unduli clone wrote:Thanks unduli clone...
And Brazil Luvs Ami, hopefully you can serve as a watchdog next year! You did do really well last season.
| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Brazil Luvs Ami |
|||
unduli clone wrote:Thanks unduli clone... |
|||
Phoenix1269 |
|||
Brazil Luvs Ami wrote:you're welcome! and no worries... hopefully you will still be interested next season... and have the time to!!! |
|||
Phoenix1269 |
|||
|
welcome to edgic ghoost & WTFscissoring...
jump on in! |
|||
AndreSurvivor |
|||
|
I'm looking forward to edgic this season. Last season, things started falling apart for me at the end, and--editing-wise--I still can't justify how
Susie and Bob were #1 and #2 yet they were always ranked so low in my winner's chances. That season just f-ed with my head. Here's to a season that
makes sense.
|
|||
fat little fingers |
|||
|
Phoenix- "father figure", moi?! Oh, I get it. "Sounds old and gets no respect around here", yup,
that's Dad. Heh-heh...
Green Coffee: re, feedback on your guideline thoughts: Your layout pretty well covers all the bases. Seems we will have to have a bet and a side bet running, now. The "Type A" bet that can be laid down before or by the merge. And the "Type B" side bet that will only show itself well after the merge. Phoenix: I like the refinements to the guidelines that you've compiled. Those guidelines have never been completely satisfactory to anyone. We simply got as far as we could each season and stopped when exhaustion and brain-freeze set in. Thanks for the shot of fresh energy, you two! |
|||
craig |
|||
|
I'm willing to be alternate Visibility watchdog.
I have much respect for the chart but don't always follow it. I propose that all close calls on UTR vs INV be resolved in favour of UTR by watchdogs. Since getting an INV is supposed to carry so much negative weight, it should require a clear majority. Craig's Archive Opening Night: Case for Sierra (p.9) I think this season had a very weird opening, because we only had four players getting above a 2 in visibility (Taj did NOT seem like a three). Of those, Carolina's gone, Sandy was an OTT distraction, Ben was contradicted very early and made to look like a dick, and Sierra's the only one with winner potential. So Sierra is my first winner pick because she definitely fits into the first impressions theme and she wasn't FORCED on us by the edit as much as was possibleYes Kitty! We posted 2 minutes apart and came to the same conclusion. If Black is the complex tribe, the major characters are Coach and Sierra. And they relate to the same THEME, which is also in the title. Coach is about voting off the weak before they start. That's his gameplan, his idea fixee. Sierra gets defined as weak because she's sick. But she unselfishly chooses to work on the camp rather than seek the idol. She plays well socially, in contrast to Granny on the other team. Granny is a distraction that pimps the theme, but Sierra is the underdog that actually succeeds. Coach's most N comment is when he dismisses her efforts: "the strong must survive, Sierra is awesome, but she's gotta go." What a great story if twist baby Sierra could defeat Coach in the end. That would justify all the attention for the outcasts in ep.1. Editing likes to play up the winner being in jeopardy in ep.1. They did it with Chris, they did it with Parvati, they kinda did with Sierra even though she didn't go to TC. There was also a lot of talk about the temperature at the beginning. Sierra also fits with that, having a tenmperature of 102. :) Theme: First Impressions are Wrong (p.18) #1 Erinn, "Tall spikey haired model boy. Love him! He just seems like a good guy to have around!" The First Impression theme will tie into the wuinner somehow. I think the bias is to show First Impressions Being WRONG. For Sierra, that would mean proving Coach and her tribe wrong. She's clearly on the road to doing that already. Whether she goes all the way for the win is the question. In her favour is the fact that her and Sandy got a ridiculous amount of airtime, more than the simple requirements of the twist. (Bet we'd have ridiculous ep.1 visibility for Misty as the first exile if she'd won Panama.) For Erinn, her becoming a great social player would ironically prove Tyson wrong. Usually you wouldn't see a winner being called a bitch right off the bat, but in a season about the wrongness of first impressions? (Especially since Erin came across as a potentially good potential social player in pregame interviews - she doesn't annoy easily, and when she does she can hide it.) Likewise Erinn's comments on the hike - maybe in time the hairdresser turns out to be very much in her element. For Tyson, the idea that "he is a good guy to have around" is ultimately going to be the reverse of the truth. He''ll be the sneaky asshole who blindsides people and disses them in confessionals. Maybe he boots a naive Erinn and wins? Or maybe Erinn catches on and she becomes the Jenna\Sandra to his RobC\JFP. Time will tell, but I suspect the positive first impression of Tyson probably is a bad sign for him. Based on this analysis, Stephen would be my #1 pick from Red (behind Sierra, Erinn, and Tyson). Sandy thinks she'll be able to "lead him around real easy." But the NY Jew is a Yale grad, so I bet he's smart and leads others around including her. Stephen also gets to give his impression of JT, would probably means they allign and last awhile. Based on this, a Stephen\JT\Sandy faction is might succeed on Red. I pretty confident one of Sierra, Erinn, Tyson, or Stephen will win. Though nobody stands out like Yul or Parvati.
