S29.E14: This Is My Time / Live Reunion

[Special K]

Well Jaclyn might have liked it, but she probably also felt very awkward sitting there while it was happening.  

[allthatglitters]

It's not even about what she thought though, Jeff and "Survivor" should have said "you need to go." If she has to sit out in all the challenges that everyone else has to fight and compete for. Why is she allowed to stay and someone who was playing in those challenges have to go? She should have been removed. Not sit like a bump on a log for the next 3+ immunity challenges. 

 

 

Its not an advantage to have to sit out challenges,  especially late in the game. Its a big disadvantage. If you are perceived as a threat to win (have a lot of friends on the jury) you are a sitting duck at each TC.  If you are looked at as a possible goat they don't vote for you. You are complete putty in their hands to do with you as they will with  no possibility of immunity for yourself.  And like someone else opined, a rule  like that would be useless as the injured player could simply attempt to play for 2 seconds and then fall down and give up.

 

Thanks, Lance. I would have thought

another sponsor might have carried on the tradition.

 

Yes I don't understand why they couldn't find one other company in the whole USA to sponsor the Fan Favorite. I mean $100,000 is chicken feed to a big corporation. Its super cheap advertising for the amount of audience you reach.

 

 

Ugh, I hated Reed's speech.  He is now my least favorite.  Nasty, spiteful, mean, completely unnecessary.  He must have been able to tell that the jury wasn't going to vote for her anyway, so there was no need.  Dare I say it? It was un-Christian.

 

(And it would have been nice to have seen any of her alleged bad behavior towards the "outcasts" that Reed was talking about.  I didn't see any of that at all.  Good god, has any middle-aged woman who's made it to FTC been treated kindly since Tina?? They always seem to get the worst of the jury's bile.)

 

 

Yes, Reed you're a model christian.  So full of judgment of others, while refusing to look at yourself.  I am certain that Reed voted for Jaclyn simply because he wanted to be sure Missy came in last.  And then to show no caring at all for Missy's feelings at the reunion by refusing to at least say he didn't mean to hurt her.  That's how petty he is.  Pretty model christian, there.

 

Reed had the opportunity to actually BE that Christian Gay role model, emphasis on Christian. I take it he and Josh are Log Cabin Republicans ala Colton Cumbie. Those that feel entitled to treat someone else like shit and be unapologetic about it while at the same time pining on how they are actually the ones persecuted. The only difference is that Colton didn't claim to be a (morally superior) Christian.  I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian house and I know that one of the main points of Christ's teachings is forgiveness. To be humble, turn the other cheek etc.. Reed showed non of that. I think he not only gives the gay community a bad name with his feeding into the stereotype over-the-top bitchy queen, but also the Christian community by not only the vindictive and cruel assholish behaviour but that he didn't even attempt to try and forgive the perceived wrongs he felt Missy wrought on him....even when Jeff bent over backwards to give him the chance.

 

I'm happy Nat won. I too didn't really like her at the beginning. But maybe her sister leaving helped bring her down to earth and re-focus on how she played the social game, and also took a target off her back early as someone without a partner. Also a watershed moment for me was when she alone stood up the big bad bigot (Rocker).  Couldn't stand Probst's gushing attempt to whitewash (!) JR at the reunion. He was an embarrassment and a huge mistake for the Survivor franchise and should have been just ignored.

[JudyObscure]

Hell people have lectured, yelled and screamed at people they ended up voting for anyway - see Tony last season. Sarah, Jefra and especially Trish were all fairly livid towards him and Trish laid into him about using his dead father to swear to her he was loyal to her and she still voted for him. Lex gave his whole "Survivor is life" speech and used it to declare Rob the most horrible human being in the entire world, Ozzy spewed some bullshit to Parvati about him depriving him of his time with Amanda when she blindsided him, he and others also basically railed on Sophie about being incredibly pretentious and smug and obnoxious and incidentally voted for her anyway.

I wonder if the reason some people see Reed's comments as particularly terrible is that Missy, unlike those other good examples, had her daughter there to break into, "He's being mean to my Mommy!" sobs. We saw, throughout, that Baylor was an easy crier and she does the child's trick of self-starting the tears by making a trembling cry-face first.

It's just one more reason why I hate the blood vs water concept. "Survivor," is my favorite show because it allows us to watch the social dynamics of a group of strangers, dropped into an isolated place, trying to get along under harsh conditions. Operative word being, "strangers."

[Guest]

If you don't like Reed, fine.  I find his voice mildly annoying.  But everyone is using the show as a stepping stone to fame, even if it's only the 15 minutes of fame they get by being on the show.  

I'm not sure everyone is there for the 15 minutes of fame.  I think most people are probably there for the experience and the opportunity to win the money.  I also don't think most people choose how they play the game in order to maximize their reality show opportunities after the game, but I know many do.  

[Special K]

Reed had the opportunity to actually BE that Christian Gay role model, emphasis on Christian [....]  I think he not only gives the gay community a bad name with his feeding into the stereotype over-the-top bitchy queen, but also the Christian community by not only the vindictive and cruel assholish behaviour but that he didn't even attempt to try and forgive the perceived wrongs he felt Missy wrought on him....even when Jeff bent over backwards to give him the chance.

[....]

I'm happy Nat won....Also a watershed moment for me was when she alone stood up the big bad bigot (Rocker). 

 

I'm not sure I understand the difference between the conflict with Missy and the conflict with Rocker.  Why one is deplorable and one is admirable.

[lilly6]

Pretty sure Reed isn't a Log Cabin Republican, unless his political stance has changed dramatically in the time he's been with Josh.

 

Reed's father is the former (Democratic) Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota.

 

Josh, on the other hand, very well could be. 

[JudyObscure]

The only difference is that Colton didn't claim to be a (morally superior) Christian.

I never heard Reed claim to be morally superior to anyone. I don't ever seem to hear Muslims or Buddhists or Atheists charged with claiming to be morally superior just because they identify with that particular belief. No one looked at the behavior of the Jewish players on Survivor and said, "Hah! I thought he said he was Jewish! Eating shellfish! What a hypocrite!" Maybe Christians shouldn't play "Survivor," at all if the minute they have to lie about an alliance or hide an immunity idol the internet is going to jump at them with, "How un-Christian!"

The only person I heard claiming particular moral superiority was Missy with her claims of being "loyal to a fault."

Edited December 19, 2014 by JudyObscure

[Guest]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between the conflict with Missy and the conflict with Rocker.  Why one is deplorable and one is admirable.

I'm not saying anyone's stance is right or wrong.  But for me, I'm cool with Natalie either messing up John's game by throwing his past foot-in-mouth stuff in his face, or just doing so because she was pissed off.  But Reed's tantrum seemed calculated to just draw attention to himself and throw out unfounded (IMO) insults in a sanctimonious, bitter way.  

 

Being a sexist racist pig and giving your kid more rice are not the same to me, either.

[truthaboutluv]

Reed's father is the former (Democratic) Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota.

 

 

Interesting. Shows what an assumption that was huh... Yeah  I'm pretty sure I never heard either Reed or Josh specify themselves as Republican in any way and even the Christian thing, that seemed to largely be a talking point for Josh whose father is a Pastor I believe and admittedly, he was raised in the church. And as someone who watched Colton in both of his seasons, I definitely do not agree with the comparison with him and Reed and Josh.

 

YMMV but the issue with Colton wasn't his being dramatic and feeding stereotypes of gay men but that he was hateful - racist, mean, obnoxious, vindictive, etc. Again to each his own but I saw none of that from Reed and Josh. As I've said, no I did not think Reed's speech to Missy was so evil and unkind. A bit dramatic with all his flourishes sure...but hateful and unkind no. He thought she treated people badly and called her out on it. 

Edited December 19, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[Special K]

No one looked at the behavior of the Jewish players on Survivor and said, "Hah! I thought he said he was Jewish! Eating shellfish! What a hypocrite!" 

 

Seriously.  Or the yoga teachers who periodically pop up (Vytas, Grant).  They're not supposed to lie!  (Or eat meat, or do many other things we all do every day).

[allthatglitters]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between the conflict with Missy and the conflict with Rocker.  Why one is deplorable and one is admirable.

 

Well one has a record before the show as acting like a racist jerk in real life, and then added a lot of sexist misogynistic attitude on the beach. I don't think Missy's bad behaviour went past being self centered (which includes being daughter centered) sour, and just unlikeable on the show only. Big differences. And just that some entitled wealthy sports jock, who obviously thinks he can get away with saying anything about anybody...finally has someone call him out. And the predicable satisfaction of seeing him turn red and with his implicit threat of violence towards a woman that showed the world he hasn't changed and made him look like a fool.

 

Pretty sure Reed isn't a Log Cabin Republican, unless his political stance has changed dramatically in the time he's been with Josh.

 

Reed's father is the former (Democratic) Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota.

 

Josh, on the other hand, very well could be. 

 

Ok, my bad. I still think his spiteful, bludgeoning hate speech performance for the camera was deplorable. And I didn't like Missy much either, especially earlier on. Some players redeemed themselves to some degree and improved their character through the show (at least edited that way) like Natalie, and to some extent Keith and Missy too. Reed seemed to just get more ugly.

[BarneySays]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between the conflict with Missy and the conflict with Rocker.  Why one is deplorable and one is admirable.

The difference is that Natalie acknowledged that she was angry and unfairly lashed out at Rocker impulsively.  Her statements at the reunion expressed a morality that disapproves of that behavior.  And it seemed she had either apologized or at least cleared the air with Rocker and they were on good terms.  That's a morality I respect and agree with- no one is perfect, but you have to own your own mistreatment of others and apologize for your behavior, not necessarily your opinions.  Reed not only did not apologize to Missy for hurting her, he wouldn't even acknowledge that she was hurt.  At no time.  He clearly did not give a shit about her feelings.  Which exposes his ridiculous claim that "I was speaking about a character in the show" because at that moment on the reunion he was dealing with the person who is Missy.  But he had the same bile for her then as he had at FTC.  That's a morality I don't respect.  When you heap onto that kind of disrespect for the basic humanity of others and then hold yourself out as some religious/moral role model?  No, that kind of person perverts the very notion of morality.  It's the do as I say, not as I do phenomenon that is all too familiar among "righteous" Xians.  (Before the whining commences- do people of other faiths do it?  I am sure.  Do I see it with the same frequency?  Not on your life.) 

 

I will also bet good money that these two self-involved clowns will try to make hay out of their "pilgrim" status, because it is clear as day that neither of them could ever achieve a career in the performing arts beyond chorus boy (and there's nothing wrong with being in the chorus.  ht Michael Bennett).  Their voices alone would disqualify them from all but a few speaking parts.   

 

I never heard Reed claim to be morally superior to anyone. I don't ever seem to hear Muslims or Buddhists or Atheists charged with claiming to be morally superior just because they identify with that particular belief.

When you hold yourself out as a role model for others based upon your religion, then you are holding yourself out to be morally superior.  It's inherent in the concept of role model.  If you understood Buddhism you would know that your point is antithetical to its teachings.  Atheism is not a belief system.  If you haven't heard anti-muslim sentiment while living in America, I don't know what to say.

 

YMMV but the issue with Colton wasn't his being dramatic and feeding stereotypes of gay men but that he was hateful - racist, mean, obnoxious, vindictive, etc. Again to each his own but I saw none of that from Reed and Josh.

As a gay man, I saw a lot of similarities between these three.  Sure, Colton's animus was more visceral than the other two, but they all IMO suffer from a lack of development due to internalized self-loathing.  They all present themselves defensively as indomitable, all suffer from grandiosity (broadway stars?  get the fuck outta here; urban NYers? no, hicks just like keith).  The only difference is that reed and josh have polished their issues to a cleaner shine.  But, I assure you from my many years of experience, they are not as different as they may appear at first.  YMMV.

 

ETA:  I did not like Missy at all during the whole season.  Baylor, however, charmed me.  The difference between how they handled being blindsided by Natalie and Reed's behavior shows a big difference in the characters of those people. 

Edited December 19, 2014 by BarneySays

[lilly6]

Reed really wasn't this obnoxious until he started dating Josh.  This whole "look what a Great Gay Christian I am" thing is new, since then.  It's a shame, because he really can be very sweet but he's allowed Josh to change him.   He used to really devote himself to Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS and other social and political causes and to actually be more of a role model, before he got into this religious thing he's into now.

 

Reed can kinda sorta claim the title of Broadway star, or at least Broadway performer.  He's been working pretty consistently on Broadway for the last 10 years.  Josh did just get cast in his first part on Broadway but "star" is still a huge stretch for him. 

 

I think a lot of their posturing is for the benefit of Josh's family who don't seem to be very accepting.  I'm not a Josh fan by any means but I think he must feel a lot of pressure to compensate for that lack of acceptance and feels he has to be seen as a role model.  Problem is, he isn't a good one. 

Edited December 19, 2014 by lilly6

[choclatechip45]

I said this in the ponderosa thread, but I feel like it's appropate here I wonder how much of it is these contestants are mad that a 20-year old outlasted them or their loved one.

 

 

But I really felt like it wasn't even 'about Missy'.  It was about Reed putting on a performance before his 15 minutes ended.

I completely agree. I think Reed knew he was going to be a minor character and knows the online Survivor fan base always talks about bitter jury speeches. So he decided to go out with a bang. My whole problem with it was that he didn't even seem that angry or bitter  when he delivered the speech which made me think he did it for camera time.  Even though he is one of my least favorite Survivors at least someone like Lex actually seemed pretty pissed off when he made his speech to Boston Rob. If you are going to make a bitter jury speech at least look somewhat angry!
 

 

I mean really Reed's vote even if it was to avoid a tie for second place is unprecedented for Survivor - really?

 

Yes, it absolutely was. When else did anyone cast a final vote specifically so that someone would drop from a 2nd place tie to 3rd place and make them lose $15K? It literally has never happened.

 

No Vytas voted for Monica so Gervase would get third because he wanted his vote to mean something. He has talked about it in interviews.  I just assumed Reed was copying what Vytas did.

Edited December 20, 2014 by choclatechip45

[truthaboutluv]

Reed not only did not apologize to Missy for hurting her, he wouldn't even acknowledge that she was hurt.  At no time.  He clearly did not give a shit about her feelings.  Which exposes his ridiculous claim that "I was speaking about a character in the show" because at that moment on the reunion he was dealing with the person who is Missy.  But he had the same bile for her then as he had at FTC.

 

 

He said something to the effect that he wasn't trying to be mean and then stated that everything he said was in relation to who she was out there in San Juan Del Sur and who she was within the game because he does not know her outside of the game. Therefore he made sure to state that his comments were not a commentary on  Missy in her private/personal life. That being said, he stood by his observations and assertions as he saw them with regard to how she played the game. I completely disagree that it showed some huge disrespect to humanity or demonstrated some god awful lack of morality. Again maybe it's because I just really did not think anything Reed said to Missy was that awful and so I feel like most of the reactions to what he said are a bit hyperbolic.

 

As noted, I've watched people be called evil, bitch, most horrible human being in the world, liar, etc. Reed essentially told Missy "you favored people you cared about and liked and treated the ones not in your favor like crap and now it's going to come back on you because you won't win." That's it. Sure he used the wicked stepmother analogy but big whoop. Nowhere in his comments did he make things truly personal - he didn't comment on her three divorces, make some cheap shot that no wonder she's gotten divorced so many times based on her attitude, didn't attack her on her ability as a parent with regard to Baylor, etc. He essentially said "you said you were the mom but instead of nurturing and kind, you were entitled, mean at times and played favorites." This...this is the huge moral failing by Reed?

 

When you hold yourself out as a role model for others based upon your religion,

 

 

Except at no point in the game do I remember Reed doing this. Post-show Jeff referred to them as a Christian couple and Reed talked about he and Josh being a Christian couple after he was voted out but during the show, Josh is the only one who mentioned his faith. Reed certainly never spoke of himself as some role model based on his religion. 

 

As a gay man, I saw a lot of similarities between these three.

 

 

Well I'm not gay but what I did do was watch both seasons that Colton was on and saw someone who was hateful in many ways - racist, classist, belittling of others, mean, catty, etc. I saw none of that from Reed and Josh, in my opinion, during the season and as I have never judged all members of a group as one thing, I'm not going to categorize Josh and Reed with Colton when they exhibited none of the same behavior in my opinion. This is like the comparisons of them to Ariana Grande's brother who competed on Big Brother, long before Reed delivered his speech some found so offensive. Seems to me like brushing people with one broad stroke. 

 

I said this in the ponderosa thread, but I feel like it's appropate here I wonder how much of it is these contestants are mad that a 20-year old outlasted them or their loved one.

 

 

Except many of the players seemed to dislike Baylor long before she outlasted them. She was at the bottom and on the outs at Coyopa a lot, Alec was an ass to her long before they even merged,  Wes didn't seem to have much to say to her, Keith had that confrontation with Missy where he called Baylor out on being lazy and accused Missy of coddling her and jumping up to do anything Baylor was asked to do, etc.

Edited December 20, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[choclatechip45]

 

This is like the comparisons of them to Ariana Grande's brother who competed on Big Brother, long before Reed delivered his speech some found so offensive. Seems to me like brushing people with one broad stroke.

 

I was guilty of that myself, but it had more to do with the fact Josh/Reed are both involved with Broadway just like Frankie. Personally, I did think Josh/Reed were playing to the cameras just like Frankie. The only difference is they didn't make any vile comments besides the FTC speech and Reed did seem to regret the brat comment. According to Reed's Instagram he is friends with Frankie.    I agree I don't think they are anything like Colton.

 

 

Except many of the players seemed to dislike Baylor long before she outlasted them. She was at the bottom and on the outs at Coyopa a lot, Alec was an ass to her long before they even merged,  Wes didn't seem to have much to say to her, Keith had that confrontation with Missy where he called Baylor out on being lazy and accused Missy of coddling her and jumping up to do anything Baylor was asked to do, etc.

Besides Alec being an ass to her pre-merge  Missy/Baylor already voted for him. I don't think he would had the confrontation if he Baylor/Missy hadn't voted for him and Baylor decided not to rejoin the Josh alliance.  I don't think Josh/Reed would of made all the anti-Baylor comments in their exit interviews/post merge if Baylor had decided to rejoin Josh. Well, to be fair it seemed like Wes did the same thing he did to Baylor to Jaclyn.

Edited December 19, 2014 by choclatechip45

[neece26]

 

I completely agree. I think Reed knew he was going to be a minor character and knows the online Survivor fan base always talk about bitter jury speeches. So he decided to go out with a bang.

 

Exactly this.  His speech came off as such a rehearsed, desperate ploy for attention that you had to laugh at him.  Kind of like the way he did the split after the immunity challenge.  So strange.   Not a bit surprised he's friends with Frankie.

 

 

 

 

[Gianthambeast]

I never heard Reed claim to be morally superior to anyone. I don't ever seem to hear Muslims or Buddhists or Atheists charged with claiming to be morally superior just because they identify with that particular belief. No one looked at the behavior of the Jewish players on Survivor and said, "Hah! I thought he said he was Jewish! Eating shellfish! What a hypocrite!" Maybe Christians shouldn't play "Survivor," at all if the minute they have to lie about an alliance or hide an immunity idol the internet is going to jump at them with, "How un-Christian!"

The only person I heard claiming particular moral superiority was Missy with her claims of being "loyal to a fault."

I think if you make your religion the defining characteristic of your identity and you fail to live up to it,  critcisms like "that's so un-Christian" are valid.  But as you say,  I didn't get the sense that Reed was doing that, unlike some players who are constantly invoking their faith like Coach or Brandon Hantz. I enjoyed Reed's speech for what it was--campy attention-whoring at its finest-- kinda like his random heel-stretches and splits with beautifully pointed toes. LOL

[riverblue22]

I do kind of wonder how Reed's speech would look to the critics if the Survivor editors had actually included the sneaky "stepmother" actions in their editing.  What if we had seen Missy consistently get her daughter the best sleeping arrangements, or if we had seen her give her alliance more food, and treat the other alliance as second class.  There seems to have been a widespread dislike for Missy and Baylor and I suspect they earned that dislike.  Just because it wasn't included in the editing doesn't mean it didn't happen.  I actually thought they showed very little of camp life this year.  Most of the filming seemed to be about the challenges and it was kind of tedious.  In past years it seemed there was more filming at the camps when they would give them chickens to mess around with or some other camp-

based activity.  We didn't even see them build their shelters this year.

[Guest]

Seriously.  Or the yoga teachers who periodically pop up (Vytas, Grant).  They're not supposed to lie!  (Or eat meat, or do many other things we all do every day).

Heh, what yoga do you study that forbids eating meat and lying?  

[willpwr]

I stopped watching this show the week Kelley was eliminated so I was actually happy to see her at the show even though she didn't speak. One of the reasons I stopped watching was actually due to Missy and Baylor and their, IMHO, bratty and entitled behavior in regards to ricegate, votes, etc. I actually agreed with Reed's speech and yet was disappointed by it at the same time because I agree, there is a time and a place and kicking someone while you know they're down is just not something I respect. I believe the reason some people were nodding along with Reed's speech was pretty indicative of behavior that was not shown but Reed had no leg to stand on considering his actions (I'm basing this off of videos on the cbs website and interviews). In regards to Reed's vote, just out of curiosity but if Jack and Missy had each gotten one vote, how would a tiebreaker be decided? 

 

I'm glad Natalie won and am surprised by that but I gained a lot of respect for her in the few episodes I watched. 

[peachmangosteen]

I do kind of wonder how Reed's speech would look to the critics if the Survivor editors had actually included the sneaky "stepmother" actions in their editing.  What if we had seen Missy consistently get her daughter the best sleeping arrangements, or if we had seen her give her alliance more food, and treat the other alliance as second class.

I for one would honestly probably have liked it more if we had been shown Missy's deplorable behavior. I would still dislike Reed and think the whole thing was an attention-seeking ploy that said way more about him than about Missy, but I probably would've felt some satisfaction from seeing someone call out someone who did those things.

 

Have any of the other contestants talked about specifics in the case of Missy being an 'evil stepmother?' Like did she seriously take more rice to give to Baylor/her alliance than to Reed/Josh/the other idiot dudebros? Did she really give Baylor a better sleeping position than everyone else? And more importantly, why the fuck did everyone just sit there and let her do that?

 

In regards to Reed's vote, just out of curiosity but if Jack and Missy had each gotten one vote, how would a tiebreaker be decided? 

 

When Cassandra and Dreamz tied for second (with no votes each!), they each received the second place prize of $100,000. However, someone stated earlier in this thread that now they take the second and third place prize and divide it evenly between the tied players. I don't know if there's confirmation on that though.

Edited December 20, 2014 by peachmangosteen

[willpwr]

I for one would honestly probably have liked it more if we had been shown Missy's deplorable behavior. I would still dislike Reed and think the whole thing was an attention-seeking ploy that said way more about him than about Missy, but I probably would've felt some satisfaction from seeing someone call out someone who did those things.

 

Have any of the other contestants talked about specifics in the case of Missy being an 'evil stepmother?' Like did she seriously take more rice to give to Baylor/her alliance than to Reed/Josh/the other idiot dudebros? Did she really give Baylor a better sleeping position than everyone else? And more importantly, why the fuck did everyone just sit there and let her do that?

 

 

When Cassandra and Dreamz tied for second (with no votes each!), they each received the second place prize of $100,000. However, someone stated earlier in this thread that now they take the second and third place prize and divide it evenly between the tied players. I don't know if there's confirmation on that though.

In ricegate episode, it was pretty much confirmed that Missy was put in charge of cooking the food as well as food distribution, it's why Baylor went up to her and said she wanted more rice even though they were rationing before Missy got there. Supposedly Missy was feeding Jon and Alec a lot of food (she allegedly even had Jon calling her "momma") and making more food than the blue tribe ate so they actually threw away rice daily before the switch. The only one to openly question her was Dale and we know how that turned out. Missy was lucky to always be part of the majority alliance and most of them seem pretty laid back.

 

Oh, okay, thank you for explaining about the votes.

[peachmangosteen]

I think I'm just gonna call it a wash between Missy and Reed. They both suck IMO.

[Guest]

I feel like we see such a minuscule peak at what actually happens out there, we probably can't even judge.  If they'd shown Missy being more evil and Reed being less show-boaty, I would've loved the smackdown.  That's why reality tv works-- the editors give us heroes and villains and we can root for and against different people.  In reality, I'm sure I'd be like 95% of them when it's over and like everyone, because people are gray, not black and white.  

 

I guess it speaks well about how good these editors did that some see Reed as the villain and some Missy.  I guess a lot of it is who you identify with most.  I'm a mother and am the opposite of an attention ho, so Reed bugged me once he fired up his act.  But Missy bugged me with ricegate.  Though I thought Jeff had a point-- if eating more rice was strategic, it worked.  

[fishcakes]

When Cassandra and Dreamz tied for second (with no votes each!), they each received the second place prize of $100,000. However, someone stated earlier in this thread that now they take the second and third place prize and divide it evenly between the tied players. I don't know if there's confirmation on that though.

 

Splitting second and third prize was confirmed by Dawn in an interview with Dalton Ross. Cassandra and Dreamz getting $100K each might not be true though. Apparently that information came from Yau Man who later may have said that he was incorrect. I don't know if Cassandra or Dreamz has ever said what they got, but TPTB are notoriously close-mouthed about the prizes.

 

That's why reality tv works-- the editors give us heroes and villains and we can root for and against different people.  In reality, I'm sure I'd be like 95% of them when it's over and like everyone, because people are gray, not black and white.

 

It's always surprising to me how different my reaction can be to returning players, disliking people I'd previously liked and vice versa. The editing plays a big part, but also when returning players are playing with people they already know instead of strangers, they show different sides of themselves. That's why I think the first BvW was effective because here were people we thought we sort of knew being more like their true selves with their loved ones, and why this BvW was not because it was people we didn't know, didn't care about, and their stupid brother/spouse/partner/kid who we didn't care about either. And there's also something about the gestalt of the season; I'm currently rewatching Tocantins and hating Tyson, just as I did when I first watched this show five years ago. But the thing is, he's pretty much the same guy in Tocantins as he was in HvV, where I was more "eh" about him, and the same guy as he was in BvW, where I loved him. I think there are a few people from this season who I might like a lot if they returned -- well, maybe just Baylor, if she came back without Missy -- but I'm hoping more that they don't return to this particular well.

[Guest]

For me, seeing Sugar in two seasons was a serious eye opener.  I kind of liked her in Gabon and then detested her in whatever season she came back in.  Also, Coach went from stab-worthy to kind of lovable in some parts of some seasons.  

 

 

[bluebonnet]

I think this is the best thread to discuss this since it's part of the ongoing conversation, though it mentions Ponderosa, so feel free to have me move this if it belongs elsewhere.

 

In Jon's Ponderosa video, they have a clip of Jon and Missy talking about faith and loyalty and god stuff and Missy talks about 'these people'.  I might be projecting so others should watch this and see what they think, but it does look as though she sees 'these people' as beneath her (and Jon by extension).  I wonder how much of that attitude was apparent in her everyday interactions with people at camp.  I mean, we all know when someone is looking down on us, when they think they are superior...even if they are doing the 'nice' things like smiling and stuff.  

[needschocolate]

After Jeff asked Keith's wife if he really spits that much in real life (and thank you Survivor editors for not having a montage of Keith spitting), I was hoping Jeff would ask Alec's mom "So does your son ever close his mouth in real life?" - if nothing else than to give her the opportunity to explain that he has sinus blockage that prevents him from breathing through his nose. 

 

And Yay! for Natalie.  As much as Jon was shown concentrating on how the jury would perceive him, Natalie actually played a near perfect game of promoting herself to the jury.  From telling Jon to play his idol loudly enough for the jury to hear to openly asking Jaclyn "did you vote the way I told you to?" she made sure the Jury knew who was making the moves and controlling the game, even though the members of her alliance didn't seem to realize it.  Heck, Keith was trying to convince Jaclyn to take him the final instead of Missy because Missy would be harder to beat, instead of pointing out that Natalie was really Jaclyn's biggest competition - yeah, Keith may not be the best example, but it seemed to me that Missy, Baylor, Jon and Jaclyn all pretty much planned to sit at the final with Natalie. 

 

The only tribal council move Natalie made that I questioned was her announcing that she if she were at the end she would win.  Perhaps it was more self-promotion, and perhaps she understood how clueless the rest of the players were, but it seemed foolish.  It didn't hurt her though, so she must have known what she was doing (although, she apparently suffered a number of black-outs - maybe this was one of them)

[Guest]

I think this is the best thread to discuss this since it's part of the ongoing conversation, though it mentions Ponderosa, so feel free to have me move this if it belongs elsewhere.

 

In Jon's Ponderosa video, they have a clip of Jon and Missy talking about faith and loyalty and god stuff and Missy talks about 'these people'.  I might be projecting so others should watch this and see what they think, but it does look as though she sees 'these people' as beneath her (and Jon by extension).  I wonder how much of that attitude was apparent in her everyday interactions with people at camp.  I mean, we all know when someone is looking down on us, when they think they are superior...even if they are doing the 'nice' things like smiling and stuff.  

I'm not sure if she was playing Jon like he suggests (I kind of doubt it) or just implying that she and Jon would get to the end by having honor and loyalty unlike "these people" who betrayed others.  Which of course she didn't do (remain loyal), though she seemed like she would've liked to have if Baylor had let her play it her way.  

 

I think if Jon is gullible enough to take "trust in god" as to mean "have total faith in Missy and Baylor", he kind of deserved to be played.  

[angelita100]

I have been trying to get to the end of this threads for days! I've loved all the conversation.

 

YAY Nat.  I was in a survivor pool and wanted to pick one of the twinnies to go all the way.  I picked Nadiya!!  LOL. But I couldn't be more thrilled by the ending.  To me this season was just ok but I stuck with it because of her. This wasn't Russell seasons level of suck  (and he btw never won because he had ZERO social game, a major part of playing survivor.  And there were a few seasons where I couldn't even stick it out they were so bad.

 

I don't get the Missy and Baylor hate. They didn't annoy me as much as Jack and Jon or Reed and Josh or Alec and Drew.  In fact I actually liked baylor a lot. She seems to have turned out pretty well. And I loved her relationship with Natalie. She entrusted Nat with a lot of personal information.  And the way she handled her blindside was just cool to me.  Missy I could have done without  - not because of some sort of rice gate - but because of her game play.  She's over protective of her daughter.  Not a sin to me or something evil. Hell Jackie seemed more entitled to me during much of the show.  But I liked her end game after Jon left and also her humor during the reunion show.   

 

And even though I hated everyone giving Jackie and Missy all this free rewards - I don't blame them. I blame the people who was giving it to them. I understand once or twice for strategy but this season it was just too much of it. It should be outlawed in all future seasons.

 

Reed - I didn't know Reed and Josh were Christians during the show. Did they harp on it and I missed it?  Anyway, I don't expect christians to be Christ like but I don't expect them to rehearse probably for weeks how they were going to humiliate someone on national tv.  It's like he sat in the house after being eliminated and   just couldn't let it go.  I don't know what purpose it served.  Hopefully I never have to see him again.  He was a non entity during much of this season. He got outplayed and outlasted by Missy.  Boo hoo live with it.  And man their grandiose idea that they are pioneers is just well... huh?

