The Syndicate

Golden wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

Golden wrote:inh, I think people will vote for whatever game they like in the end. This is season one of Syndicate Survivor - it has to evolve it's own way, not as though it's part of the show continuity. It will be interesting to see what that means if scotty brings it back for season 2 (which I hope he does).

I agree that's probably what will happen- people voting for who they like/didn't screw them over, but I personally don't think that's what should happen, and will make my opinion clear on the subject to the degree I am capable of changing others minds.

I kind of like that for all we know Epi is picking based on who drafts the best fantasy sports team. That's season 1 thinking right there!

We can all agree that Epi is basically the Greg Buis of this season.

This analogy would make Elo the Colleen Haskell, which works too.

LoRab wrote:I fondly remember watching that episode. Oh, Sue.

And my opinion of whether Opt should win is no more personal than her vote for me yesterday.

Opt has stated multiple times that the vote wasn't personal. Do you disagree?

Golden wrote:inh, I think people will vote for whatever game they like in the end. This is season one of Syndicate Survivor - it has to evolve it's own way, not as though it's part of the show continuity. It will be interesting to see what that means if scotty brings it back for season 2 (which I hope he does).

I agree that's probably what will happen- people voting for who they like/didn't screw them over, but I personally don't think that's what should happen, and will make my opinion clear on the subject to the degree I am capable of changing others minds.

Are you saying that I didn't make an actual argument as to why we shouldn't discredit Opt's accomplishments?

If so, I think that's a little ridiculous.

The only significant thing Sorsha can say for her game is "behind the scenes stuff," which seeing as I never had BTSC with Sorsha, is completely irrelevant to me.

People are desperate to draw a forced equivalency by dragging down Opt with fairly pedestrian stuff like "she had a role advantage" and "she didn't attribute any of her success to luck, therefore hypocrite."

I mean, come on. It feels almost personal to me on a level that none of the in-game backstabbing did.

And the snakes/rats thing is a reference to the FTC in the first season of Survivor, which came down to Richard, a savvy conniving manipulator, and Kelly, a well-liked figure who floated from alliance to alliance.

something something don't discredit opt's accomplishments something something let the snake eat the rat

Voted Opt.

I legitimately forgot Sorsha was playing for long stretches of the game.

If inoffensiveness is what defines integrity, sure, I guess Sorsha qualifies.

S~V~S wrote:Wow, she certainly owned the "biggest scumbag=best player" group right there, lol.

Once again, when we say "scumbag," we don't mean "scumbag in real life."

We mean the person who played the hardest.

If you respect someone who lies to you in a game of mafia, you should be able to respect someone who lies to you in a game of Survivor.

"Cleanest" is a subjective nonsense term.

Everybody gets dirty in Survivor. If you get to the end, and you haven't betrayed anyone or made anyone else upset, then you haven't done anything to get there.

To put it in other terms, to be upset about backstabbing and betrayal in Survivor is like being upset about being NK'd by the mafia. It's gonna happen, and acting high and mighty about it is just bad sportsmanship, IMO.

Y'all did DH real dirty, then you went around insulting him after he got voted out, and acted like you were doing me a favor by voting out my closest ally. And I still had to suck it up, and pretend like I wanted to work with you and Quin after the merge. That's Survivor.

Obviously, people are able to have their own opinions.

And I'm able to have my opinions about their opinions.

Jurors bringing their own personal feelings into the vote, and not voting for the better players simply because they got outplayed by them is a common problem in the show too.

I commend deception of every stripe.

This is Survivor, peeps.

If Lorab took being poisoned less personally, the game would be radically different.

something something russell hantz something something the game is flaaaaawed

When I hear that a certain contestant is lying, backstabbing, and manipulating others to their benefit, it only makes me want to vote for them to win.

I hope that people are able to look at this decision objectively instead of deciding purely based on "who was I aligned with/who screwed me over".

I kinda think that's tacky.

Golden's a friggin' lawyer. If anyone can present a case to a jury, he can.

I realize it was easy to vote me out to "get rid of the sickness," but was there anything I could do to protect myself from that?

Come clean in the thread, promise not to poison anyone else, apologize to Lorab, beg for forgiveness, something like that?

Frankly, I feel like my role was a trap. Every move I made just pissed someone off.

I poisoned Lorab based on pre-merge nonsense, and she held a useless grudge against me for that, and lynched me for it, despite the fact that I wasn't targeting her at all. In fact, I was going to try and work with her. I guess she felt differently.

S~V~S wrote:Golden really likes her alot and he told people he wants her to win. I was one of them. Sorsha told me he said that as well.

He wants her to stay around and play Mafia, maybe he thinks if she wins she will.

And I would not have turned on Golden, silly fool that I am, lol. At that stage I had no idea how treacherous he actually was.

Golden is a goddamn expert on Survivor. The extremely well-written essays he's written on the subject prove it.

I had BTSC with him Day 7. He spun me a yarn about how he was about to flip on you, Faraday, and Quin, and how he needed me to support him through that. He misled me completely, and the vote against me was a total shock.

The fact that you didn't know how treacherous he was until he blindsided you out of the game, proves how much deflection he's been doing.

It's common Survivor strategy for a power player to surround themselves with people who are "weaker strategic players," and people who have just pissed others off.

If Golden, Opt, and Lorab are sitting in the final 3, it's because Golden wanted that to be the Final 3.

S~V~S wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:

DFaraday wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:If Golden or SVS makes it to the end despite transparently being the two biggest threats in the game, it'd be pretty hard for me to give the win to anyone else.

Opt might turn out to be the biggest threat the way these immunity challenges are going.

Nah. Golden has Opt wrapped around his finger.

I think it's the other way around.

That doesn't jive at all with any interaction I've had with either of them.

Opt hasn't made a single game-based move, IMO.

He's Golden's goat, and is going to get dragged to the end.

Lorab has made big moves, but for idiotic reasons. She's needlessly angered people when she didn't have to. With me, with Speed, and with Faraday.

You can vote for the winner on whatever basis you choose, SVS, but I'm voting for who I think played the best game. Not "who do I like," or "who didn't screw me over," but who played the best objective game. So far, Golden is by far the frontrunner.

Also, if Lorab and company didn't vote me out D7, and me and Speedchuck approached you + Quin about taking out Golden D8, would you have been open to that?

DFaraday wrote:

insertnamehere wrote:If Golden or SVS makes it to the end despite transparently being the two biggest threats in the game, it'd be pretty hard for me to give the win to anyone else.

Opt might turn out to be the biggest threat the way these immunity challenges are going.

Nah. Golden has Opt wrapped around his finger.

If Golden or SVS makes it to the end despite transparently being the two biggest threats in the game, it'd be pretty hard for me to give the win to anyone else.