• Notes for XABF04 (Frink Gets Testy)

    From Matt Garvey@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, January 14, 2018 18:16:24
    From: mxg77@po.cwru.edu

    Um, police? I'd like to report a missing ending. This episode just sort of stopped. Anyway, it had a promising start (if one that bends the reality of the
    show in the way that can become either great or eyerolling), but totally lost track. Also, why did
    they make such a big deal about using a "Personal Value Quotient" that explicitly is about more than booksmarts and IQ, then have all the consequences
    of the rankings focus on smarts? Super duper duper short. (Also, fun fact: someone submitted the
    episode title to online resources as "Fink Gets Testy".)

    DYN:
    ...the significant look after "after the antichrist becomes president"?
    ...in theory "AOK" (or "A-OK") shouldn't have a period after the A?
    ...the rankings are given by first initial and last name, even though that's incredibly likely to be ambiguous, and almost seems to set us up for a Maggie/Marge confusion instead of the Bart/Homer one?
    ...the writers seem to feel Smithers is going to wind up transgender for some reason?

    Previous episode stuff
    3F08: survivors envying the dead
    AABF18: Springfield Mensa
    4F06: aborted "rebuttal song"
    BABF01: the ark/evacuation and taking the most valuable members of society (with Bart and/or Homer left behind)
    LABF02: Lisa's struggle with the I-beam reminiscent of the cargo container (though with a different scientific principle)
    BABF11: "Jebus" (whose help this episode is beyond)

    Don:
    Football ran pretty long, then even longer, and eventually they just pushed the
    whole thing to a nice round half hour (so this started in the 8:30 slot at the usual slightly-early 8:29).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From None of the Above@1:229/2 to mxg77@po.cwru.edu on Monday, January 15, 2018 01:36:57
    From: Eep@erg.oy

    On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:16:24 -0800 (PST), Matt Garvey
    <mxg77@po.cwru.edu> wrote:

    Um, police? I'd like to report a missing ending. This episode just sort of stopped. Anyway, it had a promising start (if one that bends the reality of the
    show in the way that can become either great or eyerolling), but totally lost track. Also, why did
    they make such a big deal about using a "Personal Value Quotient" that explicitly is about more than booksmarts and IQ, then have all the consequences
    of the rankings focus on smarts? Super duper duper short. (Also, fun fact: someone submitted the
    episode title to online resources as "Fink Gets Testy".)

    DYN:
    ...the significant look after "after the antichrist becomes president"?

    Idiot lefty political snarks are nothing new for the Simpsons writers.
    Pretty much all they have left...

    ...in theory "AOK" (or "A-OK") shouldn't have a period after the A?
    ...the rankings are given by first initial and last name, even though that's incredibly likely to be ambiguous, and almost seems to set us up for a Maggie/Marge confusion instead of the Bart/Homer one?
    ...the writers seem to feel Smithers is going to wind up transgender for some reason?

    Again, this would fit with the trendy virtue signalling of the
    writers. "Tonight, on a Very Special Simpsons..."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From dumpster4@hotmail.com@1:229/2 to Matt Garvey on Sunday, January 14, 2018 23:42:53
    On Sunday, January 14, 2018 at 6:16:25 PM UTC-8, Matt Garvey wrote:
    Um, police? I'd like to report a missing ending. This episode just sort of
    stopped. Anyway, it had a promising start (if one that bends the reality of the
    show in the way that can become either great or eyerolling), but totally lost track. Also, why
    did they make such a big deal about using a "Personal Value Quotient" that explicitly is about more than booksmarts and IQ, then have all the consequences
    of the rankings focus on smarts? Super duper duper short.


    Maybe this is a comment on the 3-digit social ranking system in China?

    https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-social-credit/

    Quote:

    "In 2014, the State Council, China’s governing cabinet, publicly called for the
    establishment of a nationwide tracking system to rate the reputations of individuals, businesses, and even government officials. The aim is for every Chinese citizen to be trailed by a file compiling data from public and private sources by 2020, and for those files to be searchable by fingerprints and other

    biometric characteristics. The State Council calls it a “credit system that covers the whole society.”"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)