 

I for one missed the fallen walk. I always like that. 

 

I also look forward to next season.  The season with the different ethnic groups is still my all time favorite season.  they were only separate for a few episodes but what I love was the diverse cast. It was wonderful. And that team that did that immunity run..man I adored them all. I just hate how Survivor and TAR, 2 shows that I love have a lack of diversity.  I thought they would take something from that Yul season. Why can't we go into it with say 8 or 9 minority players. Why can't that be the rule rather than the one lone exception.  

 

Not sure if this white collar/blue collar can give us some different types of folks but I hope so.  I'll take a wait and see attitude.

 

The reunion show SUCKED.  Honestly, they need to work on that.

[Yogi Nomad]

 

I'm not sure everyone is there for the 15 minutes of fame.  I think most people are probably there for the experience and the opportunity to win the money.

 

 

 

So he decided to go out with a bang. My whole problem with it was that he didn't even seem that angry or bitter  when he delivered the speech which made me think he did it for camera time.

 

 

 

I didn't think Reed was on survivor just for the fame. He is the super fan after all but I'm pretty sure he's milking it hard and there's nothing wrong with that. I don't like Reed in or outside the game.  His speech to Missy was really mean and unnecessary. Was I entertained by it? Heck yeah! It was a boring FTC 'cause everyone was pretty much made up their minds and ask the lamest question ever, so at least he spiced things up. I just hope they NEVER bring Reed back. He's so annoying. Josh is the better one in this couple.

 

Weird observation. All these newbies seem to respect the game and voted or who they thought have the strategies that they respect. Color me surprised! I thought the returning players are way way bitter and take everything so personal. 

Or maybe they still bitter but it mostly directed at Baylor and Missy. No one seemed to respected Baylor. I don't know if it's an age thing or Baylor was really the worst. Who knows.

 

 

A show filled with Kims, Natalies, Denises, Sophies, Parvatis, and Ciries would be unbelievably interesting.

 

 

YES!!!!!!  Or at least a Masterminds season both male and female. I would love to see that!

 

[Misty79]

Watching this episode I discovered that in spite of some of her princess-y moments I was rooting for Jacklyn. I think I always end up going for the person I think is most underestimated which is unfulfilling as they can never win almost by definition. I love that she won the last challenge and began establishing herself as an independent threat. Unfortunately that came too late, and Jon's shadow was too long (and, ultimately, their "swing vote" strategy was crap). I'd like to see her back in another season playing on her own, as I think Jon actually weakened her game play. 

 

I'm happy for Nat, she absolutely deserved the win. There were moments where she came across as too smug for my liking, but there's no question she was a worthy winner. 

Edited December 20, 2014 by Misty79

[kikaha]

 

Sex is a valid weapon when dealing with men making themselves fools over you.

Parv turned that weapon on the women too -- Natalie from Fans vs Favorites was smitten IIRC. 

 

Baylor was a nonentity to me out there.  I'm struggling to remember any strategies she came up with or executed.  Her social game seemed pretty blachhh, and I don't recall her as a challenge monster.  i.e. on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best, she seemed like a 3 or so in just about every key category.  

 

Maybe I just didn't pay much attention (for sure that happened much of the season until Nat started taking over the reins).  Seemed like Baylor was often in danger of getting voted out -- survived not through her own actions -- and got dragged deep in the game (along with Missy) mostly as a loyal vote for Natalie. 

 

Am I missing something? 

[Chit Chat]

The difference is that Natalie acknowledged that she was angry and unfairly lashed out at Rocker impulsively.

 

IMO, the difference between what Natalie did and what Reed did was that Natalie brought an outside issue of Rockers into the game and made assumptions about something she knew nothing about, and then "blacked out" and let him have it.  Reed was speaking to Missy within the context of the game, not her outside life.  I thought it was rude of Jeff to expect Reed to apologize for his comments.  Jeff should've just asked if he had anything he wanted to say, not act like judge and jury. 

[pennben]

 

Reed was speaking to Missy within the context of the game, not her outside life.

 

That's the crux of the issue to me.  I'm just not buying what he was selling in presenting that distinction. I think he intended to hurt deeply with his words; it was a two-for-one for him. I do think he had dual motives to serve:  (a) being memorable at FTC, and (b) getting to deeply hurt folks he didn't like (does that make it a three-for-one bashing both Missy and Baylor?).

Edited December 20, 2014 by pennben

[pennben]

P.S.  For what it is worth, I also hated the original "Sue Hawk" angry question which has brought about all the grandstanding at FTC. I take no viewing enjoyment at someone being cruel to another. And that's, in my opinion, what some of these questions are meant to be. 

Edited December 20, 2014 by pennben

[Kromm]

The only tribal council move Natalie made that I questioned was her announcing that she if she were at the end she would win.  Perhaps it was more self-promotion, and perhaps she understood how clueless the rest of the players were, but it seemed foolish.  It didn't hurt her though, so she must have known what she was doing (although, she apparently suffered a number of black-outs - maybe this was one of them)

I disagree--although to be honest I DID think the same thing when I first heard her say it.

But I think it maybe occurred to her (quicker than either of us, I guess) that it was a no-win question (can we get another "Shut up Probst?). How was she going to sound if she started to hedge and act like she didn't have any confidence all of a sudden? Disingenuous. The way she answered it mostly only risked sounding overconfident, and sounding overconfident at that point was more likely to help her get picked than hurt her.

[Kromm]

That's the crux of the issue to me.  I'm just not buying what he was selling in presenting that distinction. I think he intended to hurt deeply with his words; it was a two-for-one for him. I do think he had dual motives to serve:  (a) being memorable at FTC, and (b) getting to deeply hurt folks he didn't like (does that make it a three-for-one bashing both Missy and Baylor?).

IMO he showed himself to be a filthy liar by claiming that. Because while he was talking about actions she took DURING a game, he clearly was talking about her personality, values and conduct (vs. her strategic choices). It wasn't resentment over game choices she made (which we're well used to seeing, and the firestorms that often come from that), it was anger over her personality.