Last Edited By: craig
02/15/09 11:50 PM.
Edited 3 times.
|
|||
chaperone |
|||
|
I really enjoyed GreeCoffee's thoughtful theory. While in some ways it may feel like a hedged bet, I'm learning to enjoy the gray, a life among
tensions is an interesting life. I sure wish there was a mathematical formula to identify the winner, but alas, I tried that, and I didn't win. Oh well.
While new fatherhood is settling well into a great and regular routine, I'm heading into a wild few months for me, trying to crank out a masters thesis plus added responsibilities in our congregation will make render me probably an occasional contributor at best. But should we be graced with another season (I saw a casting deadline go by, so I only assume there will be a post-Tocantins season) I'll hopefully be on more available rhythms to contribute more. No doubt as I watch each episode edgic analytics will pervade my thoughts far too much. But if you want to bait me back here initiate some controversial theological discussions, I can't seem to bite my tongue with those. haha. I'm glad to see Phoenix is rockin' out the voting site. You're awesome. |
|||
fat little fingers |
|||
|
chaperone who? heh-heh...Yeah Phoenix is doing a great job, chap.
|
|||
goohst |
|||
|
Posts: 30 (02/11/09 3:10 PM) |
Name spelled wrong seething hate
|
||
unduli clone |
|||
craig wrote:In theory, I like that concept, but due to the people who don't recognize the INV1 rating and won't vote for it regardless of how "clear-cut" an INV1 is, this rule could easily result in UTR1's that were deserved INV1's. |
|||
Oowatanite |
|||
unduli clone wrote: I propose that all close calls on CP vs OTT be resolved in favour of CP by watchdogs. Since getting an OTT is supposed to carry so much negative weight, it should require a clear majority. I furthur propose that all close calls on CP vs MOR be resolved in favour of CP by watchdogs. Since getting an MOR is supposed to carry so much negative weight, it should require a clear majority. I furthur propose that all close calls on MOR vs UTR be resolved in favour of MOR by watchdogs. Since getting a UTR is supposed to carry so much negative weight, it should require a clear majority. P.S. Hi gohost !!
Last Edited By: Oowatanite
02/11/09 3:35 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
unduli clone |
|||
|
^ Don't be silly, Oo. INV1 are auto eliminations and the very nature of them seems as though they should never be Close Call'd... there is a slight difference! |
|||
BlakeB717 |
|||
|
Not sure what's going up but if I'm needed/wanted anywhere let me know. Otherwise I'll see you guys all after the premiere as usual!
