|
Shakugan posted:Yeah, that was something that stood out to me. Jeremy's attitude is easily as sexist as the rest, if not more so. Women players: "These guys are real jerks" Jeremy: "We men should be more polite around the women" *sound of a thousand goons pounding away on their tumblr to condemn Jeremy* Lone Goat posted:If a final is AaB then a says "don't vote for me, vote for A" and it's A vs B and effectively a final 2. With ABC in the final you're up against two people which is much worse because votes rarely get split amongst all three FTC members. But it's better to have your partner A on the jury. That's a guaranteed vote for A' and no chance of a split vote that leaves player B a chance of a 4-3-2 win.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
So Josh’s RHAP interview confirmed the he did actually spend time with Jaclyn and tried to keep the alliance together. He called her out at tribal council when she said that the guys ignored and disrespected her and she amended her complaint to say everyone but Josh ignored her, etc. So, he was trying to hold the alliance together but his work didn’t make the broadcast so instead we have the narrative of a bumbling idiot who can kind of build an alliance but can’t maintain one. In an episode that was hinging on Jaclyn’s alliance decision, I find it incredible that they didn’t show even a short, 30 second scene of Josh trying to keep her happy. Instead we spend time on scenes like the Baylor chat and taco eating. At this point it’s looking like Alec is the goatiest goat left. There is little hope of him rebuilding relationships so he should be in everyone’s final 3 plans. This final tribal pool seems like it will lean heavily on relationship voting rather than gameplay, Big Moves, immunity wins etc. Josh and probably Reid would vote on gameplay, Wes and Jeremy would probably talk up the gameplay but I think their gameplay analysis would be biased by relationships, Missy, Baylor, Jaclyn, Keith and, to a lesser extent, Jon, Natalie and Alec all seem like relationship voters. I'm lumping positive and negative relationship voting together so winning the vote if a jackass like Alec is very different than winning Missy's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
I don't think the editing made Josh look bad. He just happened to be in an alliance with three assholes, and those three assholes pushed the swing vote away. It didn't look like his fault at all. He came off extremely well (and he's obviously going to get to play again.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
DaisyDanger posted:No one has an issue with Jeremy thinking the women who are going to be on the jury need respect. It's the broad generalization that "all women are delicate and farting around them is simply unacceptable" That's what rubbed me the wrong way. Also, if Parvati indicated that she treated men like that outside of Survivor, I would take issue with that, too. Kind of like how Russell used women in his strategies, but he has proven that he is a jackass on and off show. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
paperchaseguy posted:But it's better to have your partner A on the jury. That's a guaranteed vote for A' and no chance of a split vote that leaves player B a chance of a 4-3-2 win. If me and my loved one are in the finals together I'd say "If you would vote for me, instead vote for my [loved one] instead". Unless I was in the finals with someone so loathsome I think they'll get no votes, in which case I'd try to play for both first and second prize.  You do make a good point with the guaranteed vote on the jury, but in a vacuum I'd prefer having the ability to dictate who is in the finals with us between B and C.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
paperchaseguy posted:But it's better to have your partner A on the jury. That's a guaranteed vote for A' and no chance of a split vote that leaves player B a chance of a 4-3-2 win. I would agree with your analysis if we were at the beginning of the season. A guaranteed vote, someone pulling for you at Ponderosa and someone asking you a helpful question would all be benefits of having your partner on the jury and recreating a 3 party election strategic voting scenario is tough to hang your shot at a million dollars on. At this point, however; we’re down to three pairs so we can see who exactly would be sitting next to each other. I think Keith/Wes, Jon/Jaclyn and Missy/Baylor could all make a case for going to final tribal together. Keith and Wes are interchangeable at this point so either could be put forward for votes and Missy would clearly be the one put forward. Jon and Jaclyn would have the toughest decision on who would be the vote getter, but I think most people see them as a team and would be ok with giving them a team vote. It's tough to think of a scenario with these exact players in which both partners would get votes but the votes are not transferable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Being butt-hurt and obsessing over Jeremy's comment indicates he might be right. Oh ok, thanks for clearing that up. Or maybe you are proving the point that it's a widely ignored/accepted form of sexism, who knows?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
So, this is the first season of survivor I've ever watched (coming right off the first season of big brother ever -- yeah, well, better late than never) and I've never seen a cast with so many people I'm either apathetic towards or actively dislike. Like, out of the people left, I think only really Natalie (yeah, people hate the twinnies, but I found them entertaining in the amazing race), maybe Jaclyn and Jon, maybe Jeremy are all right. And even then I don't have a clear favorite and the only reason I mention them is because they're not total assholes or totally stupid like all the other people left. I'm actually pretty glad that Jon/Jaclyn flip-flopped. The season of Big Brother I was watching would often have edits where people would consider flipping their vote to make a big game move but never actually did, so I wouldn't have been surprised if nothing had happened here. But as a girl, I'm kind of pleased that rear end in a top hat behavior was rewarded with J&J flipping, especially since no one else was doing/saying anything about it. Plus, I didn't think Josh was particularly likable, and I thought he was overplaying. Or at least he thought he was playing better than he was, and I just didn't think he was at that level to have that kind of smugness in himself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
