OscarBluth

Uh... no.

The jury also determines who doesn't win, and that doesn't mean that person ISN'T deserving, no matter how much you protest.

wirefan

You don't have to convince anyone you deserve a single penny of that money or that you played the best or that you were nice, you can just as easily convince people that the person next to you is just more undeserving... Convincing people the person next to you is more undeserving, doesn't mean that you actually are deserving, it just means you are less undeserving.

See the problem with the whole the 'vote is earned' or the vote is a 'vote in favor of someone' logic, is that the voting is forced - the jury has to write a name down and cannot abstain... If people were allowed a "none" vote you really think for a second Natalie earns or convinces 7 people (or the 5 she needed) that she deserves to win? If there was a "none" vote noone walks away with a million last season... and that is why I believe both she (and Russell for that matter) were undeserving...

As an aside I would love Survivor to consider a "none" vote... then it wouldn't be a game about who's the most objectionable person I can take to the final 2, it'd be about how do I actually earn these people's vote.

dolphinboy

I agree, Russell wasn't deserving of winning, just like the jury voted. No protest from me.

dolphinboy

Just to add, he's actually stated that the winner is deserving. Which I'm sure you meant to imply, but those blinded by their sexual attraction to Russell and looking for anything to quote to use, that has nothing to do with why Russell lost and why he got what he deserved (2nd place), to make it seem like they're blasting holes in that simple truth.

The old man from was 1st to go from the tribe Hatch was not on. The pushy old man who was a great shelter builder and hard worker but rubbed people the wrong the way as a taskmaster.

I can see how that slight error in specifics completely nullified my post and was the only thing that was responded to. Yeah, and it's a total crack up moment, I guess.

wirefan

So back to the strategy last night:

Why the hell did Rob's alliance not go after Parv instead of Russell? This seems like the 2nd time in a row they made the highest risk play (they should have gone after Danielle the previous week) and ignored a higher probability/lower risk play?

Coach came to Rob and said it should be Courtney or a blindside of Parv.... as flaky as Coach is, if you follow his plan you make him seem like the leader and you likely get his vote (or at least make it more likely than trying to dictate to him who he should vote for). Rob also knew pretty clearly that Jerri was flipping (or at a minimum thinking about it) - so why make her choose between Rob or Russell, why not give her Parv as an option (who she dislikes). If the vote was Rob v Parv, the vote is probably at least 4-4, if not 5-3 for Rob's alliance. And then you have Russell and Danielle on an island for the next vote and at 5-2 you can even sustain one person flipping or doing something crazy and still win the next vote.

I wonder if Russell (and yes you haters will have a field day with this) understood that a Rob vs Russell vote was better for him and his alliance than a Rob vs Parv vote. Was his intention to personalize things with Rob to force a Rob vs Russ showdown not out of ego, but also knowing that if it was Rob v Parv, he'd likely lose that battle (which would mean he'd be gone the following vote).

Maybe, just maybe, his "one of these two" comment in front of Rob/Courtney/Sandra was not just another example of him being obnoxious and lacking a social game, but an intent to ensure those folks would get irritated enough that the vote was Rob V Russell and not Rob v Parv? I'm sure some will say it's farfetched (and it might be ), but is at least even possible there was more to that comment than Russell just being the jerk that he is?

Kdogg

I'm sure that's why he asked a judge to let him go. He wanted to go mainly because he's broke.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...h_N.htm?csp=34
http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/07/richa...-survivor.html
http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/r...or-20-9248.php

davidh777

Good choice to get rid of James or he would have had to run or puzzle in the immunity challenge.

He was totally dominating the game. The double-tribal turned things around with Rob vs. Russell.

dino88

The whole "one of these" conversation was justified on Russell's part. All 3 of the people sitting there had been bad mouthing Russell and telling him that he was going home. The Russell haters will use that as an example of a bad social game because they are blind to everything the other players do that aren't named Russell.

I don't know, maybe it's only because we're sexually attracted to him like the idiot above suggested.

dolphinboy

The idiot above has read and learned first hand that personal attacks are not allowed under ANY circumstances.

Whether a mod enforces the rules or not, I don't know, but I'm not surprised it was you that resorted to breaking the forum rules to get your point across.

dino88

Kind of like you suggesting everyone that disagrees with you must be sexually attracted to the guy. Kind of like you suggesting I was an idiot that couldn't comprehend Big Love because I disliked this season. Now you're crying for a mod? Is it also a personal attack to call you a hypocrite? If you're going to make ignorant statements, expect to be called on them.

dolphinboy

Boy, rather than simply apologize for the comment and the clear violation of the rules, you go for the big reach that my comments implied the same thing as you calling me an idiot. All of your "examples" are weak. People disagree strongly ALL THE TIME.

