I'm not convinced, looking again I see that most of the tropes in the list of subtropes are not actually subtropes at all. If this isn't cut, the list will at least need pruning.
Take for example Karmic Trickster or Only Bad Guys Call Their Lawyers; there is no way either of them are subtrope of a highly specific argument that somebody might make. In fact, I'm not sure there's a single valid subtrope in that list at all, - which ones would you consider a valid subtrope of "Using tolerance to excuse poor behaviour."? This brings us back to the beginning.
Edited by 86.176.36.202
Culture Justifies Anything, Diplomatic Impunity and others for example. That said, I think that this trope's definition is a bit murky.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
You're right that this is a bit murky, but from my understanding I wouldn't call either of those two subtropes.
Diplomatic Impunity is when a charachter abuses a legal privilege given to diplomats. While the diplomat might justify themselves with words about tolerance there's no requirement for them to do so; so Diplomatic Impunity is not a more specific version of this trope.
Culture Justifies Anything is definitely a related trope, however I think it's a sibling trope sharing a common parent of "tolerance is good". The reason is that this trope is specifically about somebody using the idea of tolerance to try and avoid personal responsibility. Looking at the examples in Culture Justifies Anything I see a lot more about somebody saying "I refuse to judge", than somebody saying "you can't judge me". I don't think you can say "I refuse to judge" is a more specific version of "you can't judge me".
The "tolerance" in this trope is not as narrow as you are saying it is. It does cover diplomatic immunity quite well. Same for cultural tolerance, which is at the heart of Culture Justifies Anything.
Also, 51 inbounds.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The tolerance in this trope is definitely about a cultural value and not a law. Diplomatic Impunity is about abusing a specific set of laws.
As for cultural tolerance, I never said that the definition of tolerance was too narrow. In fact I said the opposite when I called them sibling tropes. The reason I don't think Culture Justifies Anything is a subtrope is because this trope is specifically about justifying your own bad behaviour and Culture Justifies Anything is not. If anything, Culture Justifies Anything is the super trope.
If you don't want to cut it that's one thing. But if we keep this trope we will need some serious pruning, and I think those two tropes will have to be pruned from the list of subtropes.
Edited by 86.176.36.202
Diplomatic Impunity does not cover just laws. So no. And Culture Justifies Anything does involve tolerance of cultural values.
I am not at all convinved by the definitions you are using. You might want to take this trope to Trope Repair Shop though.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Actually, the forum doesn't work like that anymore. Now you can just make a topic, and if the moderators agree that it's an issue worth discussing they'll open it.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Re cut: Well, I see that this page has a big note at the bottom to put examples under "unsorted examples" or the long, long list of subtropes that this article has. Pretty much all of them have work examples.
So this isn't a case of a trope being exampleless; just that we've been very efficient at sorting the examples to the subtropes. There is nothing that warrants a cut here.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman Hide / Show Replies