I agree that it's the presentation that sets off the red flags. I like to hypothesize just as much as anyone but the statements about Adalind aren't being played that way. There's a version of her character that some people have in mind that just doesn't exist in the show but they're making statements like that's actually who the character is. It's not being presented as a "what if" scenario.
Three confusing discussions that come to mind are the Adalind is just conning Nick, Kelly isn't really his, and even the Juliette was just slumming with Nick debates. None of these things have anything to support them in the show but there are plenty of statements that make it seem like that's exactly what is happening. It should of been stated that these were preferred scenarios rather than trying to impose them on the narrative.
For the record, I preferred the conniving Adalind but that character is long gone. She's not running any schemes.
Three confusing discussions that come to mind are the Adalind is just conning Nick, Kelly isn't really his, and even the Juliette was just slumming with Nick debates. None of these things have anything to support them in the show but there are plenty of statements that make it seem like that's exactly what is happening. It should of been stated that these were preferred scenarios rather than trying to impose them on the narrative.
For the record, I preferred the conniving Adalind but that character is long gone. She's not running any schemes.