Board Thread:Clean up Concerns/@comment-2175012-20171129183922/@comment-29644557-20171130004746

Overseer80 wrote: Also, going off of your serial killers example, we would not consider Jerome Valeska to be what he is, because after all, what has he done but murder more than other murderers in a series filled with murderers? And yet somehow we still consider him worse than the rest. But then, our ideas of "heinous standard" here are deeply flawed/contradictory anyway. I still say we just drop all pretenses and go for a "TV Tropes is always right" rule, which is basically what we have now. Let's just be honest about it. Heinous standard is usually tricky, but it usually boils down to how they compare with the other villains. In Gotham, most of the villains have some humanity; they're tragic, delusional, or not as heinous. They're murderous lunatics, but still relatable in some way or another. However, Jerome has no humanity and stands out as one of the only villains to be that way.

In Where the Dead Go to Die, almost nobody has any humanity. Almost every villain would qualify. While Labby stands out for being the worst and the possible cause of a lot of the evil, he is not the exception, like in Jerome's case. Everyone acts Pure Evil, so that means no one is.