EchoBase posted:It's tough to think of a scenario with these exact players in which both partners would get votes but the votes are not transferable. You are not allowed to share the money, so it may not be allowable to even encourage "transfer" votes like that. And if I were on the jury, I would find the suggestion distasteful. It's complicated because some of these people are blood relatives. OTOH it would be hilarious if, for instance, Jon and Jaclyn make the tribal, he transfers votes to her resulting in victory, then she forsakes any chance at being Rob and Ambuh II by dumping his rear end before the reunion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
EchoBase posted:So Josh’s RHAP interview confirmed the he did actually spend time with Jaclyn and tried to keep the alliance together. He called her out at tribal council when she said that the guys ignored and disrespected her and she amended her complaint to say everyone but Josh ignored her, etc. So, he was trying to hold the alliance together but his work didn’t make the broadcast so instead we have the narrative of a bumbling idiot who can kind of build an alliance but can’t maintain one. In an episode that was hinging on Jaclyn’s alliance decision, I find it incredible that they didn’t show even a short, 30 second scene of Josh trying to keep her happy. Instead we spend time on scenes like the Baylor chat and taco eating. I don't know how much I believe Josh's story considering he later insists on how much Baylor owed him and how he had her back 100% of the time and it was a betrayal for her to turn her back on him. I listened to the interview and I really kind of got the sense of a player who doesn't think he did anything wrong and can't admit any mistakes or flaws. He just claims the entire Baylor thing is because she's young and naive and he did nothing wrong and was always on her side. So it kind of seems in character for him to insist that Jaclyn was wrong and he was totally right and she just said silly excuses just like he claims Baylor did. And Rob never really presses any of this stuff or challenges players like that. Not that anyone cares but I stopped listening to RHAP because I'm not a huge fan of Rob's opinions/style and hated Ian and Brian during BB. But I listened to these last couple of them and I really like Stephan Fishbauch. Rob's podcasts seem to be heavily influence by who he has on with him and Fishbauch is a good partner so I think I'll keep listening for this season. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Nov 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
paperchaseguy posted:You are not allowed to share the money, so it may not be allowable to even encourage "transfer" votes like that. And if I were on the jury, I would find the suggestion distasteful. I'd expect the money-sharing rules are relaxed a bit in a Blood v Water season. I can't really imagine then saying "No you can't share money with your daughter/husband/sister/etc"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Clocks posted:So, this is the first season of survivor I've ever watched (coming right off the first season of big brother ever -- yeah, well, better late than never) and I've never seen a cast with so many people I'm either apathetic towards or actively dislike. Like, out of the people left, I think only really Natalie (yeah, people hate the twinnies, but I found them entertaining in the amazing race), maybe Jaclyn and Jon, maybe Jeremy are all right. And even then I don't have a clear favorite and the only reason I mention them is because they're not total assholes or totally stupid like all the other people left. Check out last season. Cagayan. You'll have a wonderful time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Lone Goat posted:I'd expect the money-sharing rules are relaxed a bit in a Blood v Water season. I can't really imagine then saying "No you can't share money with your daughter/husband/sister/etc"? Surely none of these "rules" would ever stand up in court. If a contestant wins, and they are paid, it's their money at that point. So surely, if that contestant wants to then give some of that money away to whoever (including other players), they would be free to do so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
paperchaseguy posted:But it's better to have your partner A on the jury. That's a guaranteed vote for A' and no chance of a split vote that leaves player B a chance of a 4-3-2 win. In a Final 6 with 3 pairs, why would anyone feel comfortable with entering F5 as the only single left? I don't think many people would willingly let themselves be voted out at F4 just so they can give their partner a jury vote. And if a pair makes it to F3, it shouldn't be that hard to make a case for the fact that both of you deserve to win over the other player left, while still directing jury votes at just one member of the pair. You should have played well enough that the odd man out doesn't receive 4 votes in which case it doesn't matter if your partner got 1 or 2 stray votes to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Seconding Cagayan, or even the first blood vs water. There's a lot of people who talk about the old survivor episodes being fabled greatness, but the latest most recent seasons have been rather engaging. Except this one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:Surely none of these "rules" would ever stand up in court. If a contestant wins, and they are paid, it's their money at that point. So surely, if that contestant wants to then give some of that money away to whoever (including other players), they would be free to do so. The rule is that you can't CONSPIRE to share the money while on the show. It's to prevent very obvious strategies that would make for a very boring TV show, like a race-to-the-bottom prize sharing where the finalist who agrees to give the most of the money away to the jury will win. They definitely don't care what you do with the money after the show. And the rule is definitely suspended in BvW seasons, at least within the loved one pairs. The married pairs share a bank account, after all. I also remember Gervase and Marissa discussing sharing the prize if either of them won.