you haven't encountered really annoying people who <would've made> vs <would make> you overstep your principles.

[Tony_M]

Hello.

The dialogue is mine.

A: My parents have always told me to treat people as I want to be treated. Even if people are really annoying.
B: You're too young. You'll soon learn that sometimes that's just impossible.
A: Maybe you're right. Maybe I haven't encountered really annoying individuals, or they haven't been really annoying so far.
B: I think the former. I'm pretty sure you haven't encountered really annoying people who would've made you overstep your principles.

The construction "would've made" is the third conditional. Can I use just "would" to mean this?

... who would make you overstep your principles. -> "would" indicates repeated action in the past. In other words, "you haven't encountered anybody who annoyed you on multiple occasions."

Thank you.

 

[BobK]

They mean slightly different things:

• "would've made" - you've actually had the experience of being aannoyed by such people
• "would make" - if you ever met such people (which you haven't done) you'd think differently

At least, that was my first thought; which suggests that "would make" is in sime sense 'better'(given the context). But I think, in that dialogue, I'd say 'would've made' - maybe that's just a form of (excessive?) politeness; (subtext: 'I don't believe you've ever had your principles put to the test, but I'm hedging my bets just in case I'm wrong')

 

[jutfrank]

I'm going to argue that 'would' does not brings a sense of repeatedness to the sentence, and that you ought to remove it. If you want to convey a sense or repeatedness, you're going to have to introduce a modifying adverbial phrase.