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

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
ArtieeLange1		#701	[-]
Posts: 116 (07/01/08 6:58 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	SFC wrote: I'm sure the majority of viewers would take a Final 4 interesting characters, rather than 4 Boring Immunity whores. Unlike what your mindset is Survivor isn't about the Challenges. Your distorted thinking is what gave us the "characters" Kathy and Chet. Your distorted thinking fails. The game is called "Survivor", it is about Surviving, Outplay, Outwit, Outlast. Which "character" do you find so interesting, who do you relate to? Are you a lil gay elf? A sloppy hippo? A pea-brained bim?
doc		#702	[-]
Posts: 160 (07/01/08 7:09 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	So you really think Christina was the 2nd best chef? That's little Gordon doing the thinking.
CatLurvesDorothy		#703	[-]
Posts: 219 (07/01/08 8:23 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Two questions for you. You state that the stronger players are taken out of the game pre-merge by the weaker players. Where exactly did Ozzy, Jason, and Eric leave this season? Where did Chet and Kathy leave this season? kthxbai Last Edited By: CatLurvesDorothy 07/01/08 10:20 PM. Edited 1 times.
getting real		#704	[-]
Posts: 1227 (07/01/08 9:20 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Talkers generally become talkers because they fail at actually doing, and the reason they fail is because they are weak-willed. Interesting attempt to shake things up but your basic premise fails because you are introducing your own value judgements as to what constitutes a good player. You are trying to introduce "deservingness" into a final outcome where deservingness is itself determined by the people who make it to the end. By definition, the people who make it to the end deserve to be there, by whatever means they used to get there. In their own way, they out-witted and out-played. Certainly, they outlasted. Wishing that a different type of people made it to the finals merely reflects your own value judgements and your approval of people with similar characterstics to yours.
SFC		#705	[-]
Posts: 386 (07/01/08 9:56 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange1 wrote: Which "character" do you find so interesting, who do you relate to? Are you a lil gay elf? A sloppy hippo? A pea-brained bim? I tend to relate to the type that realizes a crappy idea when they see one You on the other hand relate to Doctor Sean, the type that thinks they have a ground breaking idea, but everyone else with a brain knows it's idiotic, and you just can't grasp the fact that their idea fails.
ArtieeLange1		#706	[-]
Posts: 117 (07/02/08 12:49 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	getting real wrote: Interesting attempt to shake things up but your basic premise fails because you are introducing your own value judgements as to what constitutes a good player. You are trying to introduce "deservingness" into a final outcome where deservingness is itself determined by the people who make it to the end. By definition, the people who make it to the end deserve to be there, by whatever means they used to get there. In their own way, they out-witted and out-played. Certainly, they outlasted. Wishing that a different type of people made it to the finals merely reflects your own value judgements and your approval of people with similar characterstics to yours. You're confusing my comments about casting to my idea for the game. General consensus is casting sucks because the players suck, hopefully they are taking steps to resolve this (like lowering the age from 21 to 18). The outcome of the current game is determined by 1) losers bonding during the team-segment, and 2) then the individual challenges. The latter is always fair because it gives all the players an equal chance. The problem is that the former doesn't. Better players are penalized by a) being stuck on a loser team and b) being voted off by mobbed up losers, and the worse players are rewarded by the same aspects. Other shows, that don't lose a million viewers per season, have a clear definition of "deservedness". From Jeopardy to AI, Ultimate Fighter, Hells Kitchen, The Mole, etc. Winners of Survivor? Winners of Survivor can't even build a fuckin fire. It's a joke. The standards for both getting on the show, surviving on the show, and winning the show need to be raised. It's not 2000 anymore.
cardswin5		#707	[-]
Posts: 600 (07/02/08 12:59 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	All those shows you mentioned aren't even close to survivor. I mean a trivia competition, cooking show, and fucking American Idol you can't compare those to survivor. Also in case you weren't aware all those shows are losing viewers and lowering ratings. TV ratings are lower in general all across the board ever since the writers strike.
getting real		#708	[-]
Posts: 1228 (07/02/08 1:15 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Winners of Survivor? Winners of Survivor can't even build a fuckin fire. I think you've misunderstood what it is Survivors need to survive. It's not nature, or the elements... It's each other. Other than deprivation adding adding a sharper edge to people's behavior, survival in this game is not far removed from the game of life. How many people do you see in real life who are successful because they're the strongest or the most intelligent? Not as many as those who can best juggle their relationships with others. Survivor, in this game as well as in life, is about surviving relationships. The rest, my friend, are mere bagatelles.
goose		#709	[-]