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:Seconding Cagayan, or even the first blood vs water. There's a lot of people who talk about the old survivor episodes being fabled greatness, but the latest most recent seasons have been rather engaging. Tony was great tv but his season suffered due to the Tyler Perry Idol, which was too powerful and allowed much of his confident and arrogant gameplay. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:allowed much of his confident and arrogant gameplay. That was there before he found the idol, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
This season, people are complaining about how the Fart Patrol talks to Baylor, Keith's crudeness and Jeremy's confessionals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YRgrTWyliU Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Nov 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
I would have to go back to episode 1 to confirm this, but I'm pretty sure the editors are intentionally putting a "Jeremy bitches endlessly" section after every single immunity challenge. I usually go the the restroom after the immunity winner gets the necklace, and I swear to god I know the show is back on because I can hear Jeremy bitching. But yeah, it was an excellent play by him to get rid of Josh, and despite his weird confessionals and need to send men to protect his Boston PD wife I still think he has a really good game sense, and is a really good social player that managed to convince all the women to stick with him. EDIT: Honestly Jaclyn and Jon seem to have the best relationship since he actively has mentioned that she can take care of herself, and they at least seem to discuss their plays as equals. It's rather refreshing to see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Anonymous Zebra posted:EDIT: Honestly Jaclyn and Jon seem to have the best relationship since he actively has mentioned that she can take care of herself, and they at least seem to discuss their plays as equals. It's rather refreshing to see. Yeah, neither of them seems super smart, but they are very likeable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
King Burgundy posted:Yeah, neither of them seems super smart, but they are very likeable. They both seem like pod people to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Smorgasbord posted:They both seem like pod people to me. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
everyone on this cast is pretty stupid, especially Natalie. lol Crossfit
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 10:05
|
|
|
Dustkoch posted:everyone on this cast is pretty stupid, especially Natalie. lol Crossfit While none of this cast is setting the world on fire, I'm curious as to why you think Natalie is the worst.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
Wee Bairns posted:While none of this cast is setting the world on fire, I'm curious as to why you think Natalie is the worst. Had to look it up. She's a Crossfit coach. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
I haven't watched since episode 5. How's everything going?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
blue squares posted:I haven't watched since episode 5. How's everything going? *fart*
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Terry Glenn posted:Reid's penmanship is exquisite. I haven't been on SA in a very long time, and I logged back in, got a new password (cuz obviously I forgot what it was) and came back to TV IV just to post this exact thing. Cheers! Oh how I've missed you, Survivor discussions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
This week the key aspect is whether another pair is broken up or a single is voted off. I have a feeling we’re looking at a landslide win by Natalie/Jeremy over Alec and Wes/Keith. With a different cast I’d say the pairs would stay in the numerical advantage until the end with one pair making the final, but with these people, I don’t see the evidence that the pairs will start working together or avoid a vote that would break up a pair. Regardless of how it comes about, if a pair is broken up this week, I see Jeremy/Natalie having enough wits to realize 5 > 4 and organize a singles alliance. Despite some singles distaste for other singles, none can really afford to ignore the potential and have a hope of winning (Alec is, of course, guaranteed a final spot as he should be everyones’ choice for goat). Once the singles are grouped, the suballiance of singles without partners on the jury should be solid until the final four where Jeremy and Natalie will try to eliminate the other and bring two goats to the final: Alec and surviving half of Wes/Keith.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Really enjoying RHAP lately, probably helps that he's had some stellar guests in the past few weeks (Aras, Parvati, Vytas). It's almost like I have friends who like Survivor 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
too soon
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
PREVIOUSLY ON...SURVIVOR I missed last week, so this recap has to be good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Oh boy, it's time to rack up some injuries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Meh... another uninspired challenge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Lol soft drinks for Baylor
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
Muffin vs Baylor? COOOOOOOP OUT!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Who ever is picking these teams is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Hahahahaha gently caress Alec
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Keith just owned Alec so hard
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:11
|
|
