During the investigation of recent hollers in the Complete Monster thread, it's become apparent to the staff that an insular, unfriendly culture has evolved in the Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard threads that is causing problems.
Specific issues include:
- Overzealous hollers on tropers who come into the threads without being familiar with all the rules and traditions of the tropes. And when they are familiar with said rules and traditions, they get accused (with little evidence) of being ban evaders.
- A few tropers in the thread habitually engage in snotty, impolite mini-modding. There are also regular complaints about excessive, offtopic "socializing" posts.
- Many many thread regulars barely post/edit anywhere else, making the threads look like they are divorced from the rest of TV Tropes.
- Following that, there are often complaints about the threads and their regulars violating wiki rules, such as on indexing, crosswicking, example context and example categorization. Some folks are working on resolving the issues, but...
- Often moderator action against thread regulars leads to a lot of participants suddenly showing up in the moderation threads to protest and speak on their behalf, like a clique.
It is not a super high level problem, but it has been going on for years and we cannot ignore it any longer. There will be a thread in Wiki Talk
to discuss the problem; in the meantime there is a moratorium on further Complete Monster and Magnificent Bastard example discussion until we have gotten this sorted out.
Update: The new threads have been made and can be found here:
Please see the Frequently Asked Questions and Common Requests List before suggesting any new entries for this trope.
IMPORTANT: To avoid a holler to the mods, please see here for the earliest date a work can be discussed, (usually two weeks from the US release), as well as who's reserved discussion.
When voting, you must specify the candidate(s). No blanket votes (i.e. "![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/thumbs_up_emote.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
to everyone I missed").
No plagiarism: It's fair to source things, but an effortpost must be your own work and not lifted wholesale from another source.
We don't care what other sites think about a character being a Complete Monster. We judge this trope by our own criteria. Repeatedly attempting to bring up other sites will earn a suspension.
What is the Work
Here you briefly describe the work in question and explain any important setting details. Don't assume that everyone is familiar with the work in question.
Who is the Candidate and What have they Done?
This will be the main portion of the Effort Post. Here you list all of the crimes committed by the candidate. For candidates with longer rap sheets, keep the list to their most important and heinous crimes, we don't need to hear about every time they decide to do something minor or petty.
Do they have any Mitigating Factors or Freudian Excuse?
Here you discuss any potential redeeming or sympathetic features the character has, the character's Freudian Excuse if they have one, as well as any other potential mitigating factors like Offscreen Villainy or questions of moral agency. Try to present these as objectively as possible by presenting any evidence that may support or refute the mitigating factors.
Do they meet the Heinousness Standard?
Here you compare the actions of the Candidate to other character actions in the story in order to determine if they stand out or not. Remember that all characters, not just other villains, contribute to the Heinousness Standard
Final Verdict?
Simply state whether or not you think the character counts or not.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 31st 2023 at 4:14:10 AM
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yeah, I do agree on that one. I rather like the first quote, though. It communicated the trope very well.
Galbraith does strike me as one of the more horrific guys we've discussed here.
Caesar
Make no mistake: This isn't an extremely good book. It is filled with Narm-y stuff, and the author really felt like he was trying to make the most disgusting villain he could imagine, and it just resulted in a completely over-the-top ridiculously evil psycho. I agree with Hamburger Time in the "Trying too hard" sentiment, but it 'tis what it is.
Galbraith is a horrible, horrible individual, and, regardless how "Over the top" he is, he counts.
![[down]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_down.png "[down]"){kind=icon}
Oh no, no, no, I'm sorry. I wasn't directing any ill will at you, or anyone else on this thread. Because honestly, I myself was weirded out at how Narm-y he was. Forgive me if I offended you, I was just trying to find a way to express that I agree that this guy is way too over-the-top.
edited 12th Jan '16 8:26:23 PM by Ravok
WHAT A WONDERFUL DAY!
I don't think anyone's disputing that, I was just expressing my opinion.
Well ![[tup]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_up_emoticon_3268.png "[thumb up]"){kind=small}
for Galbraith, obviously.
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
Everybody but HamburgerTime: "Dr. Galbraith?! OH MAH GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!
Me and HamburgerTime: "Eh.
◊"
Obviously I'm giving Galbraith a , but after being on this forum for over a year, and having watched Where the Dead Go to Die (amongst other things), it's almost impossible for me to really get all that shocked anymore.
Honestly for me the only thing Galbraith has on Anita Roycewood is number of victims. And she has being-less-cheesy on him. 
