Russell H. ≤ Sugar (she's not nearly as bitter and famewhore-y) in Survivor Sucks Forum

0 Points

Russell H. ≤ Sugar (she's not nearly as bitter and famewhore-y)

Started By	Comment
novaya		#61	[-]
Posts: 1400 (12/22/09 12:26 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Do not click here, if you like ads Remove this ad SPunKeeMonKee wrote: The problem with Sugar & her antics was that we ended up with boring-ass Bob winning. He didn't do anything strategic & was dragged the whole way through, even his own alliance mates said he never contributed to the strategy sessions & just did random shit at camp (Marcunt mentioned this in an interview). What's even more disgusting was the reason he was taken to the end, because he was supposedly a "good person" according to Sugar & her twisted, hypocritical logic. Seeing him win was not satisfying, having Russell lose caused a meltdown of epic proportions.. and we're only one day into it. Russell's game was easier to swallow compared to Sugar's "omg I will help America's favourite get to the end so I can become popular & further my acting career" strategy. At least he was trying to win, even though he was delusional about the jury votes. Ugh, they're both horrid in completely different ways. Point is if you hate bitter juries not respecting gameplay you should hate Gabon's jury more than Samoa's. ^_^ Sugar > Russhole by this metric, no matter how people want to slice Stephen's avocado.
Sshaaz		#62	[-]
Posts: 550 (12/22/09 12:29 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Bitter juries aside, both are despicable. Comparing what Sugar did with her experience to what Russell is doing is a moot point. There is no comparison. Thinking that Sugar > Russell is a slap in the face to anyone who gives a shit about people.
novaya		#63	[-]
Posts: 1402 (12/22/09 12:32 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Sshaaz wrote: Bitter juries aside, both are despicable. Comparing what Sugar did with her experience to what Russell is doing is a moot point. There is no comparison. Thinking that Sugar > Russell is a slap in the face to anyone who gives a shit about people. lol wut? 1. I am pleased with your acknowledgment that Russell, like Sugar, played a good strategic game but a shit social one and they're the same player. <3 2. I still lol that you think Russell is a philanthropist for russellgotscrewed.com which is SO egotistical whereas if Sugar did the same thing she would have been ripped harder than ever by Sucks (or "THAT GIRL" for a random Micronesia reference). Make up ur mind.
ThrowMeGabon		#64	[-]
Posts: 1318 (12/22/09 12:32 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I think Romber is a better analogy to Russell/Natalie than Sugar/Bob. Natalie and Amber both knowingly rode strategists to the end. Bob just kind of did his own thing, had a good hike, and everyone else ended up shooting themselves in the foot.
SPunKeeMonKee		#65	[-]
Posts: 12942 (12/22/09 12:35 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I agree although I think the Onions were more vindictive & immature, nothing could've been said that night to change their minds. Russell had a chance but he was too cocky and didn't feel the need to show any humility. Ultimately I don't care, I'm more pissed when it comes to Gabon because Bob shouldn't have gotten anywhere near the finals in the first place. That would've been like Russell bringing Brett to the end. So completely stupid.
Sshaaz		#66	[-]
Posts: 552 (12/22/09 12:38 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	My mind has never wavered... There's no possible way, unless you just truly hate everyone in general, to take the result of Russell's experience and shit on them then proclaim that anything Sugar did was worth a bucket of piss. The fact that Sugar DIDN'T do it should tell you something. You seem to be the sort of person who would kick someone when they were down... Am I wrong?
novaya		#67	[-]
Posts: 1403 (12/22/09 12:44 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	SPunKeeMonKee wrote: I agree although I think the Onions were more vindictive & immature, nothing could've been said that night to change their minds. Russell had a chance but he was too cocky and didn't feel the need to show any humility. Ultimately I don't care, I'm more pissed when it comes to Gabon because Bob shouldn't have gotten anywhere near the finals in the first place. That would've been like Russell bringing Brett to the end. So completely stupid. Exactly. Gabon Jury -- both Kota AND Fang -- was WAY more bitter than the Samoa Jury. Sugar got ripped a new asshole (as did Susie) and they both were all kinda ^_^ about it, despite Sugar flipping Corribitch off. Russell didn't get a SCINTILLA (Monica word) of the heat these womyn did during his FTC from that "bitter Galu Jury". I understand ur thoughts on Gabon, tho. But when you think about it (and Sug's kind of a moron so we'll never know), she knew Matty/Susie/Her in an F3 would have been a clear Matty victory so she decided to try and take the two boring oldies with her. She lost and was all kinda "^_^ w/e!!!" in the end, but you can still pull a sense of strategy from it -- her faux-t.ears and faux-anguish over the Matty boot counting as a strategy, ps. Russhole never even tried to work that angle, otherwise he would have worked it for Shambwhore to ride it to the end with him. ThrowMeGabon: ASS is not even comparable as an F2 binary 0 v 1 vote is diffo from an F3 vote. I outlined this on LTS. Comparing this to ASS is so disingenuous. END OF THE DAY: Russell is nothing more than a Sugar. Last Edited By: novaya 12/22/09 12:46 AM. Edited 1 times.
