Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Give me a reason
153 views
Skip to first unread message
nam sak
Dec 10, 2015, 9:26:12 AM12/10/15
to
Another Survivor recycled player farce where I don't want anyone to
win. I have tried to think of a reason for me to support any of those
left to win and I honestly cannot. The last 'blind side was pathetic.
What on earth are these people thinking ? Are they thinking ? Tash I
seem to remember suggests this is second chance lets not take a goat
and those around her agree ? Seemed to be more a case of anyone but
me. At this stage of the game that is abysmal. The logical vote would
have been Spencer, Jeremy or Keith since they seem to be the only ones
capable of winning challenges and thereby controlling the end game.
You might give Tash Kudos for controlling a vote albeit there seemed
no logic to it but Kass hates Tash and I kind of like Kass. So who
should win ? Give me a clue. I would like to be rooting for someone at
the finale.
win. I have tried to think of a reason for me to support any of those
left to win and I honestly cannot. The last 'blind side was pathetic.
What on earth are these people thinking ? Are they thinking ? Tash I
seem to remember suggests this is second chance lets not take a goat
and those around her agree ? Seemed to be more a case of anyone but
me. At this stage of the game that is abysmal. The logical vote would
have been Spencer, Jeremy or Keith since they seem to be the only ones
capable of winning challenges and thereby controlling the end game.
You might give Tash Kudos for controlling a vote albeit there seemed
no logic to it but Kass hates Tash and I kind of like Kass. So who
should win ? Give me a clue. I would like to be rooting for someone at
the finale.
shawn
Dec 10, 2015, 10:26:37 AM12/10/15
to
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:25:55 +0000, nam sak <nam...@nirvana.com>
wrote:
I think Spencer might be the most worthy of those remaining given how
he was clearly on the outs at the start of the season and now he's at
a point where he has a good chance of being in the final 3. Jeremy
hasn't made much in the way of big moves other than his playing an
idol at TC so I don't find him that worthy of the win.
However, I have to wonder about how bitter these last remaining jury
members are going to be. It's possible that Spencer could end up
losing if the jury ends up being bitter about his playing both sides.
That might let Jeremy slide into the winner's seat. In any case I
don't think we will see a landslide vote for anyone this season.
wrote:
he was clearly on the outs at the start of the season and now he's at
a point where he has a good chance of being in the final 3. Jeremy
hasn't made much in the way of big moves other than his playing an
idol at TC so I don't find him that worthy of the win.
However, I have to wonder about how bitter these last remaining jury
members are going to be. It's possible that Spencer could end up
losing if the jury ends up being bitter about his playing both sides.
That might let Jeremy slide into the winner's seat. In any case I
don't think we will see a landslide vote for anyone this season.
General Zod
Dec 13, 2015, 1:53:12 AM12/13/15
to
that less room for the real players. So if you take the goats, what's
the odds your in f3? If you take two goats, then only 1 of the
remaining strategic players is at the end.
I don't think I've ever seen this much though put into a season of
survivor. Most everyone is trying really hard. We've had many
seasons were a single standout player dominated everyone else (because
they were surrounded by goats), but this season so many people are
trying and making movies, then no one really seems to be standing out.
I'm looking forward to the finale.
nam sak
Dec 13, 2015, 11:07:09 AM12/13/15
to
It's supposed to be a competition for a million dollars, not a high
school sleep over.
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 22:53:09 -0800, General Zod <z...@krypton.com>
wrote:
school sleep over.
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 22:53:09 -0800, General Zod <z...@krypton.com>
wrote:
zeppo
Dec 13, 2015, 3:32:17 PM12/13/15
to
On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 10:53:12 PM UTC-8, General Zod wrote:
> I'm enjoying the season.
I agree that it's a good season. The only serious irritant, IMO, was the incessant
> I'm enjoying the season.
blathering (mostly by Stephen Fishbach) about the S31 game featuring strategic elements
that had never been seen before. These comments were unnecessary, self-serving,
and incorrect, and I am happy that we haven't heard much on this topic since the
longwinded Stephen's departure.