Which is fine to be angry about. People don't always get along. But trying to re-frame such feelings as "nothing personal, even though I called you out on National TV--I just meant IN THE GAME!" is disingenuous. Because it certainly WAS personal when there was no element of it being about strategic choices.

[Whimsy]

The religion/Christianity discussions are veering away from anything related to Survivor and this episode specifically. Please remember this thread is to talk about this episode. No more religion talk from this point forward.

[Miss Scarlet]

 

 

Sex is a valid weapon when dealing with men making themselves fools over you.

Well said. I think it's interesting that people will put Parvati in the top tier of players/winners and yet still deride women who 'use their boobs to manipulate' or flirt with the men to get further. Parvati played that kind of game impeccably and I applaud her for it. Hell, she played that kind of game with women even!

The issue is not whether or not men are dumb enough to fall for that or how effective flirting is to get favours done for you. This issue is that is dangerous for women for several reasons, the main ones being a) this is a short-term strategy that most women can't use as they get older and is problematic because it takes the place of developing other skills that are more useful and longer-lasting that women could use to get their way, b) it encourages men to continue objectifying women and think that's all women have to offer and c) the power in this situation doesn't reside with the woman because it's still up to the man to decide if she's pretty enough/good enough, etc. for him to give her what she wants. So this is about more than the short-term gain of a woman getting a man to do her a favour or in making moves when trying to win a game, especially when CBS brands Parvati's flirting strategy as the archetype of a successful female winner.

 

Beyond the CBS marketing though, I think Parvati's case is a bit different because even though she refers to her strategy/interpersonal style as "flirting", I don't think that's really what it is. It seems like it's actually more about using fake flattery to get on people's good sides, which she does with both men and women. So it doesn't seem as sexual as what using the word "flirting" would suggest.

 

Natalie probably played the best game by a female contestant since Parvati. I wasn't a fan since she and Nadya were irritating on TAR, but I grew to like her. Most deserving winner in my opinion.

Natalie played it better -- she didn't use sex as a weapon.

I definitely think Natalie played a better game than Parvati. I give most of the credit in Micronesia to Cirie and maybe I'm just forgetting something, but the only big movie I remember from Parvati in H vs. V was the double idol play. That was great, but she made that move based on knowing Amanda was lying because they were good friends outside of the game. Natalie made several big moves towards the end when playing with strangers who she really had to read without much to go on. Unfortunately, although a lot of people will count Natalie as satisfying winner I don't think people will ever see her in the same league as Parvati because at this point people forget what Parvati actually did in the game and just go off of the reputation she has built in the Survivor world.

Edited December 20, 2014 by wudpixie

[Cutty]

I also think Natalie is better. I've never been a huge fan of Parvati, and think she is one of the most overhyped players in the history of the show. People forget that she would have been one of the first boots in HvV if Tyson didn't screw up the vote and Russell didn't play his idol for her. 

[needschocolate]

I was pleasantly surprised at how well Baylor handled being blindsided. Even more surprised that Missy took Baylor's blindside so well.  I thought there would be yelling back at camp or at least Missy would be gunning for Natalie to be voted out - heck, after the tribe shuffle, that dad became the most vile person on the face of the Earth because he dared to write down Baylor's name after Baylor targeted him.  But there was no animosity toward Natalie that we saw.

 

Regarding Natalie saying at tribal that she would win if she made it to the final tribal -
 

I disagree--although to be honest I DID think the same thing when I first heard her say it.

But I think it maybe occurred to her (quicker than either of us, I guess) that it was a no-win question (can we get another "Shut up Probst?). How was she going to sound if she started to hedge and act like she didn't have any confidence all of a sudden? Disingenuous. The way she answered it mostly only risked sounding overconfident, and sounding overconfident at that point was more likely to help her get picked than hurt her.

Good point. I think it may also be that she understood the other players well enough to know that they wouldn't get any sort of sudden realization of "oh gosh, Natalie's right, she will win if she gets to the final." Maybe Natalie understood how strongly each of the thought they were the most deserving of the win. From my seat on the couch, it sure seemed like Missy and Jac were both pretty confident that they had a good chance to win.
 

[Wings]

There is no right or wrong way to be or act; it is a personal choice.  The only control we have is our reaction to another's behavior.  Sometimes you just have to let 'em twirl!  I, for one, loved Sue Hawks TC speech.  She made a stellar analogy and articulated it well. It cannot be compared to Reed, who was not poetic in his blather.  Didn't bother me though. 

 

I am entertained observing human behavior.  And I love a little drama and adore the crazies!.   :>)  

 

As far as the Collar season, it is just another 3 tribe format.  I thought it was an interesting change last time.  What the tribes are named has nothing to do with any social experiment or the ability to play this game.  I am looking forward to it.  

[kikaha]

 

this is a short-term strategy that most women can't use as they get older

Irrelevant.  Each person uses his or her own attributes, qualities, strengths and weaknesses. 

 

 

is problematic because it takes the place of developing other skills that are more useful and longer-lasting that women could use to get their way

 

It sure didn't stop Parvati from developing those skills.  She's a quadruple/quintuple threat, who can beat you with strategy, brains, social, brawn, charm, sex appeal and double crosses.  The most complete package in Survivor history IMO.  

 

 

it encourages men to continue objectifying women

 

I strongly disagree that responding to a woman sexually 'objectifies' her. It's an essential part of evolution, built in to our genetic code.  The moment men stop responding to women that way (and vice versa) the human race is in serious trouble.    

 

 

the power in this situation doesn't reside with the woman because it's still up to the man to decide if she's pretty enough/good enough, etc. for him to give her what she wants. So this is about more than the short-term gain of a woman getting a man to do her a favour or in making moves when trying to win a game, especially when CBS brands Parvati's flirting strategy as the archetype of a successful female winner.

 

EVERY strategy depends on the other people.  You have to persuade others to go along with you: they decide if your pitch or alliance or promises are good enough to go along with you.  So in the way you are describing the power is always with others.  And in fact, that power is notoriously short-term: it constantly shifts, as broken alliances and the endless blindsides prove. 

 

i.e. the thing you complain about is true of every aspect of Survivor. 

 

Besides, this whole passage sees one tree and mistakes it for the forest.  Parvati builds alliances, plots critical blindsides, wins immunities, and strategizes with the best of them.  Sex appeal is just one tool in her arsenal. 

 

 

I definitely think Natalie played a better game than Parvati.

