Maybe someone has already mentioned it, but I had a harder time with two other more unlikely issues in the story.
One, why would Hawkins lab create a near identical dummy match for Will's body? What point does this serve for them. It makes the story more interesting by having his family and friends believe he's really dead, but how can we believe that this lab that just accidentally opened a portal to hell and unleashed a demon and a super mutant kid on a small town, would funnel resources into creating a dummy dead body for a kid that they've only seen in pictures? Kids go missing all the time. Just let him stay missing. Also, who is the employee at Hawkins lab in charge of creating realistic versions of dead people? Is that in house, or did they have to call in a contractor?
Secondly, why did Hopper get so far in the facility and just end up waking up in his trailer the next day? He then goes on to beat up several state police, and no one seems to be looking for him? Considering how quick the lab was willing to wipe out Benny in the restaurant, letting Hopper out seems like a much bigger loose end.

Yeah, but it was a vorpal bat of friendship or something.

You described in a nutshell why I find this show mediocre.
You also forgot that Jonathan, Nancy, and Steve are able to hold off the monster with a baseball bat, a small handgun, and a few booby traps but the government spooks with their far superior weapons were all obliterated by it in a second.

Those are just production flaws, most of which would not even register with anyone had the story been set in some other period, further down the history lane.
Stories about 80's are period pieces now. 90's too.
Still those are all just production flaws.
Real flaws of the show are characters acting out of character just to serve the plot or drama.
Like the whole thing about the gang breaking up because "traitor" - then suddenly everyone is palls again.
Deadbeat filler dad. Character serves no point other than to extend the duration of the show. He literally shows up just to add minutes to the show, then disappears again - changing nothing.
Government spooks who kill people in cold blood simply deciding to make deals.
Government spooks who kill people in cold blood for finding and feeding a kid deciding to just gamble on an attempt that the small town cop who broke into their secret base and saw the "elephant" will believe it was all a dream. Meh just drug him and put a single easily noticeable bug in his room.
Government spooks who pick up said small town cop OMINOUSLY - and then nothing happens.
Government spooks who apparently plan to have said cop and his crazy lady friend get eaten by the monster in the parallel dimension, give said cop and his crazy lady friends automatic weapons.
Retard telepath kid who decides to sacrifice herself for no reason - cause the damn portal is still there.
Mom who believes her kid when he tells her that a little girl broke his arm with telekinesis. And then we never heard from either one of them again.
Or how about that kid of hers acting like a third-rate fourth grade schoolyard bully - then suddenly he's a switchblade wielding psycho getting other kids to jump off of cliffs while threatening to stab a kid in the mouth.
Or the comically retarded always wrong father. He's so funny
Or the simply impossible science teacher - with his incredible leniency, down to putting his night with his hot Asian girlfriend on hold in order to teach small children how to construct a sensory deprivation chamber over the phone.
Or the monster which goes through government spooks like through butter and drags deer around like they weigh as much as a candy bar - but a bespectacled overweight highschool girl manages to hold on to the pool railing for quite a while before she is finally dragged in.
Or the "main kid" repeatedly turning onto the telepath kid yelling "What is wrong with you?!" at her - despite regretting doing that same thing earlier. Friends my ass.
Everything about the douchebag boyfriend with the heart of gold.
Everything about the supposed love triangle. Which rests on the words of an old lady calling it "love" and the girl buying that - despite being there when the fight broke out OVER her douchebag boyfriend shoving the other guy and verbally abusing him by insulting his entire family.
She is supposed to think (and act like) the other guy beat up her douchebag boyfriend over her? What is wrong with her?!
The entire show is nothing but a decent under two-hour movie about kids and a monster.
But since that would be an R-rated kids horror movie (Which is like a veteran virginal prostitute - there ain't no such thing.) and would come off as a badly written Stephen King wannabe story - there's both a schlocky teen horror movie AND a mediocre parent horror movie spliced in.
Padding it out to about 6 hours of "story", for the sake of making it into a mini-series.
Which is thus two thirds filler.
And you just gotta love those cliffhangers at the end of an episode and surprise reveals at the beginning of the next one - on a show designed for binge watching.

