Yuku free message boards

Actually, wallduck, it is precisely because the editors could have developed Ken more thoroughly and have not that makes him such a good Edgic fit.

He has not been individually negative in most episodes, only with respect to the negative tone given to Fang as a whole. Specific negativity has been generally focused on first GC and now Crystal. There have been two other items used by posters to justify negative tone. First is his weakness, but this was emphasized only twice - once in the second episode when Gillian vainly tried to paint him as weaker than herself and once in the switch episode when he was terrible in the water lacrosse challenge. Why paint him as weak? Well, he could well avoid a target post-merge precisely because he is perceived as weak. In Survivor, a liability can become a strength as the game goes on.

The second supposedly negative incident involved Ken choosing and then keeping Kelly while indicating he was only doing so for a vote. Arguably, using Kelly isn't that negative when Kelly is portrayed as a useless and annoying player, but even if it is, it is being portrayed as strategically negative which is not a bad thing for a winner. If anything, the statement upfront that Kelly is only being used for her vote defuses the negativity of keeping her over supposedly deserving Jacquie, especially when we're specifically shown Ken waffling over this choice. It also means that dumping Kelly as the Fangs did this last episode isn't seen as much of a betrayal.

Neither of these incidents looks all that bad for his Edgic profile. He was inserted in the first episode for little reason except to introduce his character, and he did have a comment about knowing he'd be underestimated. At the switch, he emerges again to show his strategic side in a very CP episode. For most other episodes, he's been in the background, but always present. That's exactly where the winner should be - a few strong episodes to let us know who they are, but mostly standing in the shadow of bigger edits.

That brings us to Episode 3 where KP among others argues he was invisible. See, it is exactly this kind of thing that makes me despise the INV rating. First of all, it is entirely subjective to make that episode INV rather than UTR, and having made that subjective determination, you apply the unnecessarily inflexible rule that he must be eliminated from consideration. Let's use a little logic here. The reasoning behind eliminating a player from consideration for an INV is because the editors would never intentionally leave their winner out of an episode. Was Ken left out of the episode? No - he was the upset winner in the immunity challenge coming from behind to beat Professor Bob. You argue that had to be shown because it was part of the challenge. So what? The editors aren't intentionally leaving him out of the episode - he's in it, and his victory in that challenge actually goes along with his theme of being underestimated. Best of all, the editors don't have to manipulate a thing to show it - what is the sense in requiring Ken to do more in the episode, especially if they are working from the opposite angle to keep him low key (and have to spend most of the episode on the Kotas since it is about the only glimpse we get of them before the switch)? Challenge or not, it was certainly more significant airtime than Yul comparing Ozzy to Poseidon.

If I keep going here, I'm going to end up convinced Ken is a better fit than Marcus, which probably isn't true, but maybe that's because Marcus' edit has had to stand out compared to most of the Kotas whereas Ken's edit can easily fade on dramatic Fang.

KP,

What does any of that have to do with your giving Ken an INV? And if you are eliminating Ken because and solely because of the INV, why would any of that matter?

:)

Kitty Pryde1 wrote:

---

I said it before and I'll say it again, Ken's episode 3 rating, where he basically was the challenge hero and STILL got no non-challenge footage, should have been an INV. That is why I have eliminated him, just like everyone else in the game besides Randy, Marcus, and Matty (with Marcus in an overwhelming lead).

Suffice it to say, you aren't exactly being consistent here.

As for the negative edit, plenty of winners have won with a negative edit, especially when the worst aspects of such edit were borne by other tribemates. See Jenna. See Aras. See Vee. Heck, see Rich.

And importantly if he wins, none of the complaints about Fang have been directed at Ken specifically. You say it is bad for Ken's edit that he isn't shown complaining about his tribe. That's debatable, but let's say that Ken were to win, and the editors want to disassociate him from Fang in such manner. What if he never said something along those lines? Shock! The crew can try to coax trash talk from the Survivors, but they may or may not receive it (and since the crew is working before the fact, they don't know the precise reaction that will fit the story the editors will later want to tell). Well, what's the next best thing? How about associating him with another player who does say something along those lines and can still be portrayed as pretty positive? Matty fits the bill - let's roll with it.

ETA: I do want to say though that I'm glad you realize it is foolish to eliminate someone solely on the basis of a single low content episode. Perhaps we'll get that INV rating tossed yet.