad things to his son but had good reasons for them and ultimately meant well. To many readers however, he was came off as an Abusive Parent, earning him the trope.
I think the thing that differentiates this from the Starfleet example is that Locke's actions are portrayed as morally grey by the narrative, it's just that readers felt that these actions were far less forgivable than Penders apparently did. With Starfleet, the decision to not confront Raven is portrayed as 100% the right decision, with nothing in the narrative implying that they're being cowards. Most of Dirty Coward stuff seems to be unintentional implications (there's a section for it in Fridge Horror).
At this point I can see two options. 1. Keep the entry but mention that it's unintentional. e.g.
I mean, we can take the intentionality issue to Trope Talk if ya'll want, but considering the Hate Sink thing I'm 100% certain that this trope does require intentionality because it requires the character be intentionally hateworthy.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallI really don't know... (Not saying it to force it to be removed)
It just still makes it sound like Starleet are idiot cowards when really they are being sensible, and people still may get the wrong impression.
People may also still get the wrong impression from reading the fanfic; after all, folks' opinions don't come out of nowhere...
![]()
![]()
And let's not get started on how Meyer writes the Twilight series and how people perceive the protagonists. Perhaps the trope remaining while mentioning the unintentional part will suffice.
PS: So, uh, are we also gonna go over the fanfiction based on this fanfiction when we're through on this fanfiction?
Edited by N.Harmonik on Jun 2nd 2022 at 1:47:32 PM
Establish that this trope, a subtrope of a trope about intentionally hateworthy characters who serve specific narrative purposes, can even be unintentional before attempting to do that, please. Because otherwise it's the same as an arguable example, and Examples Are Not Arguable.
I've brought up plenty of evidence to support the idea that Dirty Coward requires creator intent and you keep skirting by that in favor of doing something I'm fairly certain is trope misuse. And you won't even take my suggestion to discuss the Dirty Coward debate elsewhere.
Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 2nd 2022 at 1:46:05 PM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallWhile it's not explicitly spelled out, Dirty Coward is about characters (who are almost always Villains or characters with questionable motives) whose cowardice and selfishness is portrayed in a negative light. The page itself notes that it's very hard to portray the heroes like this without them coming off as unlikable (and obviously most creators want their heroes to be likable to some degree) so creator intent is important.
If you disagree with the scope of the trope that's fine but further discussion on Dirty Coward needs to go on trope talk.
Again, let's focus on how the characters are actually portrayed in the story and how it matches up with the tropes we have as they are currently defined.
Edited by MacronNotes on Jun 2nd 2022 at 2:39:25 PM
Macron's notesEdited by WarJay77 on Jun 2nd 2022 at 4:31:29 AM
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallWould we just make a new Trope Talk... or is this the one we want...?
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13543987200A54420100&page=818#20447
So, the other day, I got some responses on a thread
. And the people responding seem to think it isn't an example. So, would it be fine if I remove the Dirty Coward entry? (I need consensus to do it because I need that to prevent an Edit War. However, someone else is more than welcome to make the change.)
It has already been positively proven (From the fic itself) as well as my explanations using the fic as fact that they are not "Dirty Cowards"
I vote for "Remove"
Now we see what others say
Edited by DakariKingMykan on Jun 9th 2022 at 5:39:23 AM
Okay, okay, I am of the opinion that the Dirty Coward thing can be removed from the character page; just note it in the Alternative Character Interpretation page.
Now what else was removed without a good consensus...?
PS: Next time, please let us know of your posting such a thing in another thread, Random.
Edited by N.Harmonik on Jun 10th 2022 at 10:56:16 AM
Hmm... I wonder if we should bring up certain tropes that have been deleted to the "Is this an example?" thread.
And one that I'd been meaning to ask about that hadn't been added before: Four Legs Good, Two Legs Better.
I've read over the segment, and I don't believe it will fit in Starfleet tropes.
The Space Ponies (Later, the Equestrians) They're not following the "funny animal" Section, and they aren't really disobeying their pony-like natures seeing as they are now 90% humanoid.
They have human-like bodies now (Including internal skeletal structure and organs)
- Shoulders, Arms, Elbows, Hands, Fingers...
- Thighs, legs, knees, shins, ankles, feet, toes...
- Yes, they even have unmentionable parts...
They aren't natural ponies (And the Equestrians aren't natural ponies anymore)
They aren't being like the animals from Madagascar (In the example picture) or like Brian Griffin form Family either.
If they were still 50% pony or so, (If they still had hooves, and stood on two legs, and used their front limbs like arms) "Then" it would be considerable, but not exactly in this situation.
They are humanoid-like aliens with pony features.
Edited by DakariKingMykan on Jun 11th 2022 at 11:33:53 AM
That reminds me, I was wondering if I can make a couple changes.
While this would be a rather minor edit, I would like to change Windy Bag's Arc Villain entry to this:
I also would like to bring back Brass Bolt's Manipulative Bastard, though I kinda trimmed it.
- Manipulative Bastard: He tricks his co-workers into thinking Conva's released prisoners attacked him while he was taking a breather from work. He actually freed them and none of them attacked him.

In Starfleet or just in any works of fiction ever? Because I could name a few but I tend to be a fan of really weird and obscure works that wouldn't mean shit to you if I referenced them.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall