I'm curious to what some of you would do if you were put into a situation that I was in a Frookies. Basically, there was an inactive in the game. Well, there was two, but the first one was voted out first. Now, I ended up getting HOH, and neither of the two people I nominated was the inactive. Why? Because a group of four (or technically three, as it turns out) people asked me for an alliance, and basically told me who to please nominate. They didn't say the inactive; they instead told me to nominate two threats that kept spamming and talking like crazy (and obviously were not a part of our alliance). As I nominated what they said, since I always listen to my alliance and keep them happy (as you should), they tried to tell me to do the inactive...too late.
So, two threats go up instead, and immediately I start to get viciously yelled at and attacked. Mainly by three people, but it's more than enough to become annoying. Apparently they think I'm stupid and that I didn't nominate the inactive because I simply don't know what I'm doing. They call me every foul, vulgar name under the sun, and honestly I mostly ignore it because it's just pitiful. And, ultimately, it paid off. I made the final two, and the four people of my alliance made the final five. So, basically, I knew exactly what I was doing. Not only was I listening to my alliance and showing that I'm trustworthy, but I also ignored peer pressure from the people NOT a part of my alliance and didn't nominate the inactive.
What I want to ask you guys, though, is what would YOU have done in that situation? Would you have succumbed to the desires of the people in the game and nominated the inactive to make the game go faster, despite risking not sending a threat home early? Or would you have done what I did and nominate two threats against your alliance and just deal with the long waiting time from the inactive? What are your thoughts?
Sparkinator Honestly, I simply can't play that way. Whenever I try to do what's best for me, all that happens is I upset people and I feel bad for it. I'm not a bad person, and I don't like to play cutthroat. So, I try and stay faithful to my alliance and never do anything against them. Sure, this means that THEY can sometimes hurt ME first, but that just proves that they play a type of game I don't respect. I don't play dirty. I'm loyal and honest right to the end. So, I always try and make my alliance happy before myself; you can't win a game by yourself. You need others by your side, ultimately.
I have seen people play it both ways, but me personally, unless there are 2 people that I KNOW would come after me personally, I would always nom the inactive against one of the "threats". I believe in common courtesy of moving a game along being the default...unless of course there are 2 big personal threats against ME (not necessarily my alliance)
You did the right thing. Why? Because inactives are useless and nonthreats. Take out the threats and take out who you want? People don't like it? Too fucking bad, sucks to suck.