Why doesn't the trope page for Karma Houdini say why authors use that trope anymore?

"The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right." - Mark Twain

Also, consider that an author shouldn't kill off a good villain, because they might need them later. In this case it's not really the bad guy is a Karma Houdini. The bad guy is just being saved - for later.

Shouldn't this be part 4, not part 2? Anyhow, I'm not sure why you'd think authors don't use this trope anymore. They certainly do. Although I suspect in many cases it's not intentional but rather due to a lack of screen time/page count/etc. So comparatively minor evil characters tend to either get impaled with extreme prejudice or become Karma Houdinis.

6434607
If I understand 6433647 correctly, they’re saying that the Karma Houdini article used to have a section detailing why authors use that trope, and now that section of the article is gone. I don’t specifically recall that section being there, and the page’s edit history doesn’t go far enough back to show any evidence.

6433910
Yeah, the TV Tropes article even specifies that you can’t call someone a Karma Houdini until the series is completely finished, or you’re otherwise 100% certain that they’re not going to get punished:

Note also: The work usually must be completed for a character to qualify as this trope. Only if there are no more opportunities for Laser-Guided Karma to strike can a character be said to have successfully avoided any consequences for their actions. Exceptions may be made in cases where Status Quo Is God, or when a character can be said to have permanently escaped, e.g. they died peacefully in their sleep at an old age.

Letting your antagonist escape punishment in the short term is a great way to make the audience hate their everloving guts, so their eventual downfall is even more cathartic.

6433753
...What does that have to do with the topic of my forum post?
6434607
Like Meta Four said, what I'm saying is that the Karma Houdini article used to have a section detailing why authors use that trope, and now that section of the article is gone. Do you know what happened to it?
6433910
Again, what does that have to do with the topic of my forum post?

6539467
Ah my mistake, apparently I misunderstood your question. That being said, the answer to your question would be that it changed because someone decided to edit the page and change it. If you want to know why they did so, that question would probably be more profitably asked on the trope's discussion page or on Ask the Tropers. It's not very likely that whoever did it is a regular poster here.