| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Casey333 |
|||
|
Posts: 597 (12/15/08 12:53 AM) |
Didn't craig also pick Randy and Crystal at various points, in addition to Corrine?
He did argue against Ken winning, so I'll give him credit for that at least. |
||
|
fat little fingers |
|||
|
Posts: 5796 (12/15/08 12:56 AM) Registered User |
Oo, I agree up to a point.
Yes, we have the guidelines as our main structure, but it's never ever clear cut. Guideline #5:The season's MOR differential takes a lot of episodes before it's useful. Unless we want to modify it to be "Over the course of the first half", which would go against the other assumption that the winner will be hidden, much of the time, behind the other edits in the first half. Marcus bothered me right off the bat because of his perfectness. He also had strange lines, like being thrilled to find a camp, because he was afraid of the predators that lurk in the forest. Marcus bothered everybody! He was disgustingly, blatantly, blandly perfect. We were disappointed that the edit was being so obvious that we had no sport left in Edgic. Well, we kinda ate that one. flf can speak for himself, but i got the feeling that a lot of his commentary to people discussing non-edgic things here was: we don't talk about revisions to edgic until the end of the season. Partly, scepticA. I was also trying to point out that panurge's Biblical themes were getting more and more elaborate and subjective, (The idea of Kenny's jealousy of Matty's proposal, etc.), and that it was straying too far outside of Edgic. It wasn't the looking at themes, but the extrapolating way out into detailed structures to explain everything. That became spec that was no longer based on what we are presented. There is no way to argue the points once we leave the material to back it up. So, I suggested starting a new thread. But, yes, Edgic postmortems are for after the season.
Last Edited By: fat little fingers
12/15/08 1:00 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 14527 (12/15/08 1:11 AM) Registered User |
Randy, Corinne, and Matty were all one step removed from the winner, and it was pick your poison in terms of editing flaws. Those who thought Fang were the
underdog good guys and Kenny their strategic hero got things completely backwards.
The "tribe-focused" edit made sense because Bob got votes from Kota because he was Kota, while Susie got the same from Fang. Even though both were looked down upon stategically by their tribe. Sugar was seen as a traitor by both sides and got zero votes. Corinne could have scooped those same 4 jury votes for the same reasons if she made the end. While the "Fang sucked" theme was clear from the get-go, it only became apparent with Sugar's move at F6 that "good" would prevail. Because before that Sugar was an ambiguous character getting tricked by evil Kenny and acting evil to Randy. |
||
 Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 7303 (12/15/08 1:12 AM) |
craig wrote: She would've gotten those votes, but the fact was, her negativity was editted to show that she COULDN'T win. |
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 14528 (12/15/08 1:18 AM) Registered User |
Corinne only got 2 N's all season. Not bad for someone who Self-Presents as a villian in confessions. Not much worse than Todd if she was the comeback
winner, which would give her P spin at end.
Anyway, Corinne was the Gary H of this season and Marcus was the Brandon.
Last Edited By: craig
12/15/08 1:21 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 7305 (12/15/08 1:25 AM) |
craig wrote: Corinne wasn't edgically viable! She was portrayed as a complete bitch that no one would want to see win! For Christ's sake, Bob won, Kota won, stop acting like Corinne made ANY sense. She was INV in TWO episodes and when she wasn't INV, she was made out to be this horrendous bitch. If an underdog is going to win, there AREN'T going to be that negative, otherwise the audience won't give a shit if they win. |
||
|
scepticA |
|||
|
Posts: 1461 (12/15/08 1:36 AM) Registered User |
Something Craig said: "Moreover, our visibility measure is screwed towards tribes going to TC, with 5 points for TC questions and othing for challenge
footage. We neeed to find a fairer measure of visibility between TC going and non TC going tribes. because the main story is always explaining the boot"
--- I think this has a LOT of merit. I was talking about this with my spouse a couple of days ago: what is the average visibility rating for members of tribes that go to TC in pre-merge episodes vs. the same average for non TC tribes? i'd guess there was a huge difference, and I'd guess that in almost any episode the non-TC tribe numbers are far smaller. so how does this matter? If, let's say, the typical TC/non-TC average visibility for episodes 2-premerge is 35/15, might there be some reasonable way to adjust visibility ratings to account for this? Yes, I know that it's easy to say "Player X on the non-TC tribe wasn't shown much at all, and they could have shown her." it's kind of obvious. But isn't it more significant if a player on the TC tribe, who got perhaps 40-50% MORE air time than the other tribe had the same meager air time? Just tossing this out as something to consider, and I think it's worthy of discussion even if the most logical result of this analysis still does nothing to make Bob's edit more palatable to Edgic. |
||
|
Former Lurker 2 |
|||
|
Posts: 230 (12/15/08 1:37 AM) Registered user |
Kirblar wrote: The theory of edgic is that the editing will predict the winner. The problem is that the edgic presumptions are flawed. You may need to revisit your presumptions to revise your theorem. If you have a thesis and your research and analysis proves it inaccurate, you need to revise your thesis. That is what you need to glean from this season of Survivor. |
||
|
ncassaro |
|||
|
Posts: 437 (12/15/08 1:45 AM) |
Oowatanite wrote: I can see what you mean, but Bob was edgically viable if you really stretch it and there are things his victory can help us look out for in the future.... although re-watching this season it'd still be impossible to pick him, we can at least learn how to spot a Bob/Danni and not *eliminate* them if we really try. I agree that Corinne was a bad pick and I personally would have ditched her; I just don't like the nastiness and name-calling. |
||
|
anthonyd46 |
|||
|
Posts: 130 (12/15/08 1:47 AM) Registered User |
Kirblar wrote: good point sugar was very important to how this season turned out. Because of sugar randy went that night, ace went home, crystal went instead of matty, ken went instead of susie, and bob made it to the final 3. None of those things would of happened when they did or even happen at all if sugar had been voted out episode 1 or 2. Regardless of bob winning this season was all about sugar. She seemed to be in the center of everything and bob would of never made the final 3 if she didnt force the tie. This is why some people thought sugar won the game because the whole game seemed to revolve around her and even though she didnt win Bob would of finished 4th without her. |
||
|
Green Coffee |
|||
|
Posts: 133 (12/15/08 1:47 AM) Registered user |
I think that the visibility calculations are intended to be heavier for people who go to TC because they necessarily play a larger role in the episode and are
likely to actually be more visible to the viewer.
The issue, IMO, is more on interpretation. A 1 when you go to tribal is a bigger deal than a 1 when the other tribe goes. A 1 isn't as big a deal if the whole episode is devoted to one major unrelated event that's just good TV. On the other side, getting a 5 when your tribe doesn't go is weird. Getting a 5 when they do go isn't as big of a deal. That said, I think visibility calculations can be improved most by incorporating new aspects of visibility. Major challenge notables (even reporting can substitute for time that would have been given elsewhere if what happens is major) and SPV are big components that I think could be given weight in the calculations. Also, in regards to this, I think the discussion TLS and I had about the viability of INV needs to be examined during the offseason. He thinks it is too subjective and I can see where he's coming from. If INV is meant to actually mean lack of visibility, let's put it to the test by setting an objective visibility cutoff. However, given what we saw here tonight, I am inclined to say the biggest move we need is one that emphasizes a conservative elimination approach. We should truly keep all edits in mind and try our best not to write people off, even when they look like they cannot win. This may include less inclinations to drop INV people from contention (although the theory held here - Bob was low vis and low impact but never absent completely). |
||
|
James Barber |
|||
|
Posts: 14778 (12/15/08 1:51 AM) Registered User |
The edit Fang had in the early episodes was almost rancid. Not only failure in challenges, but even decisions they made which had some logic in them, like the
Jacquie vote, were presented as stupid. I guess that should have been the tipoff. I thought Matty might have had a chance because he was exclude from most of
that edit, but I guess he was just the show's sentimental favorite.
