Thread:BeholderofStuff/@comment-15895329-20170924201201/@comment-15895329-20170924203126

There are several problems with this:

1) Simply saying "they don't exceed the heinous standard" is not good enough when one provides no given reason for WHY when I meanwhile listed their crimes in detail, and I personally think they are plenty heinous enough. Herein lies the problem: what's sufficiently heinous to one person is not necessarily so to someone else, though how someone can say murdering millions of innocents in a holocaust isn't evil enough is beyond me.

2) Simply saying "I agree with Austin because he knows everything" is blatant "Appeal to Authority" Argumenative Fallacy. You are assigning to him infallibility that he does not possess.

3) No, he did not "give plenty good reasons". He simply said he "couldn't agree with any of them", gave no reason for why not beyond simply citing "heinous standard" without defining exactly what that entailed, and that's it. But that's NOT enough. A guy who started a holocaust AND a war and killed millions of innocent people should be heinous enough. There is no reason for that to fall short of some heinous standard he did not bother to define in any way. Millions of innocents dead, starved, and tortured should be enough. The idea that that's "not evil enough" because of some arbitrary and poorly defined "heinous standard" is...ridiculous.

4) You're going by TV Tropes is, as I've stressed, fallacious for the plain and simple reason that they are not infallible. And, villains here are listed as Pure Evil that are not considered so by TV Tropes. So, evidently, you do not follow them absolutely or to the letter (and nor should you).

You still haven't convinced me and neither has he. And the fact that you've outright admitted you do not know about the villains in question actually tells me that I'm wasting my time and yours, and that you're the wrong person I should be discussing this with. But then, you locked my discussion with said person even though he had failed utterly to argue his case effectively.