Why a certain theory breaks the established conventions
Helena vs Helly R has been eating this sub alive since the first 15 minutes of the season. The actual, concrete evidence for either way is relatively flimsy (elevator no ding/board wants Helly R back.) Most of the theories either way rely on interpreting the character motives and actions which is not reliable. That's fine and a normal part of fan theories. But I've noticed an increasing number of comments to the effect of "if it really isn't Helena it is bad writing and I'll be disappointed." This rubs me the wrong way for all the effort that has gone into making this wonderful show, and I can't help but feel like I'm lost for where this sentiment is coming from.
With that said, I'd like to present some additional thoughts to the endless analysis: Helena over Helly R breaks the narrative cohesion and established possibilities of the show. And why Helly R also keeps with the writing from the first season.
When a severed person is on the severed floor, they are severed. Throughout the entire first season we are shown that severing happens due to some proximity or waves emitting from the severed floor. We have never seen an outtie on the severed floor. That doesn't mean it is impossible, the lights near names on the security floor along with the different "modes" the severed can be placed in show there is more to this than we know. However, the idea of Helena some how exploiting this technology without the board/Milchick's knowledge has not been established and is not consistent with the way info in the show is revealed and expanded upon. Anything with severance technology that is suddenly revealed to us is explained and established(reintegration, the severance procedure, OTC) Setting an outtie loose on the severed floor without some established role of severed technology and it's applications does not fit with the internal logic of season 1.
Innie Episode 1/Outtie Episode 2. The writers deliberately split the opening events of the story into 2 distinct episodes. We see our core 4 in both of their selves throughout the episodes. Introducing Helena in Episode 1 as opposed to 2 fundamentally breaks this narrative structure in an unnecessary way, as it does not pay off in either Episode.
Side note for the elevator piece. The elevator does not "ding" at the end of Episode 2, which some have claimed is "irrefutable" evidence that Helena is on the severed floor. Although this is the strongest evidence for the theory available, this is firmly in the "subtle hint" category as most would likely not even recognize this if not for using the subreddit, which has not been the norm for this show.
- Reveals and dramatic irony. This really culminated in the established writing technique of dramatic irony that is all over the 1st season. The writers clearly LOVE giving the audience a reveal prior to the characters. We see cobel/selvig in the very first episode even though the payoff isn't until the very end. We see casey/gemma episode 7 with the character reveal also in the finale. These are specific to the outtie/innie dynamic(cobel is not severed but she does play "2 selves.") On the other hand, Helly Helena was a true twist for the finale with ZERO foreshadowing, which made it all the more effective. I find it hard to imagine the writers moving into a more traditional slow drip with no answers for this long in the show.
None of this is to say we are not supposed to question the character, we absolutely are, that is the dramatic irony at play. We know Helly's true identity even though our innies don't, we are supposed to question why she lies to them. I have a feeling we will have our full payoff next episode.
All in all, theorizing is fun and a large part of this show that we all enjoy! But for a certain group of this sub's users to not only smugly declare that it is Helena without a shadow of a doubt, but to then declare if it isn't Helena that it is "bad writing" is ridiculous and insulting to the writers of this fantastic show.