When? And like I said before, Nancy randomly asking him doesn't count.
I think he brings it up in the basement when she says he'd be like a brother and he corrects her immediately b/c he doesn't want her to view him as a brother b/c he wants to date her. Not sure how you missed that.
Yes and hunters take the deer with them after they have killed it, either for food or for a trophy.
Yeah, if they can find them. Just b/c you hit a deer doesn't mean it dies right there on the spot. Might not die for a few days. I doubt a hunter is going to track it for 72 hours, lol.
As for a car accident? That would have been possible, but keep in mind that they were far in to the woods probably hundreds of meters away from any road. Does it feel realistic to you that a severely hurt deer draining blood out of it's body could manage to wander for that long distance before it died?
Depends on how badly it was hurt. Not all deer get hit exactly the same way by cars. But the fact that you think deer don't die in the woods is downright laughable. Deer live in the woods. That would be as stupid as saying people never die in their houses.
She obliterated just like the monster.
And what happened to her? Come on, think hard.
Yeah THAT would have been the final nail in the coffin, LOL.
It wasn't for me b/c I didn't agree with all of your examples.
There were also other arguments you didn't respond to with an answer.
So? Are you really complaining that my incredibly long response wasn't long enough? I responded to the ones I wanted to. If you don't like then that's your issue and I'm sure you'll work through it. It certainly isn't a sign of defeat on my part, lol. I'm sure I responded to most of them. And the few I didn't I either didn't care enough or I agreed with you. I never said I thought this was a perfectly written show, but I have yet to see an actual "plot hole" from anyone in this forum. It's all pretty much the "and stuff" stuff you mentioned above.

I said plot holes AND stuff which made no logical sense, most of my examples are examples of the latter.
It may not have been as well done as you would have liked, but this certainly isn't a plot hole. It was pretty obvious that Mike was starting to have a crush on El. They hinted at it a few times.
When? And like I said before, Nancy randomly asking him doesn't count.
The POV of the show is about Will disappearing and his friends trying to find him. Could they have done more in regards to Barb? Yes. Plot hole? No. You complained about the show being too slow, but you want to add more? Come on. Don't be silly.
So? it makes no sense regardless. You can't just nullify that because she wasn't central to the plot. The fact that she wasn't given any attention from anyone in the city other than Nancy showed that she served no other purpose other than to get Nancy aware of the monster and involved in the central story, which is easily as badly written. As for the whole wanting to add more while complaining about it being too slow, well they could have easily cut out all the stuff with the two school bullies, which served little to no purpose and replaced it with a bit more concern for this character which so wasn't just used as a plot device
We don't know what he did for those 7 days b/c if they had shown us him it would have spoiled the show. It wasn't important for us to know what he was eating. Just that he was "alive".
My take on the lights is that he was in their house but in the upside down world. Later on when the Jon, Steve, and Nancy were fighting the monster in the house and Hopper and Joyce were in the house in the upside down world they were doing something to the lights. So I'm guessing Will was in the house earlier and figured out how to flicker the lights to communicate.
Yes of course that was the only important stuff, assuming you WANT to turn your brain off for obvious plot holes.
As for your theory, if that gets expanded upon in season 2 I will accept it. If it doesn't however it's a blatant plot hole. You have any theories on where his food in order to survive came from?
Hunters shoot deer in the woods all the time. Or often times they get hit by cars and limp into the woods to die. Deer die in the woods all the time. Do you think they wander into the suburbs and die on people's porches? No, they die in the woods.
This is definitely not a plot hole.
Yes and hunters take the deer with them after they have killed it, either for food or for a trophy. They never leave it out in the woods. That would defeat the purpose of killing it in the first place so it of course can't have been a hunter that killed it. As for a car accident? That would have been possible, but keep in mind that they were far in to the woods probably hundreds of meters away from any road. Does it feel realistic to you that a severely hurt deer draining blood out of it's body could manage to wander for that long distance before it died? No, that's impossible. If it isn't a plot hole, then it is a Deus Ex Machina scenario on steroids!
And what happened right after that?
She obliterated just like the monster. I don't see how that dispute my argument of her being able to walk and use so much power after being so weak just seconds before.
It's been explained to me that they wanted to be low key. You already had two kids disappear and Benny's "suicide", then having the sheriff end up dead (or disappearing) would be a bit much for a small town like that
Yeah THAT would have been the final nail in the coffin, LOL. If they could have gotten away with everything beforehand they certainly could have done the same with killing him. I certainly care for all of this, as should anyone that have standards in regards to storytelling.
There were also other arguments you didn't respond to with an answer. Since you only somewhat agreed with the Hopper scenario, you shouldn't have any problem responding to the rest.