Sshaaz		#68	[-]
Posts: 553 (12/22/09 12:46 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	can you point me to Sugar's charity so I can make a donation, please?
ThrowMeGabon		#69	[-]
Posts: 1320 (12/22/09 12:47 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	A. Do you know what disingenuous means? B. It was essentially a binary vote because Mick wasn't getting a thing. It's like Cook Islands was really a F2, not a F3. Romber is much more comparable. Russell is nothing more than a Rob Mariano. Sugar is not a good parallel to Russell, and Natalie is not a good parallel to Bob.
novaya		#70	[-]
Posts: 1404 (12/22/09 12:49 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Do not click here, if you like ads Remove this ad Sshaaz wrote: My mind has never wavered... There's no possible way, unless you just truly hate everyone in general, to take the result of Russell's experience and shit on them then proclaim that anything Sugar did was worth a bucket of piss. The fact that Sugar DIDN'T do it should tell you something. You seem to be the sort of person who would kick someone when they were down... Am I wrong? Sugar RULED Gabon. She helped to butthurt Kota (thanks to Susie aka Natalie booting Marcus aka Erik) and was never in fear of getting voted off. She was the total Russell of her season. But Sugar actually had to fight pre-merge and even kickbanned her own ally in Ace whereas Russell was a guy so he got to ~survive~ unlike XXDEATHXX Mike and OTTN Ben (who Russell couldn't save when he wanted to). All the other women were kickbanned. Sugar ~survived~ more than Russell. Fact. They fought strategically, and the lost in the same way. Russell is no better than Sugar. DEAL.
crisdizzle		#71	[-]
Posts: 65 (12/22/09 12:50 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Did someone say Sugar?? ;-]
novaya		#72	[-]
Posts: 1405 (12/22/09 12:51 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Sshaaz wrote: can you point me to Sugar's charity so I can make a donation, please? Can you point me to Sugar's butthurt famewhorish web site so I can stroke her ego with an OTTP comment, please?
Sshaaz		#73	[-]
Posts: 554 (12/22/09 12:53 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	"and was never in fear of getting voted off." then this: "Sugar ~survived~ more than Russell." You are telling ME to make up MY mind?
novaya		#74	[-]
Posts: 1406 (12/22/09 12:55 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Sshaaz wrote: "and was never in fear of getting voted off." then this: "Sugar ~survived~ more than Russell." You are telling ME to make up MY mind? Do you understand the distinction between POST-MERGE (no fear of a vote-off, unlike Russell who WAS voted off during the Kelly boot ep) and PRE-MERGE (was a vote-off target unlike Russell who has a penis)? yw. I am no fan of Sugar as I am a Crystard, but Sugar >>>> Russell all. day. long.
Sshaaz		#75	[-]
Posts: 555 (12/22/09 12:56 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	If Sugar called you on the phone right now and asked you to donate money to a charity of her choice, would you?
novaya		#76	[-]
Posts: 1408 (12/22/09 12:58 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	why the fuck are you so obsessed with charities? lol. idk what the fuck this has to do with Russell and Sugar having the same "reach FTC and fail due to poor social gameplay" and "I'm a famewhore!" strategy.
Sshaaz		#77	[-]
Posts: 556 (12/22/09 01:06 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	You said it yourself... they had the same "reach FTC and fail due to poor social gameplay." So what gives? Ah, its the "I'm a famewhore!" strategy. Both lost. Both tried/are trying to do something with their Survivor experience. Russell is actually parlaying a loss into something positive. Sugar hasn't come anywhere close. Yet you still stick to the whole "Sugar > Russell" ideal. It doesn't make any sense, and it borders on almost unconscionable. It says a lot about you as a person, to tell you the truth.
Kubin		#78	[-]
Posts: 291 (12/22/09 01:08 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Russhole Fantards needs to slit their wrist. LOL
novaya		#79	[-]
Posts: 1409 (12/22/09 01:09 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	You don't get it. All this epic butthurt was about the GREATEST PLAYER EVER~!!!!!!!!!! losing to the WORST COATTAIL RIDER >:-(~!!!!!! and yet Sugar had the same game and no one rooted for the Sugar win. Russhole is a failmonger loser and Sugar is better than him at the game. If Bob deserved his win, then Natalie deserved it 20 times more. Fact.
Sshaaz		#80	[-]
Posts: 557 (12/22/09 01:20 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Do not click here, if you like ads Remove this ad Take a close look at what you are saying... noone rooted for Sugar to win, yet millions rooted for Russell to win. How exactly does that happen? If they played the same game, then what qualifies Sugar as being better than Russell? You keep using the word "same" over and over. Something had to be different. Was it a bitter jury versus an objective one? No, we agree they were both bitter. Was it that Sugar actually deserved to win? Can we agree that she absolutely did not? So what is it? Maybe its the fact that Russell actually did deserve it. Maybe that's the difference in the scenarios. I can honestly say that Bob didn't deserve to win, so by your comparison, Natalie deserved it 20 times LESS. Fact.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Russell H. ≤ Sugar (she's not nearly as bitter and famewhore-y)