An idea to improve Survivor so that weaklings dont comprise the finals

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
BobBob77		#1161	[-]
Posts: 1074 (09/26/08 6:36 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange wrote: You question my system now? What did I always say about the first voted out, without getting a chance to prove, or save, themselves? Michelle, probably the most interesting player and the strongest women, goes to tribal because her teammate quits, then gets kicked off because she was stuck on a team with weaklings, and the weakest weakling stays. She was rightfully pissed off. Can you hear that sounds? Its the ratings dropping from this piss-poor game. Who is the biggest weakling? Gillian? If I remember right she didn't last too long.
3Diesel		#1162	[-]
Posts: 8 (09/26/08 6:59 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	How interesting
Kitty Pryde1		#1163	[-]
Posts: 5612 (09/26/08 8:04 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I don't get why Artiee actually cares about Michelle being booted. Just going by his comments about Parvati/Amanda/Natalie last season, wouldn't Michelle qualify as a "bimb"? I'm sure if she made it far in the game, she would, but Artiee's just gotta use her as his example because he got utterly owned by Gillian being booted in the first episode.
Eclipse		#1164	[-]
Posts: 13 (09/26/08 8:44 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite
ArtieeLange		#1165	[-]
Posts: 229 (09/27/08 7:45 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty Pryde1 wrote: I don't get why Artiee actually cares about Michelle being booted Are you retarded? I will number it out to make it easier. Michelle being booted proves my entire point. 1) She was randomly put on "team" 2) she was one of the strongest on the team 3) she was forced to remain on the team 4) she had no way to save herself 5) the losers on her team lost BOTH challenges Under my system 1) The best players compete against each other to get into the top half, WAY more entertaining that watching losers lose. 2) Michelle and the strong get immunity, and they stay in the game 3) The weak players go to tribal, and they vote a loser off. it doesnt matter who it is, it is a LOSER. The only way you support the current system is if you feel sorry for LOSERS, because you in fact are a LOSER.
Kitty Pryde1		#1166	[-]
Posts: 5623 (09/27/08 9:16 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Okay. Then if Michelle was a good, strong player, Parvati/Amanda/Natalie were good, strong players and Cirie was a great strategic player, and thus the endgame of Micronesia was awesome, just like Fiji's, hence, no problem with those two seasons. Oh wait, I forgot that you're a sexist pig, so Micronesia could never have a good ending for you, and you're a racist fucker, so Fiji could never be considered a good season for you.
ArtieeLange1		#1167	[-]
Posts: 148 (09/27/08 10:23 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty Pryde1 wrote: if Michelle was a good, strong player Not "if", she was. She was second on her team up the hill, and never gave up during the immunity challenge. You seem to think a system works when it only fails sometimes. The current system fails because of strong players like Michelle getting voted off, just like I said, just like I've been saying - the first voted off has no chance. Just because Gillian also got voted out doesn't mean the current system does not fail. <---- read 21 times My system is foolproof, fool, and if you bothered to stick to one subject, you'd be forced to admit that.
Kitty Pryde1		#1168	[-]
Posts: 5626 (09/27/08 10:36 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	If you looked at the show as a whole, rather than citing anomalous examples like Michelle getting booted (especially after you hated the "bimbs" from last season, which Michelle would definitely fit in with), you'd see that it's not as bad as you think it is. The current system rewards intelligence and social skills along with teamwork, which Michelle didn't have. Your system just paves the way for asshole challenge whores like Ozzy and Terry to treat people like crap and act like they're gods among men. Seriously, if you want to see the players compete and do NOTHING else, then watch Amazing Race. New seasons starts on Sunday. But the vast majority of Survivor fans like the system the way it is. Hence, thirteen million viewers for the season premiere. Or better yet, watch one of the countless football games that's on down that we're in the fall. Hell, even in sports, people would rather see underdogs (Giants) overtake powerhouses (Patriots). In short, you're a tool and a hypocrite who lumps people into one category when they get far and a completely different category when they fall early (Michelle and Amanda are the same person, only Amanda can fake being nice to people). You have apparently no understanding of human psychology if you think people want to see some powerhouse succeed EVERY time. It's human nature to love underdogs, and we love seeing people make it far despite being weak. The only reason Survivor loses ratings is because people just don't like the casting, not because weak players keep making it far. Hence why China booted over Fiji's finale.
ArtieeLange1		#1169	[-]
Posts: 149 (09/27/08 12:09 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty Pryde1 wrote: If you looked at the show as a whole, rather than citing anomalous examples like Michelle getting booted In other words, ignore the examples about the current system which proves it fails, and then therefore it doesn't fail? Michelle getting booted is the reason the current system fails, she was nothing more than a victim of bad luck, luck that the current system introduces by "rock paper scissors", and "teams". Under my system, Michelle would still be around, to compete, and TWO losers would have been voted off. My system is foolproof, fool, and not one post in over 1000 have refuted that statement. All you do is post examples of where the current system does not fail, you actually think that proves something.
Kitty Pryde1		#1170	[-]
Posts: 5631 (09/27/08 2:07 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	No, under your system, instead of Gillian being booted, we would've lost Michelle and another of the younger girls. The weak like Gillian are PROTECTED under your system.
Kitty Pryde1		#1171	[-]