You seem to be confusing "plot holes" with things you didn't like or understand.
I'll address a few of them.
Mike kissing Eleven made no sense. There was no love interest leading up to it (Nancy asking him privately doesn't count). Laughably forced.
It may not have been as well done as you would have liked, but this certainly isn't a plot hole. It was pretty obvious that Mike was starting to have a crush on El. They hinted at it a few times.
Where was the public distress over Barb's disappearance? That seemed close to non existent.
The POV of the show is about Will disappearing and his friends trying to find him. Could they have done more in regards to Barb? Yes. Plot hole? No. You complained about the show being too slow, but you want to add more? Come on. Don't be silly.
How did Will not only manage to hide from the monster inside the upside down world for 7 days, but also manage to find stuff to eat there in order to survive? And how the hell was he able to contact Winona through those lights?
We don't know what he did for those 7 days b/c if they had shown us him it would have spoiled the show. It wasn't important for us to know what he was eating. Just that he was "alive".
My take on the lights is that he was in their house but in the upside down world. Later on when the Jon, Steve, and Nancy were fighting the monster in the house and Hopper and Joyce were in the house in the upside down world they were doing something to the lights. So I'm guessing Will was in the house earlier and figured out how to flicker the lights to communicate.
Wasn't it awfully convenient that Johnathan and Nancy found a dead bleeding Deer right in the middle of the woods just to set up the monster's appearance? How many times have you just found a dead deer in the middle of the woods? And how did it even die in the first place?
Hunters shoot deer in the woods all the time. Or often times they get hit by cars and limp into the woods to die. Deer die in the woods all the time. Do you think they wander into the suburbs and die on people's porches? No, they die in the woods.
This is definitely not a plot hole.
Eleven goes from being weak in severe pain at the end of the monster fight to suddenly being able to stand right up and destroy the monster. LOL
And what happened right after that?
The only thing you mentioned that I agree with his the gov agency letting Hopper go. It's been explained to me that they wanted to be low key. You already had two kids disappear and Benny's "suicide", then having the sheriff end up dead (or disappearing) would be a bit much for a small town like that. It would definitely get on someone's radar. Not sure if I buy this 100%, but I am okay with it. Now the second time he was let go, eh, that' was a bit much. He really had no leverage at this point but they still let him and Joyce go. They explained it in the show why they were letting them go. So it's not a plot hole more so than something you and I just both not care for.