If you actually read my earlier posts, I never talked crap about Russell and many other people have posted in defense of Natalie and have given thoughtful reasons to counter the comments that were made that she was the most undeserving winner and that Russell should have won. At the heart of that is simply a disagreement on what makes a great player.

But pages later, the Russell lovers keep on repeating the same thing over and over and over again. No one said he wasn't good, but god forbid anyone think he's not the best or might think he didn't deserve to win. That's enough to set you off.

But I've yet to see anyone involved in the debate violate the forum rules. Just you.

dino88

I don't care what you think about the guy, it's the fact that you started with the insults and I'm amazed you're playing dumb. So this wasn't meant as an insult?
And neither was your comment towards me in the Big Love thread I guess? Give me a break.

It's like you were waiting by your computer for someone to call you out so you could play mini-mod. It's all pathetic. I'd use the ignore button, but I can't find the thing.

dolphinboy

It was absolutely meant as a jab at the Russell lovers. It goes on all the time at DVDTalk, it's not even comparable to calling other members names. If you can't take it, don't dish it out to people who have different opinions. Your fake outrage is ridiculous. When people have different opinions, buttons are pushed all the time, but that doesn't mean you have a free pass to break rules and whine about other threads, where there were also no personal attacks.

Again, I know you're afraid to read them, but my posts before this got into a pissing match about Russell being a God or not, were fair and reasonable and didn't, in any way, shape or form, instigate people. I've complimented Russell several times in just the last two weeks.

Are your posts in this thread or ANY thread EVER not blinded by your need to be right? Didn't you call me out in another thread to claim that you were right and I was WRONG, because Chloe Sevigny agreed with you in a brief interview? What was that, nearly a week after the show ended and people had stop debating whether the season was awful or just a bad season by the great standards set in Season 3?

Of course, Chloe later clarified those comments, but I didn't post it in that thread and call you out. You had an opinion and I disagreed. You never let anything go. So, let's be done with this. Calling me an idiot was not a violation of forum rules, Big Love Season 4 was awful, Russell deserved to win Survivor last season, and he's the best player in Survivor history.

Happy now?

cdollaz

Ya'll should just have sex and make up.

wirefan

Speaking of never letting go... you continue a Big Love argument in a Survivor thread - let me guess... not because you feel the need to be right, but just to show how you're able to let things go, right?

"You never let anything go followed" by "Let's be done with this" followed by sarcasm and "happy now" seemingly intended to goad yet another response from Dino... good to see you take the high road on this one, moving on, and not prolonging the argument.

dolphinboy

Um, the other guy brought up Big Love in this thread first and I responded.

Let me guess, you're a Russell fan and you think name calling IS taking the high road.

Don't you think if you're going to take sides and keep this going and throw in the laughing emoticon, which is always the perfect touch, that you should at least get your facts right? Or the one major fact right?

You just count on no one going back to look and assuming that you're comment is actually true. So, since the thread is here for all to see and you've decided to take a shot at me, please tell me again who brought up Big Love in this thread first?

So, pardon me if I ignore the rest of your expert analysis.

edit: added the emoticon after the initial post. I mean, why not join in on the fun?

akrate69

Anyone else see the new commercial for next Thursday's Survivor Episode?

Cardsfan111

I kept seeing the commercial they've aired during the Final Four games tonight which is a little different than what you've described:

wirefan

I saw the same thing as Cardsfan (also from the NCAA tourney game)

SunMonkey

Russel would approve of the direction this thread has taken.

superfro

It's been awesome catching up on what I missed!

0073735963

Hell, Russell's not even on this board and yet he's reeking havoc! I vote he gets the DVDTalk million...or wait, maybe Natalie should get it, she 'd at me once.

Tsar Chasm

Is it too early for Parvati to betray Russell? I think she'll need to do it quickly. She's ruthless and manipulative, just more sneaky about it.

freshticles

Isn't saying that we are sexually attracted to Russell with no evidence, slander and therefore can be considered a personal attack? Or do you just haze the lines a little bit and act all self righteous and call for an adult when someone is a little more straight forward with their insults?

the big train

Randy, Tyson, Rob... Five women, two men... Are we sure this is season 20? Does she really need to betray Russell if he's clearing the decks for her already?