I wonder how this season would have come across if they'd eased up on the negativity and focused more on some positive moments from Bob and Susie. They were the two nicest people left post-merge, and they were the winner and runner-up. Was that one of the reasons they were ignored? To reinforce how they stood out from the rest? |
||
|
RobVanStratus |
|||
|
Posts: 7423 (12/15/08 1:52 AM) Registered User |
Edgic failed and I'm glad to see some of you admitting that. I give those of you that I remember off the top of my head, like OO, a round of applause for
admitting your failure. I certainly didn't participate in Edgic fully, but I supported Sugar if I had a vote in this and I accept my defeat.
In retrospect, what craig is saying is right. Fang was edited too negative early on to win the game and the winner had to be a Kota. Once Marcus left and there were no choices for Edgic, backtracking occurred and Kenny got picked, instead of looking at the whole game thus far. It was pounded into our head that Fang sucks and Kota rules, so Bob winning fit the story. Bob was the only pure Kota after Marcus left and was the only one not tainted by the loser Fang tribe. Bob was very much a Danni win in that everyone left had flaws to their edits and he was the underdog from the dominating alliance that got picked off. But if you actually looked at edits you could pick off people considered the "top picks." Matty was one note, about loving his girlfriend. He saw her and proposed, end of story. Kenny was about going from kid to man, and at the end he failed to become a man with his petty argument with Bob after getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar. I'm not saying I know everything, but looking in retrospect, Edgic made major mistakes in picking severely flawed choices. Also, the ratings for this whole season have been entirely skewed by biases. Crystal had far too many negatives and Sugar most definitely did not deserve negatives for the Randy boot, the audience loved it and supported her. Now Marcus got far too many CP episodes because everyone latched onto them as winners. Marcus talked about strategy like twice, once when the Onions formed and then once when he got booted. Other than that, he was MOR and got to the CP edits because people were trying to fit him into the Edgic story of a winner. Also the ranking of INV needed to be relooked at as well. Bob definitely had at least one INV episode and Kenny definitely had an INV in Ep3. Those should Edgically eliminate them, but incorrectly rated and Kenny got to stick around. Not like it affected Bob, other than Kitty no one ever really picked him as a top runner for winner. |
||
|
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 7306 (12/15/08 1:53 AM) |
One problem I see with the current system is that once we eliminate someone, or deem them unwinable, those players' ratings tend to get skewed. Bob got a
ton of OTTs, but I thought he got several CPs towards the end. I think if someone is something early on, we shouldn't automatically give them a similar
rating down the road because of that. This happened with Sugar and it happened with Bob.
|
||
|
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
|
Posts: 7307 (12/15/08 1:56 AM) |
RobVanStratus wrote: Sugar WAS N for the Randy boot episode, and it was reinforced in the next episode, and in Bob's responses/the jury's comments at the FTC. She was DEFINITELY N in that episode. |
||
|
mfrimley |
|||
|
Posts: 963 (12/15/08 2:08 AM) |
I'm just wondering. Is it a coincidence that they just happened to have helicopter shots of Bob from his hike? Had anybody else won, would they have had
helicopter shots of that person lying around? Do they have helicopters following everybody around just in case?
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 14532 (12/15/08 2:48 AM) Registered User |
Sugar was N for the randy boot, and had to be to explain her getting ZERO votes, and because Bob calling her out came up as a topic at the final TC. Also the
Negative Fang edit went along with their main critic Randy getting a decent edit, rather than being a one-note villian.
|
||
|
Tyran Amiros |
|||
|
Posts: 251 (12/15/08 2:48 AM) Registered User |
Sugar had to go N (or at least M) in the final few episodes to explain why the Sweetheart didn't get any votes at the Final TC. My parents still wanted
her to win the America's Tribal Council, though, after Bob won the million.