You are totally right about these plot holes and stuff that made no sense. I'll add some more:
Where was the public distress over Barb's disappearance? That seemed close to non existent.
Wasn't it awfully convenient that Johnathan and Nancy found a dead bleeding Deer right in the middle of the woods just to set up the monster's appearance? How many times have you just found a dead deer in the middle of the woods? And how did it even die in the first place?
Adding to the latter, how did the upside down world have a passage right there under the tree?
The way the monster just appears from time to time in the walls makes no sense either. What's causing it to just suddenly appear from time to time there? And why does it drop entering the wall the moment Winona flees the room?
How did Will not only manage to hide from the monster inside the upside down world for 7 days, but also manage to find stuff to eat there in order to survive? And how the hell was he able to contact Winona through those lights?
That scene where that evil agent lady visited the kids' teacher and said they were planning some sort of tour where they wanted some science kids from his class in on it. It was obviously a ploy to catch the kids, but it didn't seem like anything was ever made out of it afterwards, meaning it was a pointless scene.
Nancy and Johnathan just sneaking in to the police office and grabbing their confiscated weapons back. WTF that made no sense, first off, how did that secondary policeman not notice anything, second, why wasn't the weapons locked in somewhere like policemen are SUPPOSED TO DO TO AVOID ANYONE STEALING THEM!!??
The corporation did not kill Hopper while inside their labs and instead fainted him and sent him back to his house. Why not kill him? He was clearly a threat to what they were doing and considering how easily they managed to cover up the disappearance of people in the past, why not do the same to this clear threat!!??
Mike kissing Eleven made no sense. There was no love interest leading up to it (Nancy asking him privately doesn't count). Laughably forced.
Eleven randomly entering the hall in the house while the family plus Mike's friends were eating. Made zero sense for her to do that considering how frightened she was of every other person than Mike.
Winona and Hopper just storming the science faculty. Didn't they think it would be way higher secured meaning they had to sneak in far more subtle? Really moronic.
Eleven goes from being weak in severe pain at the end of the monster fight to suddenly being able to stand right up and destroy the monster. LOL
That was all I could think of in terms of plot holes and stuff which made no sense. I'm sure there are more neither you and I have covered. The worst part is that we haven't even covered other flaws like that for only 8 episodes, things still seemed to be moving VERY slow.

the biggest flaw I found
Actually that's not even true. I also don't like how they introduced a theory about how the monster comes when it smells blood but were very inconsistent with the application of that idea. It didn't come after El when she bled and Mike's little sister was in Will's room alone not bleeding when it tried to come for her. In fact, when it came for Mike's little sister and Joyce grabbed her, i'm not sure why the monster went away. When it came for Jonathan and Nancy, it didn't leave because Steve showed up. Neither this example or the one I mentioned above completely ruined the show for me, but they were flaws that hurt it a bit and less easily forgivable than the use of the wrong bike or a too modern periodic table. Hopefully that's the sort of thing they'll fix next season.

By the way, the biggest flaw I found was Steves ability to hold the monster off with a baseball bat while the guys with guns had no affect. If only those guys had held their guns by the barrel and beat the monster with the stock, They'd probably all have survived to the second season.

J-No, thanks for the reply. It's currently Saturday morning and i have 3 kids in my hair so i don't know how much time or concentration I have to give a proper reply at the moment. My apologies for that. But here goes:
If you're admitting to recognizing flaws, but dismissing them from your analysis, why would anyone view your opinion as complete or relevant? A complete opinion isn't one that's been honed to fit some kind of end result you're looking to achieve. That implies bias, ignorance, and/or lack of ability. Being observant and enjoying a show aren't mutually exclusive.
View my opinion as incomplete or irrelevant if you want. I'm okay with that. It's just a tv show we're talking about. But there's simply not enough perfect things in this world not to overlook a few flaws in something I otherwise enjoy. It's also fine to point out those flaws and ask for something better next season. Maybe forgiving the flaws in an enjoyable show is just one of my flaws. And i'm okay with that, too.
And you're right. Being observant and enjoying a show aren't mutually exclusive. That's why I'm able to forgive the flaws I do see. Because I can notice those, and still enjoy the show.
As for the many examples you listed, those are some great examples. The strongest one in my opinion is the one about the phone being hung up. That should have been fixed.
As for the hands not being in the right place and the coke can turning, I usually try not to observe those. Again, maybe a flaw of mine, but I just assume people are fidgety between shots and I'm okay with it. It would be different if it were a prop moving without being interacted with.
As for the stuff that shouldn't be there because it's not the right year, again, it's not a documentary. I didn't look at it as a show that was trying to exactly recreate a single week in our universes 1983, but a show that was trying to give a very strong 1980s vibe to their universe. If i can accept that an alternate dimension monster is able to enter the world of Stranger Things, I can also accept that the Smiths became popular a year or two earlier. That doesn't affect the story for me at all. Although, since such a big part of the show is the 80s nostalgia, I can see the relevance in pointing these things out and discussing them. I just don't see why anyone should let them ruin the story.
I don't know which elements would not have been on a periodic table in 1983, so I wouldn't have caught that, but if i had, it wouldn't have affected the story for me. Again, that's more about creating the atmosphere of a classroom. Did the world of Stranger Things discover these elements sooner than we did in our universe? Or is this poor production value? It doesn't affect the story, so I don't really care. I'm willing to forgive.
Other things, like seeing modern day satellites etc, can all fall under the idea of the universe of Stranger Things being slightly more advanced than ours, or, since they don't affect the story itself, they can be forgiven. Another sacrifice to a small first season budget, perhaps. Again, hopefully they'll fix things like that next season with a bigger budget.
What you're doing by pointing these things out, whether its called nitpicking or not, is certainly a valid way to critique and enjoy the show. But for those who enjoyed the story and are willing to overlook those flaws, isn't that also a valid way to enjoy the show?

