|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"The Russell Rant and Game Morality"
iltarion 1791 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
|
05-10-10, 04:03 AM (EST)
 
  |
|
"The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
I've been following Survivor since the beginning, and like many, I have come to rationalize most things that happen within the game as being acceptable BECAUSE of the game. However, Russell's insidious comments towards Rupert at the beginning of this last episode has caused me to reanalyze a lot of my thinking in this regard. I asked myself this question: if you were put on an island with other people and there were no laws and no rules, would you still follow some? Does the absence of law or ramification excuse breaking the rules?You know what? I say NO. I say, the rules would then be even MORE important. So... HERE... WE... GO... Russell says, "Rupert, you are such a dumbass." No, Russell, YOU'RE the DUMBASS, and the funny thing about it is that like a crazy person, everyone sees it but you. You will swear on your kids' life to win. You will do ANYTHING to win. And yet, you CAN'T win. You call Rupert a dumbass, and yet HE gets it 100 times better than you. HE could actually win. He could go on an IC run and make it to the end and win the vote. As unlikely as that is, it is still far better than the chances you have. Don't you see how PATHETIC that is? You are like a child wrestling with adults. You will bite and claw and scream and do whatever it takes to try to win, but it is all USELESS. You're not a villian, dumbass. You are a cautionary tale. You are a court jester. YOU are a joke far worse than Erik or Jamie or James could ever be. Obviously, I would never swear anything on my kids' lives, and I consider doing so beyond the realm of the game. Does the quest for the million dollars excuse everything? That sounds awfully familiar in these times. Who cares about the rules? I was trying to make money. That's more important than any rules.
I'm sure Russell would say his kids could care less if he swore on their lives in an attempt to win a million dollars that he can't possibly win anyway. Well, that's doubly pathetic. MY kids WILL care. You know why? Because I'M their father, and as crazy as this may sound nowadays, SOME THINGS ARE WORTH MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS! p/o >
|
|
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
krismiss2us 768 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
05-10-10, 04:36 PM (EST)
 |
|
1. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
You raise some very interesting points. And I agree with you. I too would never swear on my child's life. I tend to be an optimist and see the best in people. I believe people until they give me reason not to. I detest liars, people with double standards, etc. Yet for some reason, I find myself liking Russell and his gameplay. What does this say? hopefully nothing about my character as a person. Because as I said, I would not do a lot of the things he has done to further my own game. Yet as far as television is concerned, I find the "character" of Russell interesting and want to see more of him in the game. But maybe it's because of all of those things - you know, he makes for good tv. but i just wanted to say, you make very valid points and i agree with them (not that you need my validation or anything) but i am curious as to how many other people are out there who think like i do? That we ourselves would not stoop to that level, but find it "interesting" (for lack of a better word) for TV and like that type of person as a "character" in a show? BTW, I like Rupert too. They are my faves - one from each team.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-10-10, 05:53 PM (EST)
|
|
3. "Not Fragile" |
LAST EDITED ON 05-10-10 AT 05:56 PM (EST)
First of all, Rupert provoked the outburst. Rupert's a big boy and he can defend himself and he probably gave just as bad as he got. I'm not fragile, I laughed it off.
Second, I'm pretty sure much, much worse things get said on any given Sunday in the trenches of an NFL game between players. Now, if we'd include the fans... And, sadly, I've heard married couples yell things much more hurtfull at each other. About swearing on someone's lives, I wouldn't do it but mainly because others know it means nothing. Even if I did mean it, they'd be suspicious. You get someone's trust by your actions, by aligning your vote, not by any swear, promise or hand shake. The Heroes should have known better. Anyway, judging by this picture: 
Rupert either isn't really a man of principle or he was only upset that Russell wasn't doing his dirty deeds on his behalf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And, if that wasn't enough, Rupert is a dumbass! Putting a rock in his pocket was the first smart thing he'd done since stealing Morgone's shoes almost 3 full seasons ago! Stealing personal property is a crime in the real world but we all laughed it off back then. Is a crime only punishable if we don't like the offender?