|
|||
Apollo Italiano |
|||
Phoenix1269 wrote: Great notes on INV1, I completely agree that the rules on getting an INV1 should be much MUCH stricter, since earning an INV1 is basically a death warrant, and after last season, we shouldn't want to too easily write off anyone. The only problem I have is with what I bolded. Though I probably agreed with an INV1 for Corinne's episode four at the time, I really feel, now, she earned an UTR1. In just that episode how do we know that Corinne's comment was random? At the time, we had no idea that Corinne's story had nothing to do with being the only girl, and the comment could've been anything, ranging from irony to foreshadowing to character development. Sure, it ended up meaning nothing, but hindsight is 20/20. At the time, we didn't know it could've led to much more. Furthermore, as evidenced with Bob in episode four, comments at challenge sites and switches do hold significance that can point to the winner. Some could even argue Jason mispronouncing Parvati's name at the switch could've alone saved her from an INV1 (despite her getting SPV from Ozzy earlier that episode, and truse me, I'd hate to open that can of worms again). A perfect example of correctly giving a debated INV1 an UTR1 rating is when Marcus said no one knows what's going on with Susie. That was direct information and arguable character development that lead to Susie's big flip at Final 10. Sure, when Marcus stated that, we had no idea if it would lead to anything. But it did, an it was character development, so UTR1 was the right call. Anyways, I urge everyone to be more strict with INV1 ratings. Lately, winners have been getting less focus and are no longer Earls and Todds. By using INV1 sparingly, I feel, as a whole, we will not overlook contenders as easily. |
|||
fat little fingers |
|||
...Since getting an MOR is supposed to carry so much negative weight, it should require a clear majority. craig, where I'm more inclined to agree with you on INVs, the idea of individual UTR, MORs being positive or negative doesn't apply on an individual basis. Ditto CP for that matter. Someone who is constantly CP (think, Jonathan- Cook Islands) is more than likely a distraction role. Amassing CPs doesn't lead to a winner. Neither does receiving an individual MOR or UTR indicate anything on its own. But, yes, I agree that by definition INV is the kiss of death and should be tightly controlled. And, rather than make it a hard and fast rule, I would say that the weight should always be put on proving INV, rather than proving UTR. Any edit material that can be construed as giving weight to a character in an episode should remain UTR. |
|||
OnlyTheHunter |
|||
|
Tightly control INV? Fine. But use it when the presentation in the ep fits the definition. Bob was on no one's winner radar, but how many INV's did
he pile up? Use it wisely, but use it.
Michael |
|||
Kitty Pryde1 |
|||
Apollo Italiano wrote:It wasn't significant though. Corinne said she picked Susie to avoid being the only girl. That alone isn't significant, and was only shown because they HAD to show Corinne's pick. The important stuff was the talk of NOT picking G.C. |
|||
Oowatanite |
|||
fat little fingers wrote:Yeah Craig, smarten up, will ya ? Jeez. |
|||
unduli clone |
|||
Kitty Pryde1 wrote: I agree with Kitty. The argument of what's significant in the storyline gets us back into that trap of giving "bad" ratings to people who we've written off, and "good" ratings to people who we think are contenders. I don't think that a single sentence should boost someone to UTR1 based on how potentially significant it could be. Even if Corinne's comment about not wanting to be the only girl was minor foreshadowing as her being the last girl standing (which it wasn't), she should've still earned an INV1 for that episode because she was the faceless speaker of a line that was necessary in the pick-'em. If she had been highlighted as saying it, or if she was given some sort of throwback later in that episode or addressed in that episode in regards to the statement, then she would've deserved an UTR1; but it wouldn't be for the fact that she uttered a potentially significant line, it would be for the fact that she was being highlighted as the one to say the line. Do you kinda understand what I'm saying? It harks back to Alexis' EP01 confessionals that spelled out the theme of the entire season. Her confessionals had significance, but nothing relevant to her specific edit. Even though someone could say a single-sentence line that spells out huge significance for the season, or even that episode, if that player is not focused on as the person saying it, it does nothing to bump them from INV1 to UTR1. *breathes* Yeah, I'm getting ready for tomorrow. |
|||
fat little fingers |
|||
|
Sorry, Oo. All those multiple quote thingies confuse my little brain.
|
|||