Thank you.
I think as a whole they are indeed major in a sum-of-its parts fashion. And this was only a top-of-my-head sample, outside of the growing anachronism section that I've tallied and saved for kicks.
Who cares? Well, I look at all aspects of a production so, yeah, I care. Again, this was only a sample.
All in all, I think there is enough to like about this genuinely entertaining series. The areas of improvements just seem so obvious, and my great/classic stamp is just a little harder to earn.

I enjoyed reading your criticisms and would like to read some more but in my opinion only a few of them hold water and are so minor that meh, who cares. The one where he leaves the phone hanging is huge though.

Your line of commenting is more one-note than Winona Ryder's performance.

That wasn't very nice.
Inger, you must rot, because the times are rotten.

You can't form anything resembling a critical thought. Your opinion means nothing. Anywhere.

That said, this show has its flaws, sure, but most of them are easily dismissed if you take them at face value and enjoy the show.If you're admitting to recognizing flaws, but dismissing them from your analysis, why would anyone view your opinion as complete or relevant? A complete opinion isn't one that's been honed to fit some kind of end result you're looking to achieve. That implies bias, ignorance, and/or lack of ability. Being observant and enjoying a show aren't mutually exclusive.
If you have extensive knowledge of early 80s bicycles, I guess that ruins the show for you. If you're watching for the story, I just don't see how something like that is that big of a problem.There's a scene early on with the Wheeler family at the dinner table, and Mrs. Wheeler's hand is on the baby's seat in one shot, and in the next her hand is casually in front of her on the table, with these different shots alternating over the whole scene. Also, when Nancy and Steve were "getting it on" and there's an abundance of light coming through the blinds, despite that light not being there the shot before, and despite all shots outside the house clearly showing it was well into the night. Post-alley fight, Steve is in the gas station/diner and is putting up a cold Coca-Cola can to his bruised forehead, and the can repeatedly changes. On scenes taken from his left side, he holds the can sideways and it is written in the classic font "Coca-Cola". On scenes taken from the right side, he is holding the can vertically and it reads "Coke". Product placement may be the reason, but it isn't an excuse for continuity.
Now, do these examples impact the (frankly, rather unoriginal) dialogue, writing, and story? No, and to you maybe it's nitpicking. To me, it's sloppy directing and editing, and a complete, well-rounded opinion can't selectively dismiss these factors when evaluating the overall production. There's a difference between outstanding, first-rate, average, and flawed production values.
But when you mention "factors like rationality, likelihood, plausibility, etc." I'm curious what you're referring to. Are these actual flaws in the story? Or just characters acting in a way you wouldn't have them to?Anachronism example: Jonathan was really ahead of the curve by name-dropping The Smiths for that mixtape he gave Will. That scene quite possibly occurs while their father still lives with them, at least a year before the series opens in November of 1983. So, Jonathan is into The Smiths six months or more before their first single is even released. That's one savvy rural Midwestern high-schooler that's either hanging out in Manchester-UK or frequenting really clued-in record stores. Now, seeing as there were airplanes and ocean liners, maybe Jonathan was indeed jamming over to Manchester because he was tight with members of The Smiths and their scene. Or, Hawkins had stores, so why not an edgy record store with bootlegged copies of unreleased tracks by The Smiths? You see how all of this is possible, but that buying into it is conveniently dismissing rationality, likelihood, probability, and plausibility? More examples below for your convenience.
Writing and story examples:
Chapter One: Will tries to call 911 but the call doesn't go through. He then drops the phone, and the scene shows it swinging from the cradle. The next morning, Joyce goes to use the phone and it's sitting on the cradle as if nothing was wrong. How did it get there? Jonathan told Joyce he didn't notice anything unusual from the night before or that morning. Did the demigorgon came in the house and hang the phone up?
Nancy decides to leave Jonathan and her only weapon (the bat) behind to crawl through the hole in the tree. The monster just brought a whole deer through the forest in front of her eyes so the best thing to do is to crawl right into what's probably its lair, knowing it's still around, with no protection and without telling her partner? And shortly after, the classic backing-up-slowly-and-stepping-on-a-tree-branch-alerts-the-monster.
The kids explain the concept of a friend to Eleven, but in chapter six (in a flashback) someone uses the word on her and she isn't puzzled.
Chief Hopper asking if the NSA had something to do with this in 1983. The NSA really wasn't well known in the early 80s and there hadn't really been any depiction of the NSA in cinema at that time. Historically, the NSA really didn't have anything to do with stuff like MKULTRA. It would have made far more sense for him to question if the CIA had something to do with it as opposed to the NSA.
Kids jumping into a pool to frolic, or Barb casually running her feet through the water, in pre-winter Indiana. (Well, maybe it was heated? Not plausible enough. I don't need a map for simple point A-to-B explanations, but something like that needs clarification or I'm justified in labeling it as an oversight in production value and quality control.)
How's this for a hypothetical news forecast post-Wil

