Yuku free message boards

cardswin5 wrote:

---

^wtf? Is that supposed to be Russell and Natalie because its really not.

Kirblar wrote:

---

TheWizard wrote:

---

cfcid wrote:

---

Stephen:

Say you are playing Survivor again and you are stuck in a tribe where there is an at times condescending 'leader'. At the beginning of the game, frustratingly enough, most people are too 'scared' to vote him out even though he ruffles a few feathers. Eventually you get voted out and become part of the jury later in the game. This leader is Survivor Finalist #1.

Here are the traits of Survivor Finalist #1:
-They are a huge jerk who belittled many people in the tribe constantly. Most of these people got voted out before they could make the jury. It became apparent to you that this person was a mean individual, but you kept your distance and did not garner much criticism from this person.
-Plays great strategically manipulating his/her peers quite often and well to get his desired result, one of which is ousting you personally.
-Wins one individual immunity and performs well in the challenges at the beginning of the game.
-Provides food and fire for the tribe as well as the plans for a good shelter which does not let much water seep through

Now you have Survivor Finalist #2, who was also in your tribe and built a cordial relationship with you:
-Won 4 individual immunities, all at the end of the game
-Was extremely lacking in terms of strategy and was essentially used as a pawn by Survivor Finalist #1. You (the jury member) even took the time to present many opportunities and rationale for turning on Survivor Finalist #1 earlier in the game and Survivor Finalist #2 was too shortsighted or too stubborn to vote Survivor #1 out.
-Did not harass or malign any individual at camp, actually, he supported almost all tribe members, was a good listener, and did a lot for tribe morale.

Who do you vote for?

I would definitely vote for Survivor #1 because I think the strategic part of the game is the most important. I also THINK I would have voted for Russell. Of course, it's easy to say that watching the show and not having to live with Russell. I understand people who say, "I just could not give a million dollars to that man."

Re: camp stuff. I think camp stuff does play a major role in who you respect and who you bond with. Certainly it can be a contributing factor in who you vote out. But I wouldn't vote for a winner based on who contributed the most around camp.

What people don't realize about the game, though, is that like poker, you have to adapt and "play the players", and that includes adapting to the various jurors' voting criteria, because people aren't robots.