Caesar
I do feel that his "Pedo Ring" is something else he has on her, but, having seen that ep. of Criminal Minds, I have no real objections to the claim that Anita is, arguably, worse. ![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
So, I was wondering, if a villain does not actually appear onscreen, but a good number of notes are found written by them which clearly displays their evil personality quite well, and has them detailing(in delight) about the people they killed, and we later find evidence that moves their crimes out of Off Stage Villainy (such as the ghosts of their victims), and thus, despite not physically appearing, a personality is clearly established along with onscreen villainy, can the villain still qualify? I am hoping that the answer is no because I don't want to have to discuss the Apartment Preditor.
edited 12th Jan '16 8:59:10 PM by bobg
jjj
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
I don't think it does. Keep in mind, you don't have to discuss every villain you come across. If they don't seem like a CM, it's not always necessary to make an effortpost.
Don't think it does what?
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
I mean I don't think that kind of villain would qualify for a CM. Kinda worded that weirdly. I tend to do that. >__<
edited 12th Jan '16 9:05:51 PM by Tyk5919
I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.
Have you actually watched/played/read whatever that guy's from?
I don't think a character who never appears on screen ever can count, IMO. A character who only appears in Flashbacks can though.
I'm currently watching 13 Assassins. I might tweak Naritsugu's writeup when I'm done.
What matters most is if we see the overall actions of the character, which can include the aftermath of their terrible deeds. It's not them being onscreen so much as their overall actions, including what happens after the actions.
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
@DemonDuck: Enjoy the Big Badass Battle Sequence. 
Okay, so....I think Angus Renhym has more abstains than votes or ![[tdown]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Thumbs_down_emoticon_3571.png "[thumb down]"){kind=small}
votes. I'm not sure what we do when that happens. O__o Should we just put him on hold like we did Black Hiver or keep voting?
24 update: So I'm past the episode where Navi gets killed. And now I'm going to propose that we cut him. Now yes, Navi tried to kill his own wife and son. He clearly is a sociopath who only cares about his cause, and he will kill anyone in his way. ....But he only kills one person, and only attempted to kill a few others. That's very low on the heinous standard in the 24 universe, especially considering Marwan from the same season has done a lot more than he has. If you remove Navi's son and wife from the picture, he's just another Mauve Shirt terrorist with a couple of kills under his belt.
So are we up for cutting him? Or at least discussing him?
I write stories and shiz. You can read them here.
Oddly enough- regarding all those, um, shining literature examples that come up- I actually bought a novel (White Jaguar) a while ago just because the synopsis sounded like the villain might make for a CM proposal. Still haven't read it, though. And I got the original novel of the previously-discussed Just Cause at the same sale.
There's also- I'm sorry- another MLP fanfic villain who's caught my eye, if only for sheer hatefulness and a few potential great entries for the quotes page. But I'm not proposing her for a while since the series she features in (the Blooming Moon Chronicles, in the extremely unlikely event anyone else here has read it and wants to jump in) gets quite dark, apocalyptically so, and I want to make sure I have its heinous standard nailed down (she stood out to me and other commenters, at least, but one kinda-sorta AU entry later on apparently has the protagonists becoming villains themselves, so that alone needs investigation). And it's over four million words total, so I won't bother you with her for a while.
What does Anita do? I'm interested to hear about a villain that's actually worse than Gabriel. I mean I know Criminal Minds has some pretty sick villains but I don't recall any of them being quite that depraved.
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
She kidnapped children, beat them, possibly sexually abused them, and basically tortured them. And then she knocked them out and burned them alive in a crematorium when she got bored with them or if they got too old/uncontrollable.
Easy to Galbraith. He's a solid keeper, although I can't say I've got the same revulsion everyone else has to him due to the fact I've been so thoroughly desensitized to this stuff.
I'll also support cutting Navi. Tyk, would it be out of the question for you to provide a more-detailed writeup for Abu Fayed at some point? The current one... is pitifully short.
edited 12th Jan '16 9:32:56 PM by Scraggle
Your friendly neighborhood stank goblin
Well, if it's any excuse for me to watch more 24...
I could elaborate on the Apartment Preditor, but I am not sure if I want to discuss him here at all since he's bassicly what you'd get if you stuck Gilday and Galbraith in a blender. We don't actually SEE him doing what he did, although we do find notes written by him detailing what he did, and we do see the ghosts of his victims, so at least that's a plus from actually seeing it in action. If anyone wants me to list the quotes from his self written notes, I will.
jjj
@Tyk: I'm offended good sir, I do not have a fly on my forehead that is a better actor than me.
Honestly Galbraith wouldn't be so shocking to me if I saw more pedophiles that were serial rapists of kids and babies. I mean there was Gilda or whatever that guy's name was who ate babies and kids, but honestly I wasn't around for a few of those proposals and if I was, I don't remember too many of them. If I was, I'd probably have the same neutral reaction HT, Tyk and Scraggle have.
Galbraith. I don't think I've seen an effortpost about anyone so personally and pointlessly malicious.
