~CAM~
Sag- I need a move that was solely based from you as well not because of a minority or tyler i need something you made and created
Lol ok so Tyler was involved in all the moves I made before his vote off, but i dont think that means im just his sheep. I was the one who initially suggested he use the runestone on vincent. Tyler thought it might be better to wait till 6, but i knew vincent would be loyal to me. I’m the one who made an alliance of tyler/me/vincent possible. Tyler did not trust vincent at pretty much any point in the game, but i ensured they could vote together so that u could maintain trust with both of them. After the kim vote, I made sure alfie thought i was blindsided by the runestone and that I was not part of that plan so that alfie would trust me and not tyler. And I built my own relationships with alfie and vincent independent of tyler that ultimately allowed me to take him out. So yes i played a lot of this game with tyler, and yes tyler played a really awesome game, but i want to eliminate the perception that i was just a follower of him. We worked together to decide votes, we worked together to ensure they’d go our way. And in the end, I made sure i would never have to sit next to him at ftc.
I need three people that you think deserve to be there instead of you and give 3 reasonings why?
I’d say Kim, Tyler, and Brian deserve to be here at ftc instead of me.
Kim found idols real fast and no one really thought he had them unless they were told. Idk i find idol hunting extremely difficult and finding them with so few clues is astounding to me and i have so much respect for kim being able to find his idols. Kim also played a pretty strong social game. He built good connections with me, tyler, and alfie, and it seemed like he formed a connection with some of the minority as well. Lastly, Kim played a much more loyal game than I did. I don’t know for sure whether kim was planning to take me and tyler to final 4, but Kim was much more honest with me than I was with him, and he hadn’t made a move directly against me that I knew of. I have mad respect for people who play with loyalty, and my game was not loyal, so Kim definitely deserves my spot in that regard.
Tyler played a game I think everyone knows was strong. Tyler played a more flashy, bold game that I did, and managed to stay in a solid position for most of the game despite that. Tyler won a multiple immunity challenges, and managed to never be targeted as a challenge threat. Tyler had a much better social game than myself, which is obviously an integral part of a survivor game. Overall, Tyler did a lot of things that evidenced his strong game, and despite his threat level, wasn’t taken out till very late in the game.
Brian played an impressive game from what should have been an impossible position. Brian didn’t play as disloyal a game as I did, which, as I mentioned with Kim, is something I have a lot of respect for. Brian made just enough social connections with the right people to keep himself safe. I found it impressive that at multiple points in this game the vote was deflected off of Brian, namely by Alfie and Kim, despite him being in the clear minority. Additionally, he re-earned the trust of people who’d voted him off premerge. Brian also managed to do quite well in immunity challenges and still not be targeted, which is quite impressive since immunity threats are usually the first targets of a majority alliance. If I was in Brian’s position, I almost certainly could not have pulled off what he did, so I’d say he deserves my ftc spot.
Then I need you to tell me 3 people that don’t deserve there that doesn’t consist of someone already sitting there or that isn’t in jury also give me 3 reasons!
I guess the three jurors that, from my perspective, would be least deserving of ftc are Nate, Darrius, and Hoop.
Nate was too trusting of a lot of people. I think he told pretty much the entire merge tribe about Kim being the vote, which, considering Kim was on the swap tribe that made up a pretty large majority of the merge, didn’t make a whole lot of sense. Nate also didn’t have very strong social bonds within his alliances. Nate added me to a five person alliance at merge without forming much of a social connection, so I didn’t trust the alliance nor did i feel much desire to be a part of it. Nate accidentally made himself a pretty easy target at merge, so I would have to label him as one of the least deserving jurors to be at ftc.
Darrius made a few mistakes early on that I think doomed his game. Initially, I dont think Darrius utilized the premerge as much as he should have to make strong alliances. On nuchishi, it seemed that no one felt very tied to darrius, and that followed him to the merge, where he ended up pretty alone. Darrius also didn’t show up to a couple of early individual immunity challenges, which I think creates a perception that he wasn’t as active as other players this game. Lastly, Darrius targeted Kim too early. He thought Kim was untrustworthy due to a separate game, and that caused him to openly target kim very early in the merge. Doing so isolated him further from his swap tribemates, who mostly already felt closer to Kim, solidifying his place in the minority. Ultimately, there was a perception of Darrius’s game throughout the early merge that made him seem less hardworking and deserving compared to other players this season, which is likely why he received “most likely to become a failure” at touchy subjects.
Hoop I don’t think necessarily played a bad game at all, but because we played together for such a short time, I was unable to see him actively do anything to make himself more deserving of ftc than other jurors. Hoop’s investment in the alliance with nick tyler etc. ended up being a poor one, and though that wasnt necessarily so much his fault, it did end up costing him the game. Also other minority members (specifically Cam and Brian) were able to make relationships with people like Vincent Kim and Alfie that did or almost did save them. And though I’m sure hoop could have also made similar connections had he survived his vote, he ultimately wasnt given the opportunity to do so.
Lol i know it probably looks like a cop out to have picked the first 3 jurors, but that wasn’t necessarily intentional, though I think them being the first 3 jurors demonstrates that others may have done a better job insulating themselves and making relationships that could protect them. None of them played terrible games necessarily, but I can think of more instances where the other jury members played demonstrably impressive games, whereas these three had less opportunity to do so.