Winner Discussion Thread

Jury Duty

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:21:16 am

Lex wrote:
Kim J wrote:People didn't follow him [Gabe] because he's a "mastermind". People followed him because they agreed with him.


This pretty much says Gabe dictated a lot of the voting, and the reasons people decided to vote with him is not really relevant, he chose the vote and he got others to vote with him.

What? No it doesn't. It shows that he made EASY DECISIONS. He made decisions that SEVERAL people agreed upon. He didn't lead any sheep, he didn't lead anyone, he just sat there and voted votes that EVERYONE would've done if they were in the same position. His game was incredibly BLAND and undeserving of the win.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Lex » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:21:31 am

Kim P wrote:Lex you didn't talk to me before merge because I was on the chopping block? That doesn't make sense.


I meant after the merge. I don't even remember why I didn't talk to you before the merge. o_o Maybe there was no reason and I was just busy in conversations with other people.

Sarah wrote:I'm not voting for him because he purposely ignored my attempts to talk to him constantly. I know I'm abrasive but I'm not okay with being ignored.


You have to admit you were voted "most avoided person" for a reason though... :p
User avatar
Lex
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:17:15 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Vecepia » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:22:04 am

Oh and for the record, no one knew anything about the second merge TC. It was Sarah before immunity then Clarence, I heard about a Sean blindside, we suggested Kim P because she was a floater. It could've been Lindsey for flipping... I changed my vote like 4 times.
User avatar
Vecepia
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:22:49 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:22:21 am

Sarah wrote:I'm not voting for him because he purposely ignored my attempts to talk to him constantly. I know I'm abrasive but I'm not okay with being ignored.

That seals the deal. Gabe actively ignored the lesser half of this jury. Lex, your idolizing a complete BUM in this game.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim P » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:22:39 am

icon_wub I think your lovable Sarah icon_wub
User avatar
Kim P
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:53 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Sarah » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:22:51 am

But it still hurts. I don't know why everyone hates me? I wasn't that bad, was I? Oh right. I was. Oops :P
User avatar
Sarah
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:21:39 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Sarah » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:23:27 am

Kim J wrote:
Sarah wrote:I'm not voting for him because he purposely ignored my attempts to talk to him constantly. I know I'm abrasive but I'm not okay with being ignored.

That seals the deal. Gabe actively ignored the lesser half of this jury. Lex, your idolizing a complete BUM in this game.

um I barely made the upper half but I'm the 5th juror which makes me upper half!
User avatar
Sarah
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:21:39 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim P » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:23:48 am

Vecepia wrote:Oh and for the record, no one knew anything about the second merge TC. It was Sarah before immunity then Clarence, I heard about a Sean blindside, we suggested Kim P because she was a floater. It could've been Lindsey for flipping... I changed my vote like 4 times.

Excuse me but how was I a floater? I was clearly with Lindsey/Sarah/Gina.
User avatar
Kim P
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:53 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:24:11 am

Sarah wrote:
Kim J wrote:
Sarah wrote:I'm not voting for him because he purposely ignored my attempts to talk to him constantly. I know I'm abrasive but I'm not okay with being ignored.

That seals the deal. Gabe actively ignored the lesser half of this jury. Lex, your idolizing a complete BUM in this game.

um I barely made the upper half but I'm the 5th juror which makes me upper half!

Sorry, for clarification, by "lesser half" I meant 4 of the 9 votes needed to win.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Lex » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:24:43 am

Kim J wrote:
Lex wrote:This pretty much says Gabe dictated a lot of the voting, and the reasons people decided to vote with him is not really relevant, he chose the vote and he got others to vote with him.

What? No it doesn't. It shows that he made EASY DECISIONS. He made decisions that SEVERAL people agreed upon. He didn't lead any sheep, he didn't lead anyone, he just sat there and voted votes that EVERYONE would've done if they were in the same position. His game was incredibly BLAND and undeserving of the win.



He led the sheep for certain... he picked who to vote for and people followed. I would have been fine voting just about anyone who wasn't in my alliance, it was him who selected the people to vote for and who we eventually did vote for.

Kim J wrote:
Sarah wrote:I'm not voting for him because he purposely ignored my attempts to talk to him constantly. I know I'm abrasive but I'm not okay with being ignored.

That seals the deal. Gabe actively ignored the lesser half of this jury. Lex, your idolizing a complete BUM in this game.


