Yuku free message boards

OzarkSurvivor wrote:

---

Janu wanted to get voted out, and asked Koror to vote her out. She also knew that they would not do it, even though she asked them to. She didn't want to up and quit because a) she saw how Osten was treated and b) she didn't want to risk losing her prize money, spot on the jury, etc. So even though she wanted to leave the game, she was fine with staying as long as her tribe would keep her around. She said herself, "It doesn't matter. I'm completely satisfied."

I think the way that Tom Westman said later in an interview, she did explain her reasoning to Probst for not wanting to flat-out quit (loss of prize money, jury spot, etc). They stopped filming to check with the producers to ensure that Janu would be able to keep both of those things if she laid down her torch. They said, sure (and yes, part of it had to do with the fact that it gave Steph at least 3 more days).

But what DIDN'T happen was:
JP: Janu, do you want to go home?
Janu: Yes.
JP: Do you want them to vote you out?
Janu: Yes, absolutely, but they're not going to.
JP: Why don't you quit?
Janu: I dunno...
JP: What's the difference?
Janu: Hmmm I never thought of it that way. Ok, you're right. I'll quit.

I get ticked off every time people say "Jeff coerced Janu into quitting, and I know it because I saw him do it," because that implies that Janu doesn't have a freaking mind of her own. He didn't have to beg and plead and coerce her into doing it, and I doubt anything would have happened if they didn't realize that the only thing stopping her was the uncertainty of her prize money and jury spot.

No, Jeff didn't force Janu to quit, but he did facilitate it, and by doing so, changed the rules of the game. Prior to this, nobody had quit against the wishes of their tribemates without a valid reason (medical emergency, emotional breakdown). Those who didn't want to play anymore asked to be voted out (including Osten), and it was generally up to their tribemates whether or not that wish was granted. Janu was playing the game in this spirit, and it is clear that she didn't even consider quitting an option until Jeff made it an option. Sure, this may have been due to fear of losing her prize money (probably even moreso than her jury seat), but so what? She was willing to play things out until Jeff decided to give her an out (and in the meantime thwart her tribemates). Jeff took away one of the few things the players control in the game - the decision on who gets voted out.

I've used this example before, but here's why this is such a bad precedent. You have one alliance up 5 - 4 on another. In the minority alliance are an immunity hog and a weak older lady who is not a threat. The immunity hog wins immunity at F9 and F8, and the other two members of the alliance are voted off. He fails to win immunity at F7 - perhaps it is one of those popularity contests that it is impossible to win if you need it. His ally, knowing there's no way she's ever going to win immunity, decides to quit to protect him. She goes home at F7 instead, allowing the immunity hog to resume his immunity streak. Is that fair? Of course not, but it is basically the type of play that Jeff's decision opens up.