I think the logic was if you bring the goats
> that less room for the real players. So if you take the goats, what's
> the odds your in f3? If you take two goats, then only 1 of the
> remaining strategic players is at the end.
goats in the game since the merge. If a "goat" is defined as a player who could not
possibly win, no matter who they sat beside at FTC, then the only two players who would
possibly meet the criteria, IMO, would be Abi and Kimmi. But even they are not "classic" goats.
Despite Ciera's opinions at TC, there have been enough people playing hard this season to
make it an interesting one to watch.
Brian Smith
Dec 13, 2015, 4:07:19 PM12/13/15
to
"zeppo" wrote in message
news:9d184824-b0fb-4434...@googlegroups.com...
been different. In which past season have we seen voting blocs used on
nearly a weekly basis with different members each time and without
repercussion to those that stray from their "main" alliance? Sandra played
the numbers but she didn't change nearly as much as this group and she was
just one person. When this season gets dissected after it's over it'll
become obvious how it was different. Also think back to last TC with the
"We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
reminded when it's happened before.
> I think the logic was if you bring the goats
>> that less room for the real players. So if you take the goats, what's
>> the odds your in f3? If you take two goats, then only 1 of the
>> remaining strategic players is at the end.
>
>
>One of the great aspects of the current game is that there have not really
>been any
>goats in the game since the merge. If a "goat" is defined as a player who
>could not
>possibly win, no matter who they sat beside at FTC, then the only two
>players who would
>possibly meet the criteria, IMO, would be Abi and Kimmi. But even they are
>not "classic" goats.
>Despite Ciera's opinions at TC, there have been enough people playing hard
>this season to
>make it an interesting one to watch.
Wasn't Ciera's point that some people weren't playing for themselves early
enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
late to take out the big threats? I think she was right other than for Kimmi
who's presence still in the game is somewhat shocking to me. Abi might be
right about her being one of the two true goats because I don't see her
beating anyone.
--
Brian
news:9d184824-b0fb-4434...@googlegroups.com...
>
>On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 10:53:12 PM UTC-8, General Zod wrote:
>
>
>
>> I'm enjoying the season.
>
>
>I agree that it's a good season. The only serious irritant, IMO, was the
>incessant
>blathering (mostly by Stephen Fishbach) about the S31 game featuring
>strategic elements
>that had never been seen before. These comments were unnecessary,
>self-serving,
>and incorrect, and I am happy that we haven't heard much on this topic
>since the
>longwinded Stephen's departure.
But he's not incorrect and also not the only one to say that this season has
>On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 10:53:12 PM UTC-8, General Zod wrote:
>
>
>
>> I'm enjoying the season.
>
>
>I agree that it's a good season. The only serious irritant, IMO, was the
>incessant
>blathering (mostly by Stephen Fishbach) about the S31 game featuring
>strategic elements
>that had never been seen before. These comments were unnecessary,
>self-serving,
>and incorrect, and I am happy that we haven't heard much on this topic
>since the
>longwinded Stephen's departure.
been different. In which past season have we seen voting blocs used on
nearly a weekly basis with different members each time and without
repercussion to those that stray from their "main" alliance? Sandra played
the numbers but she didn't change nearly as much as this group and she was
just one person. When this season gets dissected after it's over it'll
become obvious how it was different. Also think back to last TC with the
"We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
reminded when it's happened before.
> I think the logic was if you bring the goats
>> that less room for the real players. So if you take the goats, what's
>> the odds your in f3? If you take two goats, then only 1 of the
>> remaining strategic players is at the end.
>
>
>One of the great aspects of the current game is that there have not really
>been any
>goats in the game since the merge. If a "goat" is defined as a player who
>could not
>possibly win, no matter who they sat beside at FTC, then the only two
>players who would
>possibly meet the criteria, IMO, would be Abi and Kimmi. But even they are
>not "classic" goats.
>Despite Ciera's opinions at TC, there have been enough people playing hard
>this season to
>make it an interesting one to watch.
enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
late to take out the big threats? I think she was right other than for Kimmi
who's presence still in the game is somewhat shocking to me. Abi might be
right about her being one of the two true goats because I don't see her
beating anyone.
--
Brian
zeppo
Dec 13, 2015, 9:32:22 PM12/13/15
to
On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 1:07:19 PM UTC-8, Brian Smith wrote:
Also think back to last TC with the
> "We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
> all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
> reminded when it's happened before.