 

While Natalie played real well, I think she played against far inferior opponents.  Who besides Nat might qualify for an All-Stars season?  Maybe Jaclyn?  Until Natalie stepped up her game, this was one of the most boring seasons I can recall.  I know many others made this point, all during the season. 

 

Parv on the other hand played against an entire beach of the best players ever (HvV), and another fantastic line-up in FvF. 

[choclatechip45]

While Natalie played real well, I think she played against far inferior opponents.  Who besides Nat might qualify for an All-Stars season?  Maybe Jaclyn?  Until Natalie stepped up her game, this was one of the most boring seasons I can recall.  I know many others made this point, all during the season.

 

Parv on the other hand played against an entire beach of the best players ever (HvV), and another fantastic line-up in FvF.

 

 

I think Natalie played a pretty good social game. She was able to get people to trust her  so she could make the move she wanted them to make.  I agree that  the competition on a strategy level was pretty inferior, but she did do well with the fact the players she was playing against were pretty unpredictable. Clearly we saw people like Jeremy, Josh and Reed who couldn't do well with the fact that they were unpredictable. I think it's hard to compare Natalie and Parvati because I don't think they played similar games. I think Natalie's game was probably most similar to Cirie's game in Exile Island or Rob C's game in the Amazon.

Edited December 21, 2014 by choclatechip45

[Guest]

That's the crux of the issue to me.  I'm just not buying what he was selling in presenting that distinction. I think he intended to hurt deeply with his words; it was a two-for-one for him. I do think he had dual motives to serve:  (a) being memorable at FTC, and (b) getting to deeply hurt folks he didn't like (does that make it a three-for-one bashing both Missy and Baylor?).

"Not buying what he was selling" is just how I felt.  I think there are many past Survivor players that are not professional actors that could really sell a tear-down or tantrum.  With Reed, I just saw a guy acting.  Which is kind of the definition of bad acting.  So him taking up my time with his audition was all the more annoying.

 

It'd be like if Baylor took that opportunity to sing an original country song about the virtues of her mother (and sang poorly).  

[Kromm]

The issue is not whether or not men are dumb enough to fall for that or how effective flirting is to get favours done for you. This issue is that is dangerous for women for several reasons, the main ones being a) this is a short-term strategy that most women can't use as they get older and is problematic because it takes the place of developing other skills that are more useful and longer-lasting that women could use to get their way, b) it encourages men to continue objectifying women and think that's all women have to offer and c) the power in this situation doesn't reside with the woman because it's still up to the man to decide if she's pretty enough/good enough, etc. for him to give her what she wants. So this is about more than the short-term gain of a woman getting a man to do her a favour or in making moves when trying to win a game, especially when CBS brands Parvati's flirting strategy as the archetype of a successful female winner.

But we're not here in a subject called "Life Lessons for Women", this is about Survivor gamesmanship and what works in the game.

I think it's okay to take issue with CBS trumpeting her as an example, sure. Because of the small possibility of people trying to apply her lessons/techniques elsewhere. But the subject I believe we stemmed from originally was when particular women have played a great game. And she did. It bothering many on an emotional/moral level is a separate thing--valid in it's own place when the question being asked is about the morals of Survivor rather than what makes people win.

[Lingo]

It seems to me that Reed, along with many other people (young people, I'm guessing), including some people defending him here -- seem to be confused about what an apology is and what it does.  Specifically, they seem to think that apologizing means not "owning" the action you're apologizing for.  They seem to think that if you apologize for something you said, then you're stating what you said wasn't true and that you didn't really mean it.  To me, that's not true.  You can still mean what you said and apologize for it at the same time.  If I were in Reed's shoes -- well, first of all I wouldn't have made that speech to begin with.  But at the Reunion, what I would have said (if I really felt I HAD to stand by what I said) was, "I still believe and mean what I said, but I'm sorry for saying it, because it served no purpose other than to hurt your feelings."  See, you can say that, and stand by what you said while at the same time taking responsibility for the consequences of it.

 

And like others said, with respect to many actions out there in Survivor, such as what Missy did, I don't really believe in a dichotomy between "the game" and "real life" -- I think that Survivor reflects who you are in real life to a large extent.  And I'm not sure Reed really believes in that dichotomy with respect to Missy either.  So I did feel like his disclaimer that he was talking only about in-game Missy was something of a cop-out.  Which I don't entirely have a problem with, because I'm not a big fan of "keeping it real." I do think that it's often better to be polite --no, KIND -- than to be honest, and to be kind, usually you don't even need to lie, you just need to keep your mouth shut!  And that's what Reed should have done at Tribal Council -- or, at least, he could have brought up his grievances with Missy in a less hurtful way.  (The persuasions of reality TV producers be damned!) And at the Reunion he should have apologized, but barring that, if saying that it was not "real-life Missy" was his way of showing some bit of kindness to her, then I don't have much problem with that.

 

I do think Reed's speech was designed only to hurt Missy (and for good TV), and I do think it's different than Sue Hawk's famous speech.  Sure, Sue's speech was probably also designed to hurt Kelly's feelings, but at least with Sue's speech she was also insulting Rich, so it felt more even-handed.  More importantly, you can argue that Sue was seriously trying to sway the jury with her speech -- remember, that vote ended up 4-3 -- so arguably Sue was trying to influence the game.  With Reed, I'm sure he already knew Missy would only get one vote, because according to Jeremy the guys at Ponderosa were constantly bitching about Missy and Baylor.  So his only purpose was to humiliate her.

 

Like others said, I still don't understand all the hate and resentment towards Missy (and Baylor), by the jury as well as by viewers, who have said that they "despise" her and call her "a nasty piece of work" in this very thread.  I accept that there must have been something -- more than we saw -- since all the players have complained about them in exit interviews.  I get that she was very careless and stubborn with respect to not rationing the rice; that was not cool.  And I see that she was very protective of her daughter.  I guess she was overprotective, and shouldn't have been, and I guess Baylor shouldn't have let Missy act like that.  But being overprotective, even to an irrational extent, is what I expect a mother to do.  That doesn't strike me as such a terrible thing.  So other than that I'm missing out on what is so terrible about her.

[choclatechip45]

 

More importantly, you can argue that Sue was seriously trying to sway the jury with her speech -- remember, that vote ended up 4-3 -- so arguably Sue was trying to influence the game.

I remember reading after Borneo aired that Gervase and some other members of pagong were originally going to vote for Richard, but felt bad for Kelly because of Sue's speech.