That said, this show has its flaws, sure, but most of them are easily dismissed if you take them at face value and enjoy the show.
If you're admitting to recognizing flaws, but dismissing them from your analysis, why would anyone view your opinion as complete or relevant? A complete opinion isn't one that's been honed to fit some kind of end result you're looking to achieve. That implies bias, ignorance, and/or lack of ability. Being observant and enjoying a show aren't mutually exclusive.
If you have extensive knowledge of early 80s bicycles, I guess that ruins the show for you. If you're watching for the story, I just don't see how something like that is that big of a problem.
There's a scene early on with the Wheeler family at the dinner table, and Mrs. Wheeler's hand is on the baby's seat in one shot, and in the next her hand is casually in front of her on the table, with these different shots alternating over the whole scene. Also, when Nancy and Steve were "getting it on" and there's an abundance of light coming through the blinds, despite that light not being there the shot before, and despite all shots outside the house clearly showing it was well into the night. Post-alley fight, Steve is in the gas station/diner and is putting up a cold Coca-Cola can to his bruised forehead, and the can repeatedly changes. On scenes taken from his left side, he holds the can sideways and it is written in the classic font "Coca-Cola". On scenes taken from the right side, he is holding the can vertically and it reads "Coke". Product placement may be the reason, but it isn't an excuse for continuity.
Now, do these examples impact the (frankly, rather unoriginal) dialogue, writing, and story? No, and to you maybe it's nitpicking. To me, it's sloppy directing and editing, and a complete, well-rounded opinion can't selectively dismiss these factors when evaluating the overall production. There's a difference between outstanding, first-rate, average, and flawed production values.
But when you mention "factors like rationality, likelihood, plausibility, etc." I'm curious what you're referring to. Are these actual flaws in the story? Or just characters acting in a way you wouldn't have them to?
Anachronism example: Jonathan was really ahead of the curve by name-dropping The Smiths for that mixtape he gave Will. That scene quite possibly occurs while their father still lives with them, at least a year before the series opens in November of 1983. So, Jonathan is into The Smiths six months or more before their first single is even released. That's one savvy rural Midwestern high-schooler that's either hanging out in Manchester-UK or frequenting really clued-in record stores. Now, seeing as there were airplanes and ocean liners, maybe Jonathan was indeed jamming over to Manchester because he was tight with members of The Smiths and their scene. Or, Hawkins had stores, so why not an edgy record store with bootlegged copies of unreleased tracks by The Smiths? You see how all of this is possible, but that buying into it is conveniently dismissing rationality, likelihood, probability, and plausibility? More examples below for your convenience.
Writing and story examples:
Chapter One: Will tries to call 911 but the call doesn't go through. He then drops the phone, and the scene shows it swinging from the cradle. The next morning, Joyce goes to use the phone and it's sitting on the cradle as if nothing was wrong. How did it get there? Jonathan told Joyce he didn't notice anything unusual from the night before or that morning. Did the demigorgon came in the house and hang the phone up?
Nancy decides to leave Jonathan and her only weapon (the bat) behind to crawl through the hole in the tree. The monster just brought a whole deer through the forest in front of her eyes so the best thing to do is to crawl right into what's probably its lair, knowing it's still around, with no protection and without telling her partner? And shortly after, the classic backing-up-slowly-and-stepping-on-a-tree-branch-alerts-the-monster.
The kids explain the concept of a friend to Eleven, but in chapter six (in a flashback) someone uses the word on her and she isn't puzzled.
Chief Hopper asking if the NSA had something to do with this in 1983. The NSA really wasn't well known in the early 80s and there hadn't really been any depiction of the NSA in cinema at that time. Historically, the NSA really didn't have anything to do with stuff like MKULTRA. It would have made far more sense for him to question if the CIA had something to do with it as opposed to the NSA.
Kids jumping into a pool to frolic, or Barb casually running her feet through the water, in pre-winter Indiana. (Well, maybe it was heated? Not plausible enough. I don't need a map for simple point A-to-B explanations, but something like that needs clarification or I'm justified in labeling it as an oversight in production value and quality control.)
How's this for a hypothetical news forecast post-

