Inconsistently Heinous

“	Humans desired reasons. Reasons for pain. Reasons for sadness. Reasons for life. Reasons for death. Reasons why their lives were filled with suffering. Reasons why their deaths were absurd. They wanted reasons for the destiny that kept transcending their knowledge. And I produce those, as it is what I have been brought into existence for.	”
	~ Idea of Evil

“	I have admired your work for years, amigo! Stealing the Moon? Are you kidding?! We would be unstoppable. Men like you, men like me. We should be ruling the world!	”
	~ El Macho revealing his true nature to Gru.

TUEs with severe mitigating factors. It is rare for a TUE to fall under this moral alignment due to their inconsistent nature, but it is still possible if they outdo the Pure Evil or Near Pure Evil characters in power, influence and overall scope of their plans or if they are the most dangerous threat in the story but are too inconsistent to be Pure Evil or Near Pure Evil.

There are four possibilities for an Inconsistently Heinous villain to qualify for TUE:

Generic Doomsday villains with little to no personality and/or characterization (e.g. GOLB, Void Termina, The Black Mass, Galeem, and Dharkon).
Villains with moral agency issues for being made of evil thus cannot choose to be good (e.g. the Idea of Evil, The Core, the Anti-Spiral, and the Grey Goo).
Villains who have multiple redeeming qualities (e.g. Affably Evil, Tragic, Honorable, etc.) that, while severe enough to keep them from being Near Pure Evil or even Pure Evil, aren't too much to make them Grey Zoned, On & Off, Villains by Proxy, or even Redeemed (e.g. Nagi, TRAGEDY, Professor Poopypants (Film), Dr. Zomboss, and El Macho).
Villains who are too comedic but are enough of a threat in-universe to qualify (e.g. CaseOh, Su Tart, Kevin McCalister, and Universe Breaker).