Lindsey barely did anything strategically in regards to what Gabe did and those of us who worked with Gabe and were around the longest in this game know how much work he did.
User avatar
Lex
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:17:15 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Lex » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:26:10 am

Kim P wrote:
Vecepia wrote:Oh and for the record, no one knew anything about the second merge TC. It was Sarah before immunity then Clarence, I heard about a Sean blindside, we suggested Kim P because she was a floater. It could've been Lindsey for flipping... I changed my vote like 4 times.

Excuse me but how was I a floater? I was clearly with Lindsey/Sarah/Gina.


I basically said you were the safest vote, although floaters is iffy.
User avatar
Lex
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:17:15 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:26:39 am

Lex wrote: Lindsey barely did anything strategically in regards to what Gabe did and those of us who worked with Gabe and were around the longest in this game know how much work he did.

Lindsey did enough strategically and MORE then enough socially. She played a great game, and for SOME reason, you feel like defending a contestant that literally ignored half of this game, regardless of their placement.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Vecepia » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:27:31 am

Kim P wrote:
Vecepia wrote:Oh and for the record, no one knew anything about the second merge TC. It was Sarah before immunity then Clarence, I heard about a Sean blindside, we suggested Kim P because she was a floater. It could've been Lindsey for flipping... I changed my vote like 4 times.

Excuse me but how was I a floater? I was clearly with Lindsey/Sarah/Gina.

The 6(or 4) person alliance wasn't really known until the next vote for sure. We were going to include you in a proposed 8 alliance but nobody knew enough about you because they didn't talk to you enough. We just labeled you as a mystery/ floater etc. We though you were just.... There.
User avatar
Vecepia
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:22:49 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Lex » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:27:38 am

I beg you not to vote for Lindsey, even if you don't want to vote Gabe, she played such a villainous game it will seriously be demoralizing and disgusting if she wins at FTC =/
User avatar
Lex
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:17:15 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Lex » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:29:09 am

Kim J wrote:Lindsey did enough strategically and MORE then enough socially. She played a great game, and for SOME reason, you feel like defending a contestant that literally ignored half of this game, regardless of their placement.


Lindsey did not do anything special strategically. The mere fact that I and others complain she got lucky she wasn't targeted and Gabe wasn't targeted for a reason should point out how much Gabe worked to trick everyone.

http://www.funny115.com/archives/kaufman.htm

^ important article regarding the Andy Kaufman strategy
User avatar
Lex
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:17:15 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Holly Hoffman » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:29:38 am

How about we let everyone make their own decisions, particularly after being given their time to address the final three.
User avatar
Holly Hoffman
Host
 
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 3:44:12 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Sarah » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:29:44 am

Lex wrote:I beg you not to vote for Lindsey, even if you don't want to vote Gabe, she played such a villainous game it will seriously be demoralizing and disgusting if she wins at FTC =/

... You're not voting for her because sh's a VILLAIN? Honey... This is Survivor. We're not on Redneck Island where it can be excused because everyone's religious... The point of the game is that you have to fight and lie to people to get here.
User avatar
Sarah
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:21:39 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim P » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:30:41 am

Lex wrote:I beg you not to vote for Lindsey, even if you don't want to vote Gabe, she played such a villainous game it will seriously be demoralizing and disgusting if she wins at FTC =/

Lol. How can you say that with a straight face when Gabe backstabbed just as many people, if not more than Lindsey?
User avatar
Kim P
 
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:53 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:30:48 am

Lex wrote:I beg you not to vote for Lindsey, even if you don't want to vote Gabe, she played such a villainous game it will seriously be demoralizing and disgusting if she wins at FTC =/

Thats an opinion. She treated me fine, and I don't see a reason why I should vote otherwise. It's "Demoralizing" to ignore half of this cast. Gabe didn't try, and I refuse to vote Linda because she, just like you, backstabbed me after I displayed several acts of loyalty. Lindsey deserves this win, and I'm happily voting for her to win.

Although depending on the FTC, Linda could steal my vote. VERY UNLIKELY though. VERY.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

Re: Winner Discussion Thread

Postby Kim J » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:33:13 am

The way I see it, Gabe actively ignored half of this game. If he's rewarded for that, it would be insulting to the whole game of "Survivor" and the rules that precede it.
User avatar
Kim J
 
Posts: 605
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:16:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ponderosa

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
cron