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
 |
|
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-10-10, 08:25 PM (EST)
|
|
5. "RE: Not Fragile" |
LAST EDITED ON 05-10-10 AT 08:32 PM (EST)No, the editors showed him selling those shoes for more supplies and most fans fell in love with the Pirate at that moment. I dare you to find smart moves other than making alliances. Any dummy can do that. The guy never saw his first boot coming, he blindly followed Romber until he hit a wall and now he went along with JT's plan to give Russell the idol. Like Ozzy, he ALWAYS believes his allies will stay with him to the end. Rupert isn't a smart player, just a good character. "Russell will do anything to win, and yet in doing so, he costs himself any chance to win" That's what I've been saying for two seasons now. Last season you thought he should have won but he has played the exact same game. If you noted, I wasn't defending his game, just saying that his outburst was nothing to write about. Rupert himself agreed with me when he chose to align with the most terrible villain ever. I see you avoided that part of my argument. Edited to answer this question I had skipped over at first: "Does the absence of law or ramification excuse breaking the rules?" There isn't absence of ramifications in Survivor: There is a Jury. That's why it's there. That's why Russell can't win. That's why the jury got it right last season. Not because of his "insidious comments" with Rupert but because of his horrible overall social game.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
garcor 432 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star"
|
05-10-10, 10:31 PM (EST)
|
|
6. "RE: Not Fragile" |
I think Rupert did intentionally provoke Russell's outburst. He figured he was next to go and was trying to start something, anything that might change that fact.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
Spanky68 8092 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-11-10, 12:33 PM (EST)
|
|
10. "RE: Not Fragile" |
First of all, Rupert isn't a saint. Yes, he did provoke Russell, though I would argue he had EVERY right to confront him publicly since Russell's lie was so egregious.I wasn't really offended that Russell called Rupe a dumb@$$ because I knew Russell was cornered there and needed to shift attention away from himself. I expected the outburst. My main point is that we don't yet know if Rupe is actually aligned with Russell. He might just be patting Russell on the back to find the best place to stab him. If that sounds less than heroic, then consider the fact that when you've been backstabbed, there is a bigger temptation to repay the dirty deed in kind. And if Rupe has thrown in with Russell, I think it is a SUPERB play for Rupe down the line (if he can live with himself until the final TC). In a final TC between Rupe and Russell it would have to be unanimous for Rupe (or very close to it). 
Agman made this fancy sig for me
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-11-10, 06:56 PM (EST)
|
|
15. "RE: Not Fragile" |
>My main point is that we
>don't yet know if Rupe
>is actually aligned with Russell. We do know that he simply voted Danielle as Russell suggested. That's what an alliance is. Rupert could have gone to Parvati and Danielle and told them he would vote with them if they wanted to get Russell out. I'm not saying that move would have been smart or not but it would have been aligned with his principles IF he had any. >And if Rupe has thrown in
>with Russell, I think it
>is a SUPERB play for
>Rupe down the line (if
>he can live with himself
>until the final TC). I wasn't analyzing the merit of the move. Of course it's better to be aligned with Russell at this point. I was just arguing that Rupert was being extremely hypocrite to start the episode saying he wanted to show everyone it was disgusting to be aligned with such a vile player and then, a day or so later, he's bumping fists as if they were old war buddies. I was ONLY asking how he could live with himself and how could his fans not criticize him.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
udg 3038 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Car Show Celebrity"
|
05-11-10, 07:44 PM (EST)
|
|
18. "RE: Not Fragile" |
Rupert could have gone to Parvati and Danielle and told them he would vote with them if they wanted to get Russell out.The only problem with that plan is that Russell had immunity. At that point, it was Rupert, Colby or Danielle who were going. Rupert obviously wasn't going to vote for himself or Colby, and throwing a vote at Parv or Jerri wouldn't have done much good. So, yeah, voting for Danielle was smart, but it doesn't mean he was aligned with Russell at that point. Only that he had few options at that TC and picked the only one that would keep him and his alliance (Colby) safe. Next week, his best move is to make sure Russell looks like a bigger target than he does, but if Russell gets immunity again, he has to have a plan B. 
