Yuku free message boards

Quote:

---

Australia was edited to show Jeri as the one everyone hated and Tina and Keith as her main victims. It didn't start that way at all.

Through interviews, we learned that, right off the plane, Jeri, Mitchell, Colby and Tina formed an alliance and added Amber to make their F5. Kel, Maralyn and Keith were the targets in that order. When Jeri didn't mention Tina in the TC, the editors jumped on it since they could portray Tina as an outsider when she never was

When Tina bonds with Maralyn, it wasn't as two outsiders facing a tough situation, it was Benedict Tina making sure she wasn't going to get a vote. Benedict Tina, as she was sometimes called, was a cold, calculating player that the editors presented as the simple mom.

If you watch Outback again, look at Keith as the real outsider and it all makes sense, from the first episodes to Colby's F2 decision. Look at Keith's vote in episode #3 when he votes against Mitchell while Tina was voting Mad dog. That was our first indication that Keith was a loner.

---

VERY INTERESTING. Thanks for the heads up. I always assumed the majority was magically formed around Jerri's strong personality, and social skills of Jerri, Amber, Tina, Colby, and Amber. I didn't know the alliance was formal and excluded Amber. This makes me give more social credit to Amber, slightly less social credit to Tina, but more strategic credit to Tina. I never thought of Tina on the "outside," really

Quote:

---

The players in an alliance don't all control the votes, certainly not equally. As a tag-along Jenna didn't decide who went. She put her "X" where the one controlling the vote told her to put it. The votes, when they are well handled, serve the purpose of the leader, not the alliance! Brian controlled the votes, Jan had no say. In Amazon, Jenna wasn't controlling the votes. Giving her 6/7 is ridiculous. At most, she deserves a 3/7

---

My critieria states that outlasting is the #1 priority. I don't think winners NEED to be in COMPLETE control and dictate as many votes as possible. Then you're arguing from a different individual's perspective--those who value completely proactive game control as the #1 priority or distinction of a good winner. In my eyes, you just need ENOUGH or the minimum amount of control. As long as a vote is not AGAINST a player's wishes, I consider that "voting control," because technically, all players are "opponents"

By the way, the numbers next to "voting control" like "6/7" isn't some evaluation. It's the number of votes they had on the final jury. So 6/7 for Jenna means that she won Survivor Amazon with 6-out-of-the-7 jury votes

Quote:

---

That is such a weird comment if you read the nature of our discussions! Didn't you start this thread saying you were surprised by the big difference in rankings? We are not of one mind, that is for sure!

---

Well for one thing, I wasn't the one who said "Everyone" first. Second, I didn't mean to say the consensus comes about immediately or unanimously. In any intellectual community, discussion generates a marketplace of ideas. Like Survivor, different ideas are put out--survival of the fittest. Some are supported while others are bashed or neglected. Some individuals are more persausive than others. Eventually, over time, certain ideas may grab a hold of the majority and be seen as fact, hence the "conceptual consensus"

Quote:

---

Jenna was nothing more than a tag along who coasted on her looks until the end of the game when she won the final 2 immunities and got to take Rob's goat to the finals

---

Tagging along = reactive strategy; reactive, but strategy nevertheless

Looks = Jenna's personal asset; that's what makes Jenna a strong player in specific contexts. You may not appreciate it, you may disrespect that as a game style, but then we just come from different perspectives and winning criteria

Quote:

---

The HII in Exile Island and Cook Islands is extremely unfair for as we saw. To get rid of the HII someone has to literally sacrifice their game and get voted out. Whose gonna take that risk? If you know someone has the idol, you vote for someone else. Thats why once Terry and Yul revealed they had the idol, no one ever voted for them except for Adam's one vote at F5 when he knew he was gone anyway

---

I don't agree that HII in and of itself, gives one an inherent ride to the final 3. Yul made it look easy, because he always had voting control to back-up his use of the idol, by organizing numbers. One doesn't have to sacrifice their game to get rid of HII--all you need is to organize numbers like Cao Boi tried. The problem is that, Yul had locked up the game on Aitu by that point. Terry likely would've lost his idol AND been voted out if he hadn't won virtually every individual immunity. No one voted for Terry because they couldn't! The HII is an advantage yes, but not an uncontrollable one. In fact, its possession could backfire and make one a target. The problem is we haven't seen enough seasons with the idol to properly assess how much of an advantage is. The more seasons we watch with the HII, the better we should be able to ascertain its impact