About Crystal being N, all of the people I watch with cheered when she got booted Thursday. My parents actually called after the show to say how glad they were that Crystal was finally gone. That's an N edit there, no matter how popular she is on the Sucks board. Kenny wasn't quite as N as Crystal, but there was a clear N undertone to his edit also. I think one thing about this season that we could not have predicted was the importance of tribe tone as distinct from individual tone. Normally, it doesn't matter when a tribe gets a positive or a negative edit, because it gets reflected in tone ratings for individual members--Ps on Koror or Drake in Tom/Ian and Rupert, for example. But I noticed early on that Kota as a tribe was getting a very P edit without touching any actual members of Kota. We had a number of toneless episodes, or ones where there were actually Ns on Kota, but the tribe as a whole was P. The edits of the Onions were highly manipulated--particularly Corrine--to avoid negativity on Kota, or when it happens, foist it onto grumpy old Randy or pre-merge boot Dan. As viewers we were never supposed to be happy that Fang took control of the game after the second switch, because Marcus' boot paved the way for Bob's classic story of a fall from grace and ultimate redemption. That's also why Fang never received an underdog edit premerge like Ulong. All of this really did point to Bob's win, but how much is capable of being caught by Edgic? |
||
|
chaperone |
|||
|
Posts: 2563 (12/15/08 3:15 AM) Registered User |
colleenlover wrote:I've been reading the last 10 pages or so since the finale started airing and I felt the same thing...the talk isn't revisionist "how we picked Bob" it's backward looking to "why didn't we?" Of course I say "we" liberally since I didn't pick anyone here except Sugar, and given my track record of Gary Hogeboom, Snout, Amanda, and now Sugar, I'm hardly a voice crying out in the wilderness. I will say that as a viewer I'm quite satisfied with a Bob win. I kept thinking whenever strategy came up he should've mentioned that he made 2 fake idols and had several people believing that they were real, and that profoundly affected the ethos of the game. So I figured he was going to lose to Sugar. Then she got 0 votes and I was humbled. Edgic didn't work this season. Was it the edgic concept? Was it the execution? Was it the sociology of edgic? Was it the editors of the shoe? Who knows. It's probably all of the above. But since we can't change the editors of the show, let's meet back here in a couple of months and start talking about s18. Sounds fun to me. We might even get it wrong again. Good for us. It'll still be fun, and if so...it'll still be fun. MDN had a good post a few pages back about FTC's affect on the editing. I think a story mode is a more universal way to consider edgic, and the story starts, in a sense, at FTC and works backward from there. It's not that the other stuff is outright wrong, but I do believe there's another dimension to it all. Green Coffee had some good points about "type A" and "type B" edits. That said, I'd like it if the name-calling was left out of the discussion.Is that a new guideline proposal, FLF? As much as Edgic was wrong, the Family Final Four concept must be having a party this season. Mom and dad, brother and sister, clear as day. They even named it in FTC. I think Complex Tribe theory will continue to take some heat, but I believe it holds up well when evaluated correctly. ScepticA had some good thoughts...and asked a good question: What evidence to we have that the editors of Survivor, from the very first episode, know who the winner is?No doubt, this question is central to the praxis of edgic. I spent a short weekend with an editor from Burnett's production company (another show of his) and this editor was telling me (I posed some of my theories to him for feedback) that the winner of Survivor is kept significantly under wraps. He had no idea who won...which tells us nothing other than editors within SEG don't know about Survivor. Of course he didn't care about the show so didn't know characters in it this season. BUT even so, what edgic calls "editors" I've long since argued isn't actually the editors, it's the "story editors". There are layers to how the show is edited:
Who else know the winner? The camera operators in the voting confessional...unless they set those on tripods and force the crew to go back to base camp while 1 high level producer makes sure the footage isn't blurry, over or under lit, etc. I would maintain that the story editors know what's going on. How much do they talk about it? Who knows. My old friend who worked for the Amazing Race said that anyone who signed an NDA with the production company knew the winner. It doesn't sound like Survivor rolls the same way. |
||
|
AbbyGirl |
|||
|
Posts: 20 (12/15/08 3:17 AM) |
Sorry about the lack of paragraghs everyone, I was in a hurry as I often am... and after all, this is Sucks!! Just kidding, I get the point and totally
understand.
|
||
