Lurker > Inviso

Mewtwo59 posted...

I don't know how you can call Caramoan's reunion the most offensive after the reunions we've had the last 2 seasons.

Jeff spoke to the entire group comprising the final episode, and the pre-merge boots at least got to be on-stage.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Why would I want to watch a group of chill friends dominate though? Angela is obnoxiously boring, Kaycee is boring, Brett is a douche, Rachel is boring. It's pretty much Tyler (who is far too in-control at the moment, which is annoying to watch live), and Winston's paranoia that are worth watching from L6. I just enjoy watching the Fouttes far more at the moment as dynamic personalities.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Kuja
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Celes
Zidane
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

I meant what Lasa said. The historical portrayal homosexual acts as "icky and gross and wrong" (even if unintentionally) is what makes OpEds and comedy bits like that SEEMS homophobic.

They're not abnormal by definition. I've had this argument with Smuffin before. If one believes homosexuality is inherently abnormal, then one would subsequently have to believe redheadedness or subcribing to the Jewish faith to also be abnormal, as those traits cover a smaller percentage of the global population than homosexuality does.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

One of the other major problems with Cambodia (although I'll fully admit that this was brewing for several seasons prior, and it's one of the few things I don't think production is entirely to blame for) is how strategy-focused it is. That's another reason why I think Cambodia is the season that utterly BROKE Survivor. It's kind of a two-pronged thing: one is the fans' fault I think, but the other part is the editors' fault.

First, I know people are tired of me bringing gender into stuff all the time, but I think that, whether organically or as a result of the producers creating a Pavlovian reaction, the fanbase has developed very specific tastes as to what they like. And first and foremost, that taste leans towards a preference for male winners. Seriously, I would say that, despite having some really strong female strategists in Sarah Lacina, Natalie Anderson, Denise Stapley, and Kim Spradlin, the last time the fans actually liked and rooted for a female winner (and subsequently loved the season she won) was Sandra in HvV. And even then, I doubt she would've received that same praise if that win didn't come with the moniker of "first two-time champion". Which means prior to Sandra, you have to go back to PARVATI for an example of a fan-favorite female winner...and that's honestly about it. Maybe Tina as the first one, but female winners have a poor record of gaining respect overall.

And what I believe fans like is: a strategically dominant male winner, BUT they also want to have SOME shake-ups just for the sake of shake-ups, so you don't get a universally derided season like Redemption Island. Cagayan is a perfect example of this. I think MvGX is given a pass because even though David lost, he was that strategically dominant player (and the producers added the fire-making tiebreaker soon after his lost). Even Ghost Island, the second that tie vote came around, a bunch of apologists came out of the woodwork to say that the season wasn't THAT bad (because the tie was unexpected.)

Cambodia is the culmination of this attitude though, 'cause Jeremy pretty much runs the season, uncontested until the final 6. There are some shake-ups that don't affect his dominance at all (Kelley's idol, the Stephen blindside, the final six tribal council), but they give a faux air of unpredictability. And since this and Cagayan are so beloved, the producers naturally want to give the fans more winners like Jeremy and Tony (dominant alpha males that weathered brief shake-ups).

Less fan-related though is the OTHER strategy-related aspect of Cambodia: the fact that the editors are lazy. I feel like Cambodia was the season that taught the editors: "Hey, you know what would be easier than crafting a season-long narrative with nuance and subtlety? Just make each episode a stand-alone arc. Who cares about the interpersonal dynamics and reasoning as to WHY the players are choosing to make decisions when they do? The fans will LOVE it if the episode ends in a blindside, even if you only started building Kelly Wiglesworth as this massive social threat in the past twenty minutes." I feel like it IS easier for the editors to just half-ass things, and they can half-ass things while maintaining an interesting show for the fans if the players are just doing random strategy for the sake of strategy every episode. And that mindset started moreso in Cambodia than anywhere else. Then we get a season like Ghost Island (or Game Changers), and the editors have no idea why it was so poorly-received, because they're just doing the same shit fans were totally okay with in Cambodia.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

KujikawaRising posted...