Quote:

---

Candice flipped for one simple reason, she liked Adam and he was on the other tribe. If Adam's not on Raro, she does not flip. Its as simple as that

---

I disagree, because I believe Candice's interviews, and her position seems supported by people like Yul and Jon who verified she is a very strategic thinker. It's true that she wouldn't have flipped if Adam wasn't on the other tribe, but not necessarily because she did because she liked him. She game trusted him and apparently was right. She feared that Becky & Yul wouldn't honor their alliance with her, because they kept asking her about her bond with Adam and Parvati. To ensure she had voting control she flipped, and in that sense, her mutiny was good. Also, Candice and Adam's relationship completely evaporated after the game, so I think that really helps support Candice's claim that her relationship with Adam was strategy and less emotionally-based

Of course, if you don't believe Candice in interviews, then this point is mute

Quote:

---

Parvati was hardly a 'puppet master'. Raro was much like Ulong. There really wasn't any alliances, there was generally an obvious boot every single time. JP, Stephanie, Christina, Brad, Rebecca, all were incredibly obvious boots. The only one that wasn't incredibly obvious was Jenny, and with her boot there was absolutely no strategizing that could happen due to the ridiculous bottle twist

---

Parvati was absolutely Raro's puppet master. There WERE alliances, although they acted like they were picking people based on being annoying or being weak at challenges. The 1st Raro alliance was: Nate, Brad, Parvati, and Adam. The boots that manifested weren't accident. In fact, often times, people had to manufacture reasons to scapegoat individuals like Brad. Brad was part of the alliance, but his tribemates read his intentions of flipping back to Becky and Yul at the merge, and promptly eliminated him. Parvati always had Nate and Adam do her dirty work, so that's why I call her a true puppet master

Quote:

---

She didn't pursuade anything. I 100% guarantee you that if ASS was a real season where the contestants didn't know one another, Amber is gone easily. She only stayed because of the relationship Rob had with Lex and Kathy outside the game and Rob fooling Lex at the immunity challenge into thinking that he'd keep him around

---

See, my issue with this is that people are giving Amber NO credit. I'm not asking you to think she's a genius or was the main reason why Lex & Kathy flipped. I know that it was largely based on friendship and strategic miscalculation. But to give Amber absolutely no credit in at least jumpstarting this and bringing this fake idea to the forefront seems very emotionally-based and not fair. No one wins Survivor with luck alone. No one

Quote:

---

Amber forming an alliance with Rob had nothing to do with skill. It was her looks. Like I already said, if Amber looks like Debb Eaton, there is no Romber alliance

---

In my book, looks = skill. You may not agree with that, and in this case we just disagree. Just because an asset comes naturally as opposed to be cultivated over a lifetime, doesn't mean you can just write it off as luck. Looks is lucky in LIFE, but in a GAME, looks is part of a player's assets and skill set. It's also dependent on context, where in Vanuatu, the "good-looking" guys got screwed as threats

Quote:

---

And its obvious why Shii Ann voted for Amber, they play the exact same kind of game. Shii Ann would vote for Amber regardless of how Amber treated her most likely.

---

Shii-Ann would've voted for Rob over Jenna. I'd say the main distinction was that Jenna annoyed her. So, I absolutely think Amber's good treatment of her helped sway the vote. It tells Shii-Ann that Amber played a better social game than Rob, because she didn't neglect Shii-Ann's vote like Rob who did nothing to cultivate any sort of bond with her or consider her a strategic component of the future jury composition. Amber WAS lucky that Shii-Ann appreciates UTR gameplay though and isn't like Colby who doesn't respect it. But again, if Amber treated like Shii-Ann like crap, I bet Shii would've given the W to Rob

Quote:

---

Amber deserves NO credit whatsoever

---

Alright, we just disagree then. The real issue is that we have different takes on "responsibility" or "credit". I see it as a shades of gray, while you seem to look at it as a black-and-white zero-sum game issue