I guess you are unfamiliar with how the world operates with producing work subject to review by people. Why are you blogging on AV Club if you don't believe in negative reviews and questioning the quality of work?

I think you miss the point of critiques and reviews. I'm entitled to my opinion as you are to yours and if I don't like the writing for a show on TV, I have a right to express my dissatisfaction with no obligation to do their work for them and come up with a better write up.

Then there's the redemptive Rick and Morty that shows what good writing is all about.

One of the more surprising things is that it took six episodes before Alicia was finally harassed by soldiers. You'd think with the short shorts she was sporting around the neighborhood, some of those female deprived servicemen would have been giving her lots of unwanted attention.

I think in the chaos- it was "dealers choice" whether to take a potential survivor back or just proactively euthanize folks on a whim.

And at the very least we know that you like to defend bad ideas and bad writing by "professionals", since that was the basis for the start of the thread anyway with you second guessing the guy who was also against Daniel's zombie release plan.

Incorrect. Getting paid to take the time to produce a good script is NOT the same as someone ad libbing an alternative solution on the fly without any real time or effort put in.

It was a gamble that was saved by plot miracles such as them finding Nick in time and not having that portion of the Hospital area overrun first. If Griselda was still alive, she would have slowed them down greatly and likely would not have made it out if not for more plot miracles. The more common likelihood if she…

There's a little difference here. I'm not the one getting paid to write and one would have to assume, take the time and effort required to come up with a more believable plan.

So what is your point - that it's not likely that poorly written shows will be canceled, so …they can continue to be poorly written?

Sure it means something- it's called a drop in ratings as people stop watching poorly written shows.

Looking at the comments - a ton of folks didn't like the "release the zombies" plan. That much is certain.

I could make the same defense - the impersonation plan would have worked if they written that in, because it did.

That's not how the conversation went.

After he released them and then found out AFTER he released them? Like I said he had no idea how they would act BEFORE releasing them.

1) So what you're saying is his plan depended on the "hope" that he could outrun the walkers - and if he was wrong, everyone was dead.

Not enough to make any mistakes of that magnitude.

You're not getting my point. He was walking slow after he released them but he had no way of knowing what their top speed would be before releasing them. You are using "after the fact" evidence as a defense and that doesn't make sense.

That's my point - how did Daniel KNOW they could be outran? He didn't, but they wanted to plot to move so he did it anyway.

I'm not sure I understand your question- the writers can make "anything" work - they've clearly demonstrated that.