3

My recent Do the internal inconsistencies of Futurama ever cause it to suffer? question has been called subjective. How can I fix it, if it indeed needs fixing?

2

It certainly doesn't look subjective to me. Your question is asking two distinct, independently verifiable things:

  1. Has the Futurama fandom ever reacted negatively to one of its many consistency hiccups?
  2. Was there ever a retcon of a consistency error with the purpose of placating an angry fanbase?

These two basic questions seem to me to be fairly straightforward yes/no questions. Either there were problems or there weren't, either they led to retcons or they didn't.

You're not appealing to individual opinions here, but to a community's reaction, which is something that can be objectively measured.

4
  • I think you've put it better than I could have. Mind if I pinch your phrasing?
    – AncientSwordRage Mod
    Jun 18 '12 at 22:54
  • Oh, not at all. :) Jun 18 '12 at 23:23
  • 1
    I believe frustration in this type of question is caused by a generally accepted "source gap". Since Futurama never appeared to suffer at the hands of anything, it stands that it did not suffer as a result of a poor continuity choice. The reason for any incontinuity therefore can not be accredited to a reaction following negative ratings. ...however, it does not bar the possibility that there was some sort of un-published strife, by which a writer may have taken influence from. This makes for unsatisfying answers that can legitimately be left open, waiting for info that isn't available yet. Jun 19 '12 at 2:08
  • 3
    Regardless, we cannot start basing a questions validity on whether the answer is available or not. That puts an unreasonable onus on the asker to answer his own question before asking it. The question is not subjective, and is perfectly valid. Jun 19 '12 at 4:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .