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
Yeah, Slash never once showed the possibility of a legit excuse during the story. It was, like, a year afterwards that the author, during kind of a Q and A thing, answered a question about Jack's Trigger event by posting a small paragraph. He himself acknowledged it was an awkward attempt to lay out his backstory, but honestly, Slash is one of those villains who doesn't need explanation. He's a psychopath who wants to watch the world burn because he thinks being psychopathic is humanity's "true" form.
This is the perfect example of what I was talking about. The one mention of Jack's life before the Nine in-story is simply him stating his "Trigger" was "More dignified" than that of someone else's. Not only does this tell us squat about his "Trigger" in-universe, but it also implies he's fine with whatever the heck it was (At least, those were my thoughts reading it. I had zero knowledge that Slash had a backstory until I read the trope page) :/
edited 11th Jun '16 7:24:15 PM by Ravok
No! That is NOT Solid Snake! Stop impersonating him!Well as long as I'm here, I feel there should be an improve on Julia Cotton's writeup. The writeup itself only seems to acknowledge her actions in the second film. But I feel the first film should be brought up as well. Something like this:
Julia Cotton is Kristy's wicked stepmother who, while she seems regretful at feeding other men to Frank and refuses to kill her husband, she later shows no problem with doing either, and helps kill her husband so Frank can wear his skin. She is also perfectly willing to let Frank rape her own stepdaughter, Kristy. After she is revived in Hellbound: Hellraiser 2, she gleefully drains people at a mental hospital of their life while relishing in their pain and suffering to restore herself, even going so far as to murdering Kristy's helper and making jokes about doing so. She feeds her rescuer Dr. Channard to her master to turn him into a Cenobite and tries to kill her stepdaughter and an innocent, mentally handicapped girl as well. When she encounters Frank again, she shows no hesitation in brutally murdering him, showing she's cast off any human attachment.
Also I have a slight concern about Channard's status. One might argue he was in love with Julia, though i personally think it's just perverted, but what do you think?
edited 11th Jun '16 8:00:43 PM by zcooper95
I think he has a fascination with Julia, but I never saw it as genuine love, and when he becomes a Cenobite, he throws that all out the window.
We could include her stuff in 1, but I think it's harder since Julia is clearly conflicted and even revolted about her actions in killing the men at first...she also loved Frank then. Damned if she didn't chuck that out the window later, though.
edited 11th Jun '16 8:07:26 PM by Lightysnake
So...you think she should be removed? Cause she did kill Frank by the end of the second film, showing she didn't care. But if you do agree she should stay, I personally think we should include it cause it won't make a difference if we all agree she counts. I just feel the first film should be acknowledged.
edited 11th Jun '16 8:13:53 PM by zcooper95
Jia, Scarpia, and Jack Slash.
- I'll play around with the Hellraiser tree for next week's batch (I just had SERIOUS deja vu with the above post)..
- This week's batch will be tomorrow by noon EST.
- Also, dammit, now I feel like I have to read Sin City (or watch the movie) to see if Wallenquist or Cardinal Roark count (I still think Ava could, but the ruling was not a high enough body count).
Alright, thanks, good. And I'm guessing Wallenquist also fails the heinous standard?
edited 11th Jun '16 8:46:55 PM by ACW
Having just watched the film, I feel like this entry needs a re-write.
- Mothra: Clark Nelson is an immoral businessman whose only concern is money. He has his men gun down innocent, peaceful villagers to kidnap the twin fairies they were protecting. He then has the fairies perform show after show as he enslaved them and kept them locked in a cage, even erecting a special glass around them to prevent them from communicating telepathically. He sends his men to kill the protagonists and when Mothra starts rampaging, he doesn't see it as his fault, flees from the country (gunning down a policeman along the way) and finally mocks the twins when it appears Mothra's been killed. His most vile action is the torture of a child who was trying to rescue the fairies.
Several of the events are listed out of order, and unless I have even worse memory than I thought, he never ordered the protagonists to be killed. The closest thing to that was the henchman attacking two of the protagonists for trespassing, and they weren't even ordered by Clark to do that. As for torturing the kid, the most that's shown is Clark and his men tying and gagging the kid, and later on, the bound and gagged kid was found buried underneath some chairs with no notable injuries.
edited 11th Jun '16 8:55:12 PM by Awesomekid42
Wasn't there some talk a good while back about cutting Akorithi? I believe Exister brought up a point that the murder of her own son was offscreen and the rest of what she did really wasn't heinous enough by the standards of the setting - much less Daggerfall alone. Looking back at it (page 2064, it seems)... seems that conversation was swallowed up by discussion on Skyrim candidates that also didn't really go anywhere.
@Hans from Fates
I actually thought about nomming him (possibly alongside Iago), but my computer is kind of busted atm and I'm not going to write an effortpost on mobile.
Other villians in the game have technically done worse things, but Garon is effectively possessed (so he's disqualified from a CM position due to lack of autonomy) and Anankos is playing the Tragic Villain card very hard. Hans actually seems to enjoy being a monster and doing horrible things.
Revelation Hans doesn't really do much, but the story still does nothing to make him sympathetic.
edited 11th Jun '16 9:45:01 PM by Karxrida
Alright with 7
, 2 abstains, and 0
, here is Jia Sidao's write up
Marco Polo: Jia Sidao is the Evil Chancellor of the Song Dynasty, and the Big Bad of season 1. Described to be cold, ruthless, and dangerous, he makes good on this claim when he in introduced brutally beating the army's general in front of his soldiers before killing him upon hearing rumors that he was insulting his style of Kung fu. He also show utter distain for the Mongols and when he hears Empress Dowager Xie Daoquing was trying to negotiate peace treaty with the Mongols he has her and those who agreed to it murdered along with her already dying husband so their son could become emperor, someone easier for him to control, thus becoming the true ruler of the empire. With his influence, Sidao has every Mongolian village near the Song Dynasty capital, Xianggang, destroyed with their people all killed. He also holds his sister's daughter hostage so he can blackmail her to go assassinate the Mongolian emperor and empress. When he finds out she failed to kill them, he tortures her daughter by binding her feat and threatens to kill her, if she fails again. When the Mongols attempt to invade Xianggang he uses gun powder to attack them where the entire army gets massacred causing the Khan to retreat. When the Mongol army succeeds in breaching the walls in their 2nd attempt, Sidao, tracks down Marco Polo, the man who orchestrated this siege and he makes him suffer, before trying to kill him. A Power Hungry Sociopath who views all those as nothing more than stepping stones for power, Jia Sidao was a perfect example of how horrible people in Midieval China could become.
Should send this to the draft page or wait for more votes?
edited 12th Jun '16 2:20:19 AM by G-Editor
My sandbox of EPs and other stuff@Jack Slash: I think your effortpost was actually better than mine
.
Three years from then and my vote still remains the same, even with the Freudian Excuse. (Which I didn't know about back then.)
edited 11th Jun '16 10:30:35 PM by rmctagg09
Hugging a Vanillite will give you frostbite.

No to Slade.
Also, if anyone has any questions about WarCraft, just PM me.
Why so serious?