This message has been deleted.

J-No, I'm interested in what you are considering to be flaws with the show.
I rated the show highly based not on the technical aspects of it, but my enjoyment while watching it. I don't like many television shows these days, so when I find something I do like, I like it a lot.
That said, this show has its flaws, sure, but most of them are easily dismissed if you take them at face value and enjoy the show. For instance, there's a thread on this board where someone says they can't enjoy the show because the bikes aren't right. But that's not a flaw with the story. A flaw with the show? Maybe, but not with the story. Either way, it's not a documentary. The universe of Stranger Things simply has more modern bikes in their 1983 than our universe did. If you are watching the show for 80s nostalgia and have extensive knowledge of early 80s bicycles, I guess that ruins the show for you. If you're watching for the story, I just don't see how something like that is that big of a problem.
But when you mention "factors like rationality, likelihood, plausibility, etc." I'm curious what you're referring to. Are these actual flaws in the story? Or just characters acting in a way you wouldn't have them to? It sounds like you're referring to either character actions or story events. If you're referring to either of those, I have a hard time seeing where rationality, likelihood, or plausibility would be flaws with the story as opposed to, say, a personal distaste for the story itself. If it's unlikely that event x would happen, and yet it does happen, that's just what the story is about whether you like it or not. If you're referring to the story contradicting itself or failing to adequately explain itself or something, then I could agree.
Having said all that, maybe the people you say are acting like the show is flawless just have a different attitude about what a flaw is and how much the flaws do or do not ruin the show. I'm not trying to contradict you or take a side, just offering a different pov. This is the sort of discussion I'm interested in if you care to discuss further.

How's this working out for you, young girl?
Any results, or are you still busy having your diapers changed?

Do things like typing out an ENTIRE cast list to display your intellect. Consistently give in to staunch overrationalizationsyou owe it to the filmmakers. When you have nothing constructive to say to someone, or someone provides valid commentary or criticism you can't understand, call that meanie a cry baby or a troll.
Follow these suggestions, and people will neither laugh at you nor ignore you. They may even scoff if someone suggests you're a moronic simpleton.
Until then, back into the cage.

What do I need to do to find acceptance?
Inger, you must rot, because the times are rotten.

Yeah right. You're nowhere near accepting your sad state of mind.
Keep bargaining with yourself, head case.