Of course Quinn is from Zoey 101. Everybody should know that, right?

Sorry – I never really watched the show. In fact, the two times I attempted to watch it, it was the same episode and I didn't really pay attention to anyone or their names. Thank you for educating me.

You have to remember – the decency and indecency of fanfic writers is subjective to the reader. Obviously you are stating your opinion but I find it uncouth and pompous when you state it as though it's a fact. All fanfic writers "pervert" the characters to some degree to suit their needs – even those who write Quinn/Cal. They are using a character(s) born from another's imagination and can only use their observations and interpretations of said character(s) to make him/her react and develop in a manner that makes their storyline plausible. And, true, some do it better than others. But even the best of fanfic writers will deviate slightly from the "true" character to ensure their creative needs are met – especially if ships are not cannon.

And I am curious to know how you are privy to what constitutes a "true Quinn". Was this a character you created and developed on the show?

Maybe to you Quinn is "the prototype of the perfect science geek girl" but your perception of her is not the "true Quinn". An ideal Quinn maybe, but her creator obviously had other ideas for her – the true Quinn – using some of that pre-existing mankind "eternal idea" and tweaking it to his vision of her. Now you can argue that Quinn is OOC for a perfect science geek girl (although I am not entirely sure how the Quogan thing fits in here) but as far as saying Quinn is OOC for the Quinn-her-creator-intended-her-to-be – she's not. The true Quinn and the Quinn you perceive (again, "the prototype of the perfect science geek girl" or ideal Quinn) are not one in the same. The true Quinn may embody a lot of qualities that geek girl character entails, but she has her own quirks as well.

Good characters are imperfectly perfect. In most works of fiction, film, television, etc., the main character (or any of the supporting characters) does something unexpected – it adds dimension and interest to the character instead of them remaining flat and dull. But it doesn't mean they are out of their character. Just out of the characterization the creator used to mold him/her.

Wow – I don't even know if that made any sense.

When the episode first aired I googled "hobknocker" to see if it was a real word since I do know Dan Schneider likes to make up his own stuff. I about died laughing when I found out it was real and exactly what it meant!

Again, that is only your opinion - not fact. And why do you watch TV if a majority of the characters on the shows are not flat? Just curious...

You fascinate me. Before having kids I was going to school to major in psychology and there are certain personality types that held intrigue...