Posts: 122 (07/02/08 8:16 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	getting real wrote: Winners of Survivor? Winners of Survivor can't even build a fuckin fire. I think you've misunderstood what it is Survivors need to survive. It's not nature, or the elements... It's each other. Other than deprivation adding adding a sharper edge to people's behavior, survival in this game is not far removed from the game of life. How many people do you see in real life who are successful because they're the strongest or the most intelligent? Not as many as those who can best juggle their relationships with others. Survivor, in this game as well as in life, is about surviving relationships. The rest, my friend, are mere bagatelles. GR has hit the nail on the head. "Sole Survivor" is merely the person who has outwitted, outplayed and outlasted the others. Not the one who out-fire-builted. I believe that whoever makes it to the final 2 actually deserves to be in the final 2, whether that's by brawn, brain or coattail. Now, please let me go look up bagatelles.
ArtieeLange1		#710	[-]
Posts: 118 (07/02/08 8:44 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	getting real wrote: Winners of Survivor? Winners of Survivor can't even build a fuckin fire. I think you've misunderstood what it is Survivors need to survive. It's not nature, or the elements... It's each other. Look Mr. Rogers, you're describing "Big Brother"...or "The Bachelor". Thats Parvatis game, the bimbos game, and it appears to be your game as well. If Courtney was on season 1, she probably would have died of starvation as her body fed off itself. As the game got weak, the players got weak, and the only ones who still think it works? Weak viewers.
tubecam		#711	[-]
Posts: 130 (07/02/08 10:14 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange1 wrote: The game is called "Survivor", it is about Surviving, Outplay, Outwit, Outlast. Usually heavily Muscled dudes have a hard time retaining enough water to last long is real survival situations Which "character" do you find so interesting, who do you relate to? Are you a lil gay elf? A sloppy hippo? A pea-brained bim? Yeah, I relate to Todd, I hang out with several guys who Todd would fit right in with. Cerie, yeah I would hang out with her, she seems to be a cool chick. I do not find any thing that would be common ground with truckwaffle. You dont understand the concept, you should not ever turn off the UFC channel. And the hot guy should always win
getting real		#712	[-]
Posts: 1229 (07/02/08 11:34 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange1 wrote: As the game got weak, the players got weak, and the only ones who still think it works? Weak viewers.
tubecam		#713	[-]
Posts: 131 (07/02/08 11:47 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	^^ Weak viewers? ^^ I would challenge Artie to an arm wrestling match anyday plus Sunday. And, the hot guys should always win
ArtieeLange1		#714	[-]
Posts: 119 (07/02/08 10:32 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	tubecam wrote: I would challenge Artie to an arm wrestling match Come to NYC, I would snap your arm off, beat you up with your own arm, and then turn to the crowd of onlookers "In real life, there are clear winners, and clear losers (here I would point at you, using your own arm). In "Survivor", that loser (points to the sobbing, bloody mess that is you) could bring along another group of people, resulting in an unfair competition n the 'team' portion of the game. That weakling (points) could outlast me. Are there any questions?" Bystander: "Don't the individual challenges represent fair competition, like we just witnessed here?" Me: "Yes, the problem is those who make it there do so by the skewed "team" segment. It should be eliminated or adjusted" Crowd, looking at you: "We understand and agree."
doc		#715	[-]
Posts: 166 (07/02/08 11:07 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Ya, we understand you're a retard, and agree your idea sux. Notice you're not talking about HK anymore. Could it be because in the F2 you have a woman who only get a job in McDonalds, shooting down your idea how fair their system is, and is what Survivor needs.
getting real		#716	[-]
Posts: 1230 (07/03/08 2:57 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Come to NYC, I would snap your arm off, beat you up with your own arm, and then turn to the crowd of onlookers "In real life, there are clear winners, and clear losers (here I would point at you, using your own arm). In "Survivor", that loser (points to the sobbing, bloody mess that is you) could bring along another group of people, resulting in an unfair competition n the 'team' portion of the game. That weakling (points) could outlast me. Are there any questions? Just one. When do you get out of prison?
tubecam		#717	[-]
Posts: 133 (07/03/08 8:33 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	ArtieeLange1 wrote: Come to NYC, I would snap your arm off, beat you up with your own arm, and then turn to the crowd of onlookers Lucky coincidence, I live in NYC. I will be sure to have the rest of my rugby team be amoung the onlooking crowd, as I am arm wrestling champ on my rugby club. The hot guys should win
Kitty Pryde1		#718	[-]
Posts: 5003 (07/03/08 1:18 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Artiee, either give examples of your idea or shut the fuck up. Oh right, you can't, because in order to continue your facade of being fair to all players, you insist that there will be challenges that ANYONE can win. Meanwhile, you continually state that someone like Chet would always go home early under your rules. Given how weak you consider Chet, you have to admit that he more than likely would never win a challenge. And under your system, someone who sucks at challenges is good to have around, because it means one less person to compete against, and thus no one in their right mind would vote against Chet under any circumstances. The only way you'd take him out of the game is if he got injured again.
Green Coffee		#719	[-]
Posts: 82 (07/03/08 2:31 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Keep on feeding the troll. Fucking idiots.
ArtieeLange1		#720	[-]
Posts: 120 (07/03/08 7:58 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Kitty Pryde1 wrote: . Given how weak you consider Chet, you have to admit that he more than likely would never win a challenge. He doesn't have to win, dummy. He only has to get into the top half.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

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

Quick Reply