>
That was a load of rubbish. When there are only seven players left in the game,
Also think back to last TC with the
> "We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
> all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
> reminded when it's happened before.
>
how can Jeremy be part of 4 or 5 different potential "voting blocks"? I don't
know why he said that, but I bet Probst was sure glad that he did. In reality, the
vote was very simple: three players who had been together since the beginning,
along with one guy who was playing the numbers, booted the easiest target
available. It was "Survivor End Game 101"
>
> Wasn't Ciera's point that some people weren't playing for themselves early
> enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
> late to take out the big threats?
of stupid things around camp. Therefore, the only way that I'm going to survive is if
the rest of you start booting your own alliance partners instead of me and my partners"
I've got to give her credit for trying, but she was done as soon as she broke ranks
with Andrew, and pulled enough votes together to boot Woo instead of Spencer.
I think she was right other than for Kimmi
> who's presence still in the game is somewhat shocking to me.
loyal to each other. Despite her discussion with Kelley regarding an"all woman alliance",
there was never any doubt in my mind that both she and Tash would vote with Jeremy
and Spencer at F7.
Abi might be
> right about her being one of the two true goats because I don't see her
> beating anyone.
of Kelley, viewed her as being too unpredictable and volatile to work with. As I've said
before, Abi has shown herself to be very loyal to those who she trusts, but that's not how she was seen by several of the others.
The Horny Goat
Dec 14, 2015, 1:11:26 AM12/14/15
to
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 14:07:25 -0700, "Brian Smith"
<dcg_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Wasn't Ciera's point that some people weren't playing for themselves early
>enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
>late to take out the big threats? I think she was right other than for Kimmi
>who's presence still in the game is somewhat shocking to me. Abi might be
>right about her being one of the two true goats because I don't see her
>beating anyone.
In fairness Kimmi wasn't seen as a major threat in her original season
<dcg_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Wasn't Ciera's point that some people weren't playing for themselves early
>enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
>late to take out the big threats? I think she was right other than for Kimmi
>who's presence still in the game is somewhat shocking to me. Abi might be
>right about her being one of the two true goats because I don't see her
>beating anyone.
either.
zeppo
Dec 14, 2015, 8:53:29 PM12/14/15
to
On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 10:11:26 PM UTC-8, The Horny Goat wrote:
>
> In fairness Kimmi wasn't seen as a major threat in her original season
> either.
I give Kimmi a lot of credit. Based on what we have been shown, she learned
>
> In fairness Kimmi wasn't seen as a major threat in her original season
> either.
from her mistakes in S2, and has played a much more intelligent game this time
around. She will not win, but getting to at least F6 sure beats being the fifth boot.
Brian Smith
Dec 14, 2015, 9:50:55 PM12/14/15
to
"zeppo" wrote in message
news:7ebe10ef-2e64-4c06...@googlegroups.com...
Saying she's played a more intelligent game this time isn't saying much. You
keep knocking Ciera so I'm going to throw something back at ya concerning
Kimmi. Remember how Kimmi turned on Monica for wanting to work with the
girls and is now ready to do the same thing? What makes what Ciera did worse
than that? At least Ciera wasn't a frickin' hypocrite about what she
said/did. The early season players this time have been major disappointments
as far as I'm concerned. In Blood vs. Water 1 people like Tina and Gervase
played very good games. This season the old season players failed to adapt
and are looking pathetic. Savage should give his earnings to the fans who
had to put up with his nonstop whining and bitching at Ponderosa. Or give it
to Kass and Ciera for being such a douche to them and not realizing it's
just a game!
--
Brian
news:7ebe10ef-2e64-4c06...@googlegroups.com...
keep knocking Ciera so I'm going to throw something back at ya concerning
Kimmi. Remember how Kimmi turned on Monica for wanting to work with the
girls and is now ready to do the same thing? What makes what Ciera did worse
than that? At least Ciera wasn't a frickin' hypocrite about what she
said/did. The early season players this time have been major disappointments
as far as I'm concerned. In Blood vs. Water 1 people like Tina and Gervase
played very good games. This season the old season players failed to adapt
and are looking pathetic. Savage should give his earnings to the fans who
had to put up with his nonstop whining and bitching at Ponderosa. Or give it
to Kass and Ciera for being such a douche to them and not realizing it's
just a game!
--
Brian
zeppo
Dec 15, 2015, 12:20:20 AM12/15/15
to
On Monday, December 14, 2015 at 6:50:55 PM UTC-8, Brian Smith wrote:
> Saying she's played a more intelligent game this time isn't saying much. You
> keep knocking Ciera so I'm going to throw something back at ya concerning
> Kimmi. Remember how Kimmi turned on Monica for wanting to work with the
> girls and is now ready to do the same thing? What makes what Ciera did worse
> than that?
Heh! Take it easy Brian. I'm not a Kimmi supporter. I'm just saying that (so far)
> Saying she's played a more intelligent game this time isn't saying much. You
> keep knocking Ciera so I'm going to throw something back at ya concerning
> Kimmi. Remember how Kimmi turned on Monica for wanting to work with the
> girls and is now ready to do the same thing? What makes what Ciera did worse
> than that?
she has been much smarter this season than her first time around when she was
shown to be a loud mouth who irritated most of her tribe mates, and almost got
into a fist fight with Alicia over a chicken.
nam sak
Dec 17, 2015, 7:12:38 PM12/17/15
to
I feel totally vindicated. Having to watch on the following morning I,
as has become my Survivor finale habit, got my well chilled bottle of
bucks fizz (clementine this time - quite nice) and my pork chops,
fried eggs, mushroom and asparagus Survivor reward breakfast and sat
down knowing that I would not want anyone to win.
I just don't like Spencer and he has not changed despite what he (and
the Survivor production team) wanted everyone to think. Pity the
girlfriend that he now says he loves, can't see that lasting till
Christmas now he's got his loser fee. Outlast? yes, Outplay? not great
but better than some, Outwit? no.
Tasha, the less said the better.
Jeremy. Outlast? yes, Outplay? no, Outwit? I nearly spat my fizz all
over the breakfast table when I thought about that. He didn't have a
clue what was going on most of the time
What's her name - was it Kimme, whoever she is - just about summed the
whole thing up. Pick a number between 1 and 10 (subtext coz aint none
of you deserve this so what's the point asking you any questions?).
The one thing I am going to give Jeremy was his response to being
called a bully. If it had been me I would have told her there is only
one thing worse than being a bully and that is being a passive
aggressive bully which is exactly what you are bitch and I bet your
offspring are just as bad as you if not worse since they are learning
at the hands of a master.
The only reason I can explain a clean sweep is that Tasha was nothing,
Spencer was hated despite what the producers peddled and Jeremy was
just the least bad of a bad bunch.
Best season ever? Yeah right.
Thank God the next season has no recycled players is the only other
thing I can think of to say.
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:26:35 -0500, shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com>
wrote:
as has become my Survivor finale habit, got my well chilled bottle of
bucks fizz (clementine this time - quite nice) and my pork chops,
fried eggs, mushroom and asparagus Survivor reward breakfast and sat
down knowing that I would not want anyone to win.
I just don't like Spencer and he has not changed despite what he (and
the Survivor production team) wanted everyone to think. Pity the
girlfriend that he now says he loves, can't see that lasting till
Christmas now he's got his loser fee. Outlast? yes, Outplay? not great
but better than some, Outwit? no.
Tasha, the less said the better.
Jeremy. Outlast? yes, Outplay? no, Outwit? I nearly spat my fizz all
over the breakfast table when I thought about that. He didn't have a
clue what was going on most of the time
What's her name - was it Kimme, whoever she is - just about summed the
whole thing up. Pick a number between 1 and 10 (subtext coz aint none
of you deserve this so what's the point asking you any questions?).
The one thing I am going to give Jeremy was his response to being
called a bully. If it had been me I would have told her there is only
one thing worse than being a bully and that is being a passive
aggressive bully which is exactly what you are bitch and I bet your
offspring are just as bad as you if not worse since they are learning
at the hands of a master.
The only reason I can explain a clean sweep is that Tasha was nothing,
Spencer was hated despite what the producers peddled and Jeremy was
just the least bad of a bad bunch.
Best season ever? Yeah right.
Thank God the next season has no recycled players is the only other
thing I can think of to say.