Slice n' Dice's Sigpic Chop Shop 2004
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
zipperhead 3442 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Car Show Celebrity"
|
05-11-10, 10:59 AM (EST)
|
|
8. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
First of all, I've always liked Rupert. He may not be the best game player (hasn't won so far in three attempts), but I just like the person who comes across my TV screen. Your mileage may vary.Second of all, I have never liked Russel. Anyone who does absolutely bizarre things like throwing a teammate's socks into the fire (last season) is a moron and borderline sociopathic. Getting to iltarion's point - No, I do not believe that the absence of "laws" and ramifications means that you should do whatever you want "because it's just a game". My favorite example would be Lil, also from Pirate Islands. That b!tch wore her boyscout gear throughout the show, yet she was very vindictive and, if I recall correctly, outright lied to get people voted off. Before the jury, she turned around and said, "Really, I'm a nice person." Nope, sorry. If you're a crooked player, you're a crooked human being. People who are comfortable being crooked, like Johnny Fairplay, are entertaining to watch and root against. But they're still crooked. This brings us to Russel. He may be lucky in finding HII to further himself in the game - and By God do they need to change the way they hide those things. But his alliance making is just outright lying that devolves into bullying. A person will not become a bully in a game unless they are comfortable doing it "in real life". That's another point that needs to be addressed. This game is not complpetely scripted. This game does not happen in an alternate reality. This game happens IN REAL LIFE. So anything a player does not cannot be excused as something they wouldn't do - cause they just did it! If they lie and cheat and bully and *boggle* burn socks or bury machetes in the game, then they have done those things in real life.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Snidget 43862 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-11-10, 02:34 PM (EST)
|
|
13. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
I do think most of us are capable of things we do not normally do in normal life at least when life is lifing along in a comfortable way and no big incentive is dangling in front of us.But like a lot of people will pull out whatever lie or bad behavior they need to during, lets say a custody battle, there are situations where any person may deviate from lets call it "every day behavior". So a "I don't do this" may be really mostly true. A lot of people don't know what values and morals they will drop or what lengths they will go to in extraordinary circumstances. I think this is why there is so much "they seemed so normal" from the neighbors interviewed on the news. When life is normal, they really are pretty normal, but under certain circumstances they do things most of us will not do. (or like to believe we won't do) Now some people do, in these games, seem way too comfortable with certain actions for it to be some place they never went before. It just may be someplace they only go for certain reasons. That is why a lot of times I do take post-show interviews and out of the game thins into consideration in the long term view of the person. Part of the game of Survivor is you have to make moves that will get you to the end of the game. And have to be able to justify those moves to the jury. There is some accountability for your actions and you can't blame the jury votes on the editing. However those may not be moves people would make with their friends or family, or even in business dealings, at least, like I said, if life is lifing nicely. On the other hand, some people do the same thing in the interviews or in post-show things that get them arrested that seem to indicate the show persona really is their standard operating procedure, not just how they had to play the game to get to the end. I, for one, would never take a "I swear on the life of________" seriously if offered in a game like Survivor as a real promise. It is just what they think they need to say right now to get me on their side for the next vote (or maybe a move or two out). Now if the producers actually had their loved ones in captivity and they would actually kill or maim them based on the word of someone in the game I might give it a tiny bit of credence, but I don't see where adding carp into the promises somehow makes them more sincere or real.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
krismiss2us 768 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
05-11-10, 09:29 PM (EST)
|
|
20. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Snidget you hit the nail on the head! Some of the above comments that people made saying how they wouldn't trust these people b/c of how they play this game are unfair and unfounded. As you state, extraordinary circumstances change a person. Your equation of a custody dispute is really quite true...and if you or someone you know is going through one, good luck. Been there...still doing that.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-11-10, 07:23 PM (EST)
|
|
16. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
"My favorite example would be Lil, also from Pirate Islands. That b!tch wore her boyscout gear throughout the show, yet she was very vindictive and, if I recall correctly, outright lied to get people voted off"That is an extremely superficial analysis. First of all, Lill didn't have a choice about wearing the uniform. Players were told they were going to simply shoot promos and were trapped with the clothes on their back. Lill did say she regretted having to wear the uniform but what else could she do? Parade naked like Hatch? I would hope not! Second: She was very nice up to the time Savage decided she needed to be voted out and lied to her about it. Once she returned as an Outcast, she was angry at him and him alone. Later, after the Rupert vote, (which was orchestrated by her new allies, JFP and Burton) Sandra and Christa became horribly mean to her. That was never shown but during their stay in exile while Fairplay was alone in camp with Danger Dan, the girls threw sand in her face and her food and called her all sorts of name. Days of that kind of abuse gets to a person. I've had the chance to exchange e-mails with Lill and she is a truly nice person that was caught up in an extremely difficult situation. "This game is not complpetely scripted. This game does not happen in an alternate reality. This game happens IN REAL LIFE." Have you played? I'll assume not so I'll inform you that if it does happen for real, it's absolutely not real life in the sense of normal day-to-day situations. It's not as abnormal a situation as we heard some real castaways having to cannibalize their own fellow stranded partners but it is an extreme situation nevertheless. It's not for nothing that every player gets a psychological evaluation once they leave the game. I do believe most people could do very unexpected things under extreme situations. You would probably say you'd never kill anyone but if someone harms, rapes or kills someone you love you'd probably want to lynch him. Survivor is an extreme situation, especially if you are facing the prospect of being voted out.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