Posts: 5632 (09/27/08 2:21 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I just went back and watched the first challenge again, because it was BASICALLY the type of thing that could only really be done solo. Sure, people could help their team. But we got a good enough feel for who would've been the top 9. The people that got up to the top first and the people that were pushing the other players to the top. So as a result, under your system, the first challenge would be won by...Marcus, GC, Michelle, Kelly, Dan, Matty, Jacquie, Corinne, Bob. As a result, the bottom nine going to tribal council would've been: Ace, Charlie, Crystal, Gillian, Ken, Paloma, Randy, Sugar, Susie. Of those nine, under your system, it makes absolutely no sense to boot the weakest (Charlie, Gillian, Ken, Paloma, Randy, Sugar, Susie), which would mean that the final decision would come down to Ace and Crystal, the two strong players to lose. As a result, even though both were extremely strong in the very next challenge, one would be voted out because there is no benefit to keeping them in the game. It would probably be Ace due to Crystal doing poorly on the hill climb. So your system doesn't weed out the weak. It weeds out the strong with bad luck. The current system works perfectly in terms of weeding out the weak, or, in Michelle's case, weeding out the players who piss off the rest of the tribe.
TimmyTAR		#1172	[-]
Posts: 767 (09/27/08 4:14 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty, I respect you tremendously for refuting his argument time and time again and proving his theory wrong everysingle time. However, I will have to ask you to stop. Dumbass will never listen to anyone that argues with him, because even though he is wrong, he will argue, "I'm right because I'm right." Artie, you claim that Michelle was screwed because if your system was employed, then she wouldn't have gotten the boot. However, you said so yourself that people who get onto the losing tribe and get voted off lost twice, proving that they were weak and their boot was deserved. While Michelle was kind of a strong competitor, her negative attitude made her strength be cancelled out. Thus, when she and her tribe lost, she lost again with her boot, making her a loser. Please, Artie. Whenever you try to defend your dumb idea when someone posts, don't just restate your idea over and over again, thinking you're going to bludgeon our brains in until we "get" it. It's not going to work, because unlike you, we have I.Q's above 50. Now, Kitty, take your amazingly awesome Renny avatar and do not feed the troll anymore. Or we can spam this thread with picture of Marcus' peen, which I bet Artie would appreciate since he loves strong alpha males.
BobBob77		#1173	[-]
Posts: 1093 (09/27/08 4:20 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I agree, you have done great but I think it is time to stop bumping the thread with our posts and let it die.
Kitty Pryde1		#1174	[-]
Posts: 5643 (09/27/08 4:44 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Honestly, I only respond because I enjoy the distraction it provides and I like typing semi-lengthy posts. Plus, Artiee makes me feel like I'm less of a loser by comparison to him.
mfrimley		#1175	[-]
Posts: 869 (09/27/08 4:53 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	So you admit you're a loser?
4 Horsemen		#1176	[-]
Posts: 46 (09/27/08 6:07 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Burn
Kitty Pryde1		#1177	[-]
Posts: 5648 (09/27/08 7:20 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I admit I have low self-esteem.
ArtieeLange1		#1178	[-]
Posts: 150 (09/27/08 7:29 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty Pryde1 wrote: under your system, the first challenge would be won by...Marcus, GC, Michelle, Kelly, Dan, Matty, Jacquie, Corinne, Bob. As a result, the bottom nine going to tribal council would've been: Ace, Charlie, Crystal, Gillian, Ken, Paloma, Randy, Sugar, Susie. Of those nine, under your system, it makes absolutely no sense to boot the weakest You seem to think you're the judge of "weakest". The reality is, your opinion is irrelevant. You just described a game, my game, that determines who the weakest half are. Of those weaklings, the game will then decide who the weakest is, by voting them out. Foolproof. And Michelle stays, because she busted her ass to get to the top half. She earned her right to outplay and outlast, get it yet?
Delusional		#1179	[-]
Posts: 32 (09/27/08 7:49 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	True they can vote for whoever they want in the bottom half. BUT, since theres only one reason to vote people, they will vote the biggest challenge threat, which 90% of the time would be the fittest, since its the most obvious aspect. Why would that be the only reason? Since Tribes are supposed to be continously changing depending on the challenges, you dont care who is the most annoying, the least loyal, the hard workers, or any of those other reasons people ussually vote. You just need to get rid off those stronger than you to make your way to the top half. Because if you keep the people that are stronger than you, you will keep staying in the bottom half and on continous jeopardy of being voted out.
Kitty Pryde1		#1180	[-]
Posts: 5651 (09/27/08 8:03 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange1 wrote: Kitty Pryde1 wrote: under your system, the first challenge would be won by...Marcus, GC, Michelle, Kelly, Dan, Matty, Jacquie, Corinne, Bob. As a result, the bottom nine going to tribal council would've been: Ace, Charlie, Crystal, Gillian, Ken, Paloma, Randy, Sugar, Susie. Of those nine, under your system, it makes absolutely no sense to boot the weakest You seem to think you're the judge of "weakest". The reality is, your opinion is irrelevant. You just described a game, my game, that determines who the weakest half are. Of those weaklings, the game will then decide who the weakest is, by voting them out. Foolproof. And Michelle stays, because she busted her ass to get to the top half. She earned her right to outplay and outlast, get it yet? Your system rewards people with shitty social skills (ie. yourself) who, if they were ever to fall into the bottom group, would have an extremely high probability of getting voted out because of how much they would piss people off. Under the current system, you need to be strong, smart, and social to survive, not just strong. That's what makes Survivor great.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

An idea to improve Survivor so that weaklings dont comprise the finals

Quick Reply