04-07-2019, 05:18 PM
Same post I posted on the other thread just change the name from Kelly to Adalind and change her function from protector of Diana to mother of Diana.
LOL, What is really ridiculous with this whole argument about Adalind (Kelly) and how she was a lousy mom (protecting) to Diana, and here we go again, someone trying to change the story line with a series of events that are translated and twisted into inconsequential series of events that make no flocking sense, whatsoever.
OK, so let’s say, this dumb-ass argument of Adalind (Kelly) being a bad decision maker and failing to mother (protect) Diana. So, now what? What has this idiotic argument proven? So Adalind (Kelly) is a lousy decision making lousy mother (Grimm), so now what? Do you win the flocking lottery and can retire for life? What is the point?
Then we get "pointdexter" to chime in on how lousy the writers were on character development without taking into account the best they could do to write in a character who's actress was more acceptable to the majority of the viewing audiences (unavailable, do to prior professional commitments to another project she was working on.)
So whats the point? You’s (NYC word, possessive and plural version of “you”) have assumed you had bad writers write up a lousy undeveloped character. Now what? My TV has an on and off switch, does yours?
LOL, What is really ridiculous with this whole argument about Adalind (Kelly) and how she was a lousy mom (protecting) to Diana, and here we go again, someone trying to change the story line with a series of events that are translated and twisted into inconsequential series of events that make no flocking sense, whatsoever.
OK, so let’s say, this dumb-ass argument of Adalind (Kelly) being a bad decision maker and failing to mother (protect) Diana. So, now what? What has this idiotic argument proven? So Adalind (Kelly) is a lousy decision making lousy mother (Grimm), so now what? Do you win the flocking lottery and can retire for life? What is the point?
Then we get "pointdexter" to chime in on how lousy the writers were on character development without taking into account the best they could do to write in a character who's actress was more acceptable to the majority of the viewing audiences (unavailable, do to prior professional commitments to another project she was working on.)
So whats the point? You’s (NYC word, possessive and plural version of “you”) have assumed you had bad writers write up a lousy undeveloped character. Now what? My TV has an on and off switch, does yours?
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!