krismiss2us 768 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
05-11-10, 09:32 PM (EST)
|
|
21. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Michael, another well thought out reply. I agree with your statements. And anyone who thinks any reality show is not scripted is well, call me. I have some ocean-front property in Arizona I'll sell ya real cheap.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-12-10, 06:15 PM (EST)
|
|
26. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Funny how you go from mocking me because you think I claimed to know Lill by exchanging a few e-mails but then, one paragraph later, you judge Russell's stress level by the way he looks!You should have considered how I got to exchange e-mails with Lill. Funny story which I never told so I'm going to bore you to death with the details. Sucks was having another endless list thread, this one about the best 2nd place finishers. Sukctards were simply in love with Lill, saying that, even if she didn't know how to play at first, she used her opportunity as an outcast to run the game, deciding every crucial votes, from Savage, Ryno, Rupert, Burton and Fairplay. They had her way up there as one of the best second placers. I came along and bashed Lill, saying that she wasn't even a second place finisher, she had finished 14th. I added that it was easy for her to be in the majority because every sane player wanted to be in the F2 with her. Only stupid Sandra wanted to vote her out. I added that the only thing Lill ever did in Survivor was whoop Johnny's ass in the last challenge. Lill must have been lurking because she sent me a PM saying that she loved reading what I had said about whooping Johnny. She added that she knew she wasn't a good player but that moment had been worth it. Not a trace of animosity despite my rant. We exchanged for a while and, even if that doesn't mean I know her, it did tell me she was a nice, sincere woman in real life. The jury didn't like her because, as Sandra stupidly said, Lill was responsible for almost everyone sitting there. That could have backfired on Sandra but no one was ever going to vote for an Outcast. PS: The sand wasn't brought up in FTC because Lill had forgiven Sandra by then. T was the one that mentioned it in an interview as a reason why she didn't vote for Sandra.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-12-10, 05:48 PM (EST)
|
|
25. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
But her fingers were crossed! 
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
iltarion 1791 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"
|
05-13-10, 02:18 PM (EST)
|
|
30. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
LAST EDITED ON 05-13-10 AT 02:33 PM (EST)In ranting about Russell swearing on the lives of his children, I would include anyone in the game, including Sandra, who EVER did likewise. I didn't think I needed to name every person who has ever done it. Consider that rant as regarding the ACT and not the person. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows that I once called Sandra a "useless human being" and swearing on her children was one of the reasons for that. Hey, I just disagree with everyone who says "well, they are just words. It isn't like his kids are going to die if he doesn't keep his word." I think that is completely missing the point. Words alone mean plenty. Wars have started over words. People have lived and died over words. Are we to lie every time a possible benefit results from the lie? I think I just described the reason for every lie ever told. If the answer is yes, then all lies are right. If that is what we believe, then we are truly lost. Just my opinion on that. I have extremely strong opinions about lying. In the movie Excalibur, Merlin is asked what the most important trait of a "knight"/virtuous person is, he responds, "Truth. It must be truth. When a man lies he murders a part of the world." That is about what I think of that. Anyway, regarding the specific lie of swearing on your children, the point is that we should hold some things sacred: things we would not discard for a million dollars. I'm not saying Russell doesn't love his children and would actually sacrifice them for a million dollars (maybe he would), but I am saying he has no HONOR. That probably means nothing to 90% of the people on here, but it means something to me. I DO judge Russell, as I judge everyone, and I'm straight up about it. Saying we can not judge Russell because we haven't been there is pointless. Have you ever been a CEO of a company? Then don't judge. Have you ever been a Wall Street trader? Then don't judge. Have you ever been in Congress? Then don't judge. Heck, technically we haven't walked in anyone else's shoes, so by that reasoning, we can't judge anyone! I reject that. But I also don't proclaim to know everything. Russell could be a totally different guy than what I see on TV, but I doubt it. Regardless, I judge what I see. I believe Lil was/is a good person. She was just incredibly irritating on PI. I didn't see anything to lead me to believe she isn't a good person. People get defensive whenever someone openly espouses a value system. I don't, nor should I considering everything I just posted. I laugh at the comparison to Survivor as "an extreme circumstance." Yeah, the contestants are so stressed that they sit on the beach doing nothing all day. They are so stressed that they vote out their most productive members at the drop of a hat. IF Survivor was an extreme circumstance, then the social game would be second to surviving. Let's call it a "different" circumstance, maybe a "unique" one, but extreme? Please. If the point is to win the game, then yeah, Russell is a dumbass and Rupert is not. As I made in my original point, Russell has no chance to win; Rupert does. If the point of the game is to make it to the end, then Russell is the greatest player of all time (if he makes it to the end again). BTW, if Russell were somehