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}
I would say that Harvey is more of a Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds, but that is nearly the same thing.
Avatars may be subject to change without notice.
Well, Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds is a subcategory of Anti-Villain.
My point is that there is more to CM status than turning down a chance at redemption. And given that apart from that there isn't much separating Eddie Brock from other Spider-Man villains, I see little reason to single him out as a CM.
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart
Eddie shouldn't even be there to begin with, I say cut.
Well, Eddie is not even on the list. Also, I sent you a PM message TWICE.
edited 24th Jun '12 8:15:42 AM by MONEYMONEY
For Adria, while she qualifies, just don't mention her being saved for an expansion, mention her role as Karma Houdini but not the whole expansion thing as that boils down to DLC complaining and Blizzard has been known to spare the Dragon in Vanilla games(Kerrigan, Arthas, etc.)
And I'm ignoring you. Becausing your P Ms have been ignoring me and require me to literally spell everything out since I say one thing wrong and you instantly jump to conclusions. So please, do not PM me again.
Okay, lets finish our discussion. But what do you mean that my P Ms were ignoring you? You never sent me any PM. The thing that I wanted to talk about was which of the villains qualifies as a CM. I want to bring one potential removal from the game; Marco Barbarigo. He is on the list. To me, he nowhere as evil as Borgia who also doesn't qualify.
- Marco Barbarigo in Assassins Creed II has a hit ordered on his own bodyguard, Dante Moro, just so he can have access to his wife. When Dante survives being stabbed in the head, Marco takes advantage of the resulting brain damage by having him annul his own marriage- and the next visual on the target briefing shows Dante standing guard at the bedroom door while his ex-wife is dragged away by Marco.
Do we remove him? To me he doesn't sound any worse than Borgia.
edited 24th Jun '12 8:32:49 AM by MONEYMONEY
Besides, you didn't say a lot except that Borgia doesn't count. I wonder, if Borgia doesn't count, than who can count? You clearly implied that there are some characters who qualify. If you said it many pages back, can you at least give a link. And also, do we remove Marco Barbarigo?
edited 24th Jun '12 8:39:45 AM by MONEYMONEY
Avatars may be subject to change without notice.
that I was referring to the "other media" section of the YMMV page for the Spider-Man series. I shouldn't have to spell it out every time I come back to the subject.
edited 24th Jun '12 8:50:12 AM by HiddenFacedMatt
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart
You were there when I cleaned up the Video Game section and cut the Assassin's Creed section down to Majd Addin, the only target in 1 who was a CM on account of lacking any belief in the Templar cause;
—>"Of course not, I killed them because I could. Because it was fun! Do you know what it feels like to determine another man's fate? And did you see the way the people cheered? The way they feared me? I was like a god, you'd have done the same if you could, such power!"
Every other target in the game (DLC that was included in the ACII game of the year edition not withstanding) believed in the Templar cause, and that cause is pretty much the definition of Well-Intentioned Extremist; wanting to end all war and divisions between people by controlling them. Even the Borgia, who were more power hungry than the others, believed in it. Majd is the only one who didn't care, and who has on-screen henious actions by the standard of the story.
And also Vidic, since he was added by Fighteer who is the mod (they always know best). I am just trying to remove Marco now. Though, still I am kind of doubtful of removing him, since his situation with Dante, had nothing to do with a Templar cause. He had really NO REASON of doing what he did. I just want opinions.
He is STILL one the list. I am serius. If you think that you did a cleanup, you are very wrong. Marco is still on the list. Look on the page!
edited 24th Jun '12 9:25:25 AM by MONEYMONEY
Just because Fighteer is a mod doesn't make him infaliable. I don't recall Vidic being here.
And I left Marco on there. And I am now offically getting sick of you're borderline-condesending comments Money. You're completely out of line.
Vidic has been added AFTER the page was locked. I am really trying to stop, but I just don't get what you say. My LAST word. The point is that you are CONTRADICTING yourself. First you said that Majd Addin is the only one that counts, now you say Marco also does. If you would be more clear in what you say, I would leave you alone long time ago.
Also, the page is filled with many poor examples. I think that maybe it is time to cleanup Kingdom Hearts page.
edited 24th Jun '12 9:52:17 AM by MONEYMONEY
Can someone fix some bias in this article?
- Jon Irenicus. Shadows of Amn starts with his torturing the Player Character, and continues with a tour of his dungeon where you find out that he has killed two of your party members from the previous game and cut one of them apart while making your innocent little sister watch, and keeps people floating in jars in perpetual pain and madness, and stuff like that. One reviewer at Amazon.com gave the game an extremely negative review after only playing this part and quitting in disgust, saying that Irenicus "defines evil".......
While there's no doubt that this character qualifies, I read the review and it sounded like something that Jack Thompson would say. Remove the mention of that review as it's biased.
edited 24th Jun '12 10:03:54 AM by xie323
Also delete this Bioshock entry:
- And both of them are outstripped in terms of atrocity by Dr. Sofia Lamb, the polar opposite of Andrew Ryan who started a cult dedicated to her daughter, the first little sister bonded successfully to a big Daddy, the player character. She starts by mind controlling you to shoot yourself in the head, in front of her daughter (who is about, oh, eight and conditioned to bond with you), and only goes downhill from there.
In the good ending she is saved and is implied to be offered a chance at redemption, so if there's something like this, she's out, as C Ms must have utterly NO chance of redemption or even Death Equals Redemption, even if it's an "ending" that allows them to. If there's an ending where this happens, she doesn't qualify.
edited 24th Jun '12 10:10:29 AM by xie323
Avatars may be subject to change without notice.
I only got one response about whether or not Eddie Brock was a CM, so I'll ask this again.
Does Eddie Brock, from the third Spider-Man movie, count as a Complete Monster or not?
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart
I think that the answers were clear. I can say for sure that he doesn't count.
edited 24th Jun '12 10:25:03 AM by MONEYMONEY
Before anyone says something, I am NOT being stubborn about this, I just want to make sure all the facts are on the table before a decision takes place.
We're told that Yakone has a wife, so did Ozai. Yakone's revenge plan was to raise his sons as Tykebombs, we don't know if that was always his plan, but if it was, he'd automatically need a wife to have a child to carry it out, at least unless the writers wanted to try and sneak rape past the sensors who had already given them plenty of leeway. Sure, he didn't abuse his wife, but Ozai didn't until he'd succeeded in his own plan. It was not outright stated, or even implied, Yakone was changed at all by his wife, in fact, the abuse of his sons implies he didn't change at all.
We're also not told why he just gave up when Noatak betrayed him and ran away. Tarrlok doesn't say he did it out of guilt, and it's just as likely he simply didn't have any faith in Tarrlok and saw Noatak's disappearance as the loss of his only chance for revenge. Which is perfectly consistent with his behavior up to that point, as he clearly viewed Tarrlok as the inferior of the two and Tarrlok was morally unable to bring himself to do Bloodbending (at the time) while Noatak was the prodigy and extremely adapt at it.
That said, if we get a decision on the matter, I promise to abide by it and not push the issue. I'm just adding my two cents to the discussion before it closes.
Avatars may be subject to change without notice.
No, you said that Eddie is not even on the list. You didn't say whether you considered that a good thing or a bad thing.
In any case, okay, now I know I have two other users backing me up. Is that enough consensus to remove Eddie Brock from the mention of him on the YMMV page I mentioned earlier?
edited 24th Jun '12 10:43:58 AM by HiddenFacedMatt
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart
Actually, there are more users who back you out. He was discussed here already.
I can't be the only one bothered by this entry under Anime and Manga:
"Pick a non-comedic Hentai anime, manga, or game, any one of them. Chances are very good that the villain, if not some variety of tentacle monster, will be one of these. If they just limit themselves to rape, a victim can actually count themselves lucky. Listing them all would at least double the page length; worse, they often act as a protagonist."
First of all, do we count tentacle monsters, which probably have some other morality, as Complete Monsters? Secondly, was this some sort of compromise to get all the Hentai examples off the page - if it was, my further complaints are moot. Thirdly, this entry is incredibly vaguely-worded, and given that there's exacting standards for Complete Monster, I think we need to either not have any mention of Hentai villains on it at all, or figure out a way to get a point across here without generalizations.
Avatars may be subject to change without notice.
Ah, I didn't recall that one. That was from much longer ago in the thread, though, and at the time I hadn't even seen the third Spider-Man movie.
It now looks like we may have an edit war going on about Yakone. I'm definitely getting brony99 flashbacks by this point.
Back on the Spider Man examples, after watching Spider Man 3 I'm inclined to think Eddie Brock doesn't count as a CM either. His "Venom" alter ego isn't introduced until the movie is more than half over. So that raises the question as to what exactly is completely monstrous about him that isn't about the movie's other villains. Sure, he's involved in the No-Holds-Barred Beatdown of Spidey, but Sandman was involved in the same one yet he's clearly an Anti-Villain. Okay, so Sandman apologized for the things he has done, while Venom turned down a chance at redemption, but Harvey Dent turned down a chance at redemption too and he's also an Anti-Villain.
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart