I hope she, and the others, are getting their own show or something because I can't see any intelligent show producer saying, "Yeah, let's get rid of the attractive woman on our show!"
But the thing about Kari is, she was never just "the attractive woman," and no truly intelligent producer would ever reduce her to that alone. She was there from the start, literally from the first pilot episode, as a builder and assistant, and as someone willing to do what had to be done to serve the myth; and then she earned her way to more prominence in the show by proving to be a smart, charismatic, and capable TV personality. She has the bonus of being beautiful and sexy, but that's never been her primary purpose on the show; it's incidental to her other assets, her personality and her skill. (Same with Scottie in the early seasons. I found her
very sexy myself, but she wasn't a conventional glamour babe by any standard; she was a welder and a skilled worker and she was funny and tough and had an entertaining rapport with the others, and her physical charms were just a fringe benefit.)
Indeed, that's what worries me: That the producers next season will feel compelled to bring in some "hot babe" as an assistant so the male viewers will still have someone to lust over, and because she'll be hired for her looks rather than really earning her position through her talents like Kari did, she just won't be as effective. I hope that doesn't happen. I certainly wouldn't mind if they brought in another female co-host; I have little interest in watching an all-male show. But I'd want her to be someone who deserves to be on the show for the same reason the male hosts are, because she's a talented engineer and designer and is willing and able to do crazy and bizarre things for science and is smart and likeable and a capable TV host. The male Mythbusters weren't hired for their looks alone, so it would be wrong if a female Mythbuster were.
This news is getting quite a bit of discussion on the MythBusters subreddit, and quite a few people there have brought up the (quite reasonable I think) point that the show used to have fewer myths per episode whole going more more in-depth on the build process; if this is a return to basics for the series, that could well be the plan.
Actually my recollection is that it used to have more myths per episode. In the first couple of seasons, there were usually three myths, maybe one big one and a couple of shorter ones, or two big ones and a little one. For years now, the norm has been to do just two myths per episode, or sometimes just one massive one, or sometimes a bunch of little ones.
But I agree, even despite that, it still feels like they're fitting less procedure into the episodes. I think it's because they're focusing more on funny banter and goofing around and such.
If we get one, maybe two myths an episode with more of the behind-the-scenes process it'll probably work fine. The show's current form is so results-focused that we're undoubtedly missing days if not weeks worth of footage from each myth so it'd be easy to get an episode up to the proper length by putting some of that back in.
Plus – according to what I'm reading – Adam and Jamie have been pretty vocal recently about wanting to show more of the build process and get more rigorous about the science and engineering. We can only hope that trimming the B-team is part of a renewed focus.
That's actually a very good idea. I'd also like it more if whatever new team members they bring in are integrated with Adam and Jamie like the build team was in the early seasons, rather than off doing their own entirely separate myths.
But I'm uneasy with the implication that Adam & Jamie pushed the other three out. My hope is that they helped the trio get a promotion to their own show in order to enable the back-to-basics approach. Actually my preference would be to keep at least Kari as Adam & Jamie's co-host, but perhaps the trio felt they'd rather stay together or that going back to a supporting role would be a demotion.
Well, the trio have already gained a fair bit of prominence on their own, hosting things like Discovery's annual
Punkin Chunkin' event and doing those car commercials (that I never cared for since it was selling out too much). They'll probably continue to get work, although I hope it's on better channels than Discovery.
The WILMA method: Okay, it works faster, but what about families? Are they really going to board a mother with a window seat and make her 4-year-old wait in the lounge until the B-seats' turn? That way lies screaming.
Oh, that's an excellent point. I hadn't thought of that. That's probably the reason they don't use it: because so many passengers travel in groups and sit together.
But then, maybe that suggests another method: Have those people traveling in groups board separately from those traveling individually, and seat the individual boarders window-to-aisle. Not sure whether it would be faster to seat groups first or second -- that's something worth testing. Time for a revisit!
In fact, I'd be checking the other lanes hoping for a way to get around you. Welcome to NJ! 