Wentworth is awesome. FACT.

Wentworth is awesome as an underdog in opposition to a dominant alliance, in a season that doesn't have a whole bunch of personality otherwise. As an individual character, I don't know how much I'd enjoy her outside of Cambodia.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Jeremy playing for Val felt as relevant and focused upon as Dom playing for his family. In that it was occasionally there to humanize him as a winner, but ultimately was overshadowed by the edit's focus on strategy strategy strategy.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i just don't get why it's necessarily "gay bashing," i guess.

if there's a cartoon about trump and merkel kissing, is it "straight bashing"?

I think it's the historical difference in how heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships are viewed in society. Heterosexual relationships are historically "normal", while homosexual relationships are historically "abnormal", so making a political cartoon about two male leaders in a relationship carries more of a connotation of "look how weird and deviant this is" that Trump x Merkel wouldn't have.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

I think that it's unintentionally homophobic. If Germany was the one that hacked our election and Trump was going out of his way to praise how Angela Merkel was running her country well, while outright refusing to offer ANY criticism on the negative things Germany was doing, then similar opinion pieces would be leveled towards Trump x Merkel. It just happens that Putin, like a large percentage of world leaders (particularly dictators throughout history) is male, so the joke appears to be easy gay bashing, when the gay bashing (while still terrible) is just coincidental.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Game Changers and HHH both had casts playing to win. Even Troyzan thought he still had a chance as late as the final seven. I don't disagree with MOST of your problems with modern seasons...but I think those flaws you mention existed in Cambodia and MvGX, yet neither season gets nearly the same level of hatred. Just looking at your list from the previous page:

1. Wentworth clearly having fun the entire time by being highly strategy-focused and really only having the one great moment where she blindsided savage, but I was willing to root for her because the other side was so robotic in their gameplay.

2. Keith Nale's "You Call, We'll Haul" mostly ignored in the season aside from two memorable moments. He went from huge fan favorite in SJDS to irrelevant footnote despite playing the exact same game both times and making a similar placement both times.

3. Jeremy playing for his family everyone plays for their family. Domenick played for his family. Having a person talk about this occasionally doesn't automatically make them interesting.

4. Spencer's semi-cheesy "relationship building" story arc Absolutely the worst part of the entire season. It was completely fake, given the 10-0-0 blowout, and it only served to make Spencer look like a robot.

5. Chaos Kass actually improving her social game by leaps and bounds I'll agree with this, but then she got booted at the merge for actually bothering to try and improve her position in the game.

6. Fishbach claiming his "Know-It-All" status and trying to play to live up to it I'll agree with this as well, but I think what made Stephen work for me in Cambodia (my favorite character of the season) was not just trying to prove his skills, but being so traumatized by how he lost Tocantins that he overplayed trying to take out Cambodia's "J.T." while simultaneously being a complete trainwreck, physically.

7. Varner's attempts to make deals with everybody and try to play the modern Survivor game No. Just straight-up no. Varner has always been the SAME exact person in Survivor: he's a guy who fancies himself the second-coming of Richard Hatch, and that's what we got in Cambodia, to the possible detriment of the season. I liked Varner more in GAME CHANGERS, up until his delusional dickbaggery at the reunion.

8. Terry Deitz being pulled from the game like that. Meh.

9. Hell, even Kimmi. Wild, crazy character gets brought back and edited into a nothing background character until she tries to make a move and gets booted as a result.

10. Abi-Maria She was the biggest character of the first four episodes, behaving erratically and controlling a lot of the game, but the second the editors could do so, they sent her to the background and made the story revolve around sturdier, more controlled characters. Woo's boot painted her as invisible despite her relationship with Woo being a major plot point up until that episode.

I feel like, again, people were invested in the cast pre-season, so they feel more apt to build them up as bigger than they really WERE in reality.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

KujikawaRising posted...

Cambodia...both.

