Talk:Nosedive (Black Mirror)

A note on how this is basically how Chinese society works would be nice.

In China, social status is everything, and surrounding yourself by people of high status is exactly what to do, to gain a higher status. Which is why in business deals, everyone is bringing his whole entourage, like a royal court.
— 87.79.190.44 (talk) 04:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

While that is true, couldn't you say that about any society? Lrichar (talk) 11:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

A more accurate comparison would be to a proposed social credit system that the Chinese government has apparently been considering [1]. However, I don't know if the rollout is actually happening or if it would be a useful addition to this article. James Martindale (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I concur. It is happening in 2017 and 2018. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zezen (talk • contribs) 14:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

The article already contains a three-paragraph section on China's Social Credit System. If you have further commentary that you think needs adding, please present reliable sources which explicitly link "Nosedive" to other real world phenomena. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 15:29, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Pastel color

Something could be said about how high-scored people wear pastel colors but I don't know how to integrate it in the article. --Error (talk) 17:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Content from Black Mirror

For attribution purposes, I should note that my edit here is based off the contents of Black Mirror#Accolades, and I also took references from 2017 British Academy Television Craft Awards and 48th NAACP Image Awards; see those pages' edit histories for a list of contributors. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:51, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Nosedive (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

0 or 1

The episode is inconsistent, they say 1 to 5 stars earlier, but later affirm her rating drops to near zero. As long as we state they rate on a 5-star system but her rating drops to zero , we can ignore that problem. --Masem (t) 01:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Ah, it's slightly more nuanced than that. Each individual rating that you give to a person is from one to five stars. We don't know the formula which indicates the change in a person's overall rating. For instance, it could be that a three-star rating or above increases your rating, and a two-star rating or below decreases your rating, in which case if you're a 1.0 and you get a two star rating, you drop below into the 0s. Now this is all speculation, but it's just an example to point out there's no contradiction here.

I've just rewatched the relevant portion of the episode and Lacie's rating can be seen to drop to 0.6, while one-star rating noises continue. In fact it's not too clear that her rating drops to 0 dead on, so I've changed it to read "below one star". — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 12:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)