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:26:35 -0500, shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com>
wrote:
UCLAN
Dec 19, 2015, 3:50:08 PM12/19/15
to
On 12/19/2015 11:52 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <41i67bhjmi4hdletg...@4ax.com>,
> next to dumb and dumber.
>
> Wentworth would have won otherwise.
She sure did clean up nice.
> In article <41i67bhjmi4hdletg...@4ax.com>,
> nam sak <nam...@nirvana.com> wrote:
>
>> The only reason I can explain a clean sweep is that Tasha was nothing,
>> Spencer was hated despite what the producers peddled and Jeremy was
>> just the least bad of a bad bunch.
>
> He was better than that, but yes, he greatly benefited by being up there
>
>> The only reason I can explain a clean sweep is that Tasha was nothing,
>> Spencer was hated despite what the producers peddled and Jeremy was
>> just the least bad of a bad bunch.
>
> next to dumb and dumber.
>
> Wentworth would have won otherwise.
She sure did clean up nice.
Questor
Jan 1, 2016, 9:29:00 PM1/1/16
to
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 00:12:14 +0000, nam sak <nam...@nirvana.com> wrote:
>I feel totally vindicated. Having to watch on the following morning I,
>as has become my Survivor finale habit, got my well chilled bottle of
>bucks fizz (clementine this time - quite nice) and my pork chops,
>fried eggs, mushroom and asparagus Survivor reward breakfast and sat
>down knowing that I would not want anyone to win.
Heh heh... thanks for sharing. You sound like a true fan -- you watch even
>I feel totally vindicated. Having to watch on the following morning I,
>as has become my Survivor finale habit, got my well chilled bottle of
>bucks fizz (clementine this time - quite nice) and my pork chops,
>fried eggs, mushroom and asparagus Survivor reward breakfast and sat
>down knowing that I would not want anyone to win.
though you don't like the show.
Have there been any seasons recently that you *did* enjoy? Does there have
to be someone you find likeable, and/or want to root for, in order to enjoy
watching?
By its nature Survivor produces cutthroat behavior, so when that occurs in the
course of game play it doesn't bother me much. The only person who I found
to be notably unlikeable this season was Abi, who struck me as mean-spirited
and emotionally immature.
Questor
Jan 1, 2016, 9:29:30 PM1/1/16
to
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 18:32:18 -0800 (PST), zeppo <rgi...@telus.net> wrote:
>On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 1:07:19 PM UTC-8, Brian Smith wrote:
> Also think back to last TC with the
>> "We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
>> all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
>> reminded when it's happened before.
>>
>That was a load of rubbish. When there are only seven players left in the game,
>how can Jeremy be part of 4 or 5 different potential "voting blocks"? I don't
>know why he said that, but I bet Probst was sure glad that he did. In reality, the
>vote was very simple: three players who had been together since the beginning,
>along with one guy who was playing the numbers, booted the easiest target
>available. It was "Survivor End Game 101"
If someone is considering all the different combinations of final fives, final
>On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 1:07:19 PM UTC-8, Brian Smith wrote:
> Also think back to last TC with the
>> "We" talk. F7 and Jeremy says he's part of 4 or 5 "Wees" and the others are
>> all part of varying numbers of "Wees." If that isn't a first I'd love to be
>> reminded when it's happened before.
>>
>That was a load of rubbish. When there are only seven players left in the game,
>how can Jeremy be part of 4 or 5 different potential "voting blocks"? I don't
>know why he said that, but I bet Probst was sure glad that he did. In reality, the
>vote was very simple: three players who had been together since the beginning,
>along with one guy who was playing the numbers, booted the easiest target
>available. It was "Survivor End Game 101"
fours, and final threes, and all the potential offers of "you and me and him
to the end," then yes, I think it's possible to have four or five "we's." How
many are being considered seriously and how much weight they are given
is another matter. I agree that the obvious choice -- Jeremy sticking with
his core alliance -- was the best one.
>> Wasn't Ciera's point that some people weren't playing for themselves early
>> enough in the game? That if you wait too long to make a move it will be too
>> late to take out the big threats?
>
>What Ciera really meant was: "I'm on the minority alliance, and have been saying a lot
>of stupid things around camp. Therefore, the only way that I'm going to survive is if
>the rest of you start booting your own alliance partners instead of me and my partners"
bottom, and you can use me to overthrow the hierarchy."
>I've got to give her credit for trying, but she was done as soon as she broke ranks
>with Andrew, and pulled enough votes together to boot Woo instead of Spencer.
but one never knows... win an immunity necklace, a couple of idol blindsides at
the right times, Joe flips out of the Bayon cloud and brings Keith with him...
and suddenly Ciera is in the majority alliance. As the saying goes, "stuff
happens."
>IMO, she is not a "classic" goat because most of the strong players, with the exception
>of Kelley, viewed her as being too unpredictable and volatile to work with. As I've said
>before, Abi has shown herself to be very loyal to those who she trusts, but that's not
>how she was seen by several of the others.
takes very little to trigger her suspicion and distrust. As an alliance partner
she's "high maintenance," always needing reassurance.
Questor
Jan 1, 2016, 9:29:55 PM1/1/16
to
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 14:07:25 -0700, "Brian Smith" <dcg_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"zeppo" wrote in message
>news:9d184824-b0fb-4434...@googlegroups.com...
>>On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 10:53:12 PM UTC-8, General Zod wrote:
>>> I'm enjoying the season.
>>
>>I agree that it's a good season. The only serious irritant, IMO, was the incessant
>>blathering (mostly by Stephen Fishbach) about the S31 game featuring strategic
>>elements that had never been seen before. These comments were unnecessary,
>>self-serving, and incorrect, and I am happy that we haven't heard much on this topic
>>since the longwinded Stephen's departure.
>
>But he's not incorrect and also not the only one to say that this season has
>been different. In which past season have we seen voting blocs used on
>nearly a weekly basis with different members each time and without
>repercussion to those that stray from their "main" alliance?
I'd say the game play this season was evolutionary, not revolutionary. There
>news:9d184824-b0fb-4434...@googlegroups.com...
>>On Saturday, December 12, 2015 at 10:53:12 PM UTC-8, General Zod wrote:
>>> I'm enjoying the season.
>>
>>I agree that it's a good season. The only serious irritant, IMO, was the incessant
>>blathering (mostly by Stephen Fishbach) about the S31 game featuring strategic
>>elements that had never been seen before. These comments were unnecessary,
>>self-serving, and incorrect, and I am happy that we haven't heard much on this topic
>>since the longwinded Stephen's departure.
>
>But he's not incorrect and also not the only one to say that this season has
>been different. In which past season have we seen voting blocs used on
>nearly a weekly basis with different members each time and without
>repercussion to those that stray from their "main" alliance?
was an increased willingness to, and acceptance of, speaking with people outside
one's core group. There was also a very slight tolerance for betraying only
part of one's alliance, although betrayal was still generally met with betrayal,
as befits game theory predictions of optimum strategy.
Also different this season was that just about everybody was "playing hard,"
which seemed to mean they were almost always actively considering the
alternatives and counter-proposals. Even though a lot of the time people stayed
true to their alliances, there was the appearance of more activity and greater
fluidity.
The Horny Goat
Jan 2, 2016, 10:46:51 AM1/2/16
to
On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 02:28:31 GMT, use...@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>Have there been any seasons recently that you *did* enjoy? Does there have
>to be someone you find likeable, and/or want to root for, in order to enjoy
>watching?
>
A lot of us tend to be Dionne Warwick-ish about Survivor.
>Have there been any seasons recently that you *did* enjoy? Does there have
>to be someone you find likeable, and/or want to root for, in order to enjoy
>watching?
>
By that I mean the line from her song 'I'll Never Fall in Love Again"
which contains the line "So for at least .... until tomorrow I'll
never fall in love again"
I was rather bummed by the finale - I was rooting big time for Spencer
- but you know I'll be back.
Brian Smith
Jan 2, 2016, 4:21:14 PM1/2/16
to
"The Horny Goat" wrote in message
news:74sf8b12ocb97moct...@4ax.com...
Survivor lately has been very good as far as I'm concerned. This past season
was one of the best. If "Second Chance" didn't do it for you I doubt any
season will. And I say that given that none of the people I wanted to win
even made F3.
--
Brian
news:74sf8b12ocb97moct...@4ax.com...
was one of the best. If "Second Chance" didn't do it for you I doubt any
season will. And I say that given that none of the people I wanted to win
even made F3.
--
Brian
0 new messages