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. "
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
- Lighty, I'm curious. What villain from which novel series do you wish could count? Incidentally, I think Alexandru Rusmanov from Department 19 also falls in that category. Sadistic as hell, but apparently loved his wife.
Zachary.
edited 18th May '16 5:43:08 AM by ACW
Because this is nagging me, I got a question: Pablo Vargas was voted down on account of not being heinous enough...despite having double-digit rapes AND double-digit murders. Are there any other (non-pedophile) Serial Rapists on Criminal Minds w/ double-digit rapes (and before you say Billy Flynn, keep in mind he was active a LOT longer)? Hell, we could probably cut Cy Bradstone (although the Facial Horror he inflicts is probably enough).
edited 18th May '16 10:03:32 AM by ACW
Actually, the thing that's nagging me is Vargas. Cy has single-digit rapes and murders (though the Facial Horror can keep him), Vargas has double-digit of each (and his murders were by stabbing...not quick and painless).
edited 18th May '16 10:14:39 AM by ACW
![]()
That's why I'm not really contesting Cy. As for Flynn, he was active since 1984, 2 and a half decades, which probably should be factored in.
Screentime is an issue with the show (we do see one of the stabbings). I don't think Crossford was on screen that long (though we did see texts to Charlie), nor was Vasher (though we do see him trying to bring the second plane down).
edited 18th May '16 11:13:12 AM by ACW

@Lightysnake
Oh man, forgot about the champagne bottle part. Been a while since season 1. And yeah, that comeuppance is the moment that I realized Banshee had me totally hooked. Lucas Hood is great.
For my money, there's not a more brutal scene in the whole show than what Sanchez does to the waitress (though the Albino and Calvin each have a scene that mayyyybe sneak into that ballpark a little), and his trainer strongly implies this is a regular occurrence for him.
Minor, minor spoilers follow re: how much Sanchez reappears.
He doesn't show up again, but there are ramifications from his presence in this episode.
@Demon Duck
Unlikely, IMO. He literally laughs in the sheriff's face when confronted about the crime. He's not presented as having any capacity for regret, empathy, or guilt. With the show ending on Friday and his not having appeared since Season 1, I don't think he's gonna march back into town to say he's sorry.
edited 17th May '16 10:51:05 PM by Monessi