This post is what I tend to mean when I say Cambodia ruined the franchise (but Andy's saying it in a much less antagonistic fashion than I do, admittedly.) I personally dislike Cambodia for a variety of reasons, but it's beloved by the fanbase as a whole for one reason or another. And I think that the producers saw Cambodia's popularity and took lessons from that without necessarily understanding WHY Cambodia worked for most people. That's why we have seasons like Game Changers which--and I will defend this statement to the death, because it's true--followed the same beats and plot structure as Cambodia, yet was far more poorly-received.

To me, I think Cambodia started from a strong position with the fanbase that, barring a generic Pagonging, would've been well-received no matter what. The whole lead-up was destined to be popular. You provide a list of players and let the fans personally choose the cast (from the group of players pre-selected by the producers)? That gets fans invested because they have players they're guaranteed to root for, and even the least popular choices can at least be shrugged off by saying "well at least it wasn't *insert person who got even FEWER fan votes*". That's the MAIN difference between Cambodia are less popular modern seasons like Game Changers and Ghost Island: the fans had DIRECT input on the casting (and the producers knew from vote counts EXACTLY who was popular, and thus who to give more screen time to, thus amplifying the fans' satisfaction.)

I think the casting in Cambodia allowed the producers to get away with a lot more than they could in Game Changers and HHH and Ghost Island (and MvGX in my opinion, but people love that season for some reason), and fans were willing to overlook a lot of things that would later become glaring flaws in seasons with less fan investment. The return of oversized casts, a bloated post-merge, six-person finale, twists and idols being more heavy-handed to force interesting game play rather than allowing for more organic game play. And I genuinely don't think the producers get that this is a problem. Hell, even though Game Changers got panned by the fans, they still tried to pimp it out hardcore in Ghost Island. And that's a season that definitively DIDN'T work for most people.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

I hope I do, because the overrating of Cambodia is why we have garbage like Game Changers, Ghost Island, MvGX, and the final episodes of HHH.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

-_-

Don't shorten my write-ups.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

I stand by my post. The active Republican platform has become increasingly hostile to liberals as a collective without offering anything to Republicans other than "hey, fuck those guys, am I right?" You can say liberals talk shit about Republicans, and yeah, we do, but liberals don't really have an entire platform based on actively fucking over the opposition (trying to exterminate gay marriage, take away abortion rights, create a tax plan that disproportionately harms blue states).
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Sadly, Red Sox isn't even entirely wrong. The past two years have confirmed that Republican voters just care about the mean ol' Democrats being mean and nasty to them, but don't expect any retaliation for the way THEY act towards Democrats. Unfortunately, Dems are more mature and vote for reasons other than "fuck those guys", which is the whole reason we're in this mess.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

So help me God if Scottie decides to join the alliance that has voted the majority two weeks in a row to further eliminate people who might work with him.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Fuck you, Kaitlyn. "This happened for a reason." Fuck you.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Raven
Bolt
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Kaitlyn is literally pissing me off. Tyler has brainwashed her to the point where she's making stupid moves, that she SHOULDN'T be making, that hurt her emotionally. I HATE the alliance she's enabling by being so easily-manipulated.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

SP, GI, All-Stars
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Kuja
Tifa
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Celes
Zidane
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Shadowcat
Nightcrawler
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Hit-Girl
Kick-Ass
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Man, fuck you Kaitlyn. I'm sorry, but the self-righteousness of that statement was too much, given how Tyler is pulling your goddamn strings.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Raven
Bolt
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Wiegraf
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Update?
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

I've watched the entire reboot, William Hartnell's entire run, and 2/3 of Patrick Troughton's run.

To me, the ultimate moment is Peter Capaldi's anti-war speech in The Zygon Inversion.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Celes
Zidane
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Suprak the Stud posted...

They don't organize things right, at all.

If you think Vlado belongs closer to Bernie Sanders than Trump, I don't know what to tell you. Like he's almost on top of Sanders, and no where near any of the republicans. He's more liberal than Obama. You are intentionally ignoring pieces of information. You aren't to the right of Vlado, for one. You should know this if you've read his topics over the year.

OR Vlado is just full of shit and says/does things in his topics deliberately to troll, and the results of the questionnaire are accurate.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

Eddv and Regaro are both conservatives

Man, am I just super surprised Eddv was to the left in the quiz and not the conservative proclaimed here.

With Eddv, I think it's a lot like what happened with me. He was a lot more centrist and moderate, but the past two years have kinda informed us that modern conservatism (at least what is mistakenly referred to as conservatism and no reactionary extremism) is actually kinda dangerous to the modern world, and maybe we can afford to move more towards the left.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Yeah, I feel like that chart is yet another in a long string of "oh, both sides are bad, therefore the Republicans aren't THAT much worse than the Democrats" arguments that you really only ever see Republicans making to try and make left-wing liberals feel less enthusiastic about the Democratic party as a whole.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=72.0&d=67.6&g=66.2&s=76.2
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Well crap. It's gonna be Game Changers then.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

As did I. So maybe just maybe it'll be All-Stars ('cause I feel like eaed likes Caramoan).
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Oh yeah, it could be South Pacific too.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

HOPING it's Caramoan or All-Stars, but expecting Game Changers.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Nightcrawler
Rogue
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Your Political Compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

GI may be recency bias, but it's also the culmination of just a bunch of awful ideas that Survivor picked up since hitting the 30s, that the producers didn't realize were bad the first time.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Jakyl and Tony, but extreme liberal in modern society is practically center left.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Eddv and Regaro are both conservatives that can't tolerate the right wing extremism of Trump. Peaf and GMUN, that's your opinion, but those two are NOT extreme liberals.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

So just to be clear...

I make a post saying "you're" and "your" and you personally feel attacked and are thus owed an apology.

YOU (and I'm referring to Corrik, not the collective you) quote MY post, asserting: "YOU are arguing that the definition doesn't exist, when it does", "YOU can't start deleting definitions to be right", "YOU said it wasn't valid."

If your half-assed excuse to weasel out of an apology (for the very thing you claim the collective I owe you an apology for) is that "you" means something other than just "Inviso", then you STILL owe me an apology because either you made a mistake and assumed I was someone else (thus your response was not directed at me, despite quoting my post specifically), or you were referring to "extreme liberals" as a collective, given your condescending follow-up post about how they all followed you just to arguing about something they got wrong, and happened to lump me into that group by, again, quoting MY post. You lumped me under an umbrella for something I hadn't done.

So I want my apology. Unless you're okay with being a coward and a hypocrite.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

I guess Paul Ryan has been replaced already with a chosen successor in your warped definition world.

Its not warped lmao, its literally the 1st and 3rd definitions of the word on your original source, Dictionary.com

Warped definition world applying to where you pick and choose which definitions are valid. Thanks for making that clear with this post.

You're quite literally saying that YOUR picking and choosing of definitions is more valid though.

I can use ANY definition to explain a usage of a word. You are arguing that definition does not exist when it does.

You can't start deleting definitions to try and be right.

I stated the words. You said it wasn't valid. I showed how it was.

Literally should have at this point been. Thanks, Corrik, for showing me that. I understand now.

And here we are.

You're claiming I said the definition you used wasn't valid. I said no such thing. I want an apology for leveling false accusations at me, and for doing it in an extremely condescending fashion.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Since you're always such a stickler for semantics, you claimed earlier that I was arguing that a definition did not exist, when in fact I said no such thing. My two posts prior to that accusation were A. pointing out the absurdity of using your chosen definition as a primary source, given that it could theoretically apply as early as at the 2012 presidential election for Obama, and B. pointing out that you were being condescending as hell in your responses to people who rightfully questioned how asinine the usage of that definition is, given how broadly it can be used. I'll accept an apology for you making a false accusation against me.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

bwburke94 posted...

Underleveled posted...

What happened to 35 and 34 :(

Oh right, I need to get around to that. Probably back-to-back in around 30-60 minutes.

Hint for #34: The starting tribes were orange and purple.

No matter the season, it's gonna be awful, so good for whatever gets booted.
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Megamind
Shadowcat
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso

Hit-Girl
Kick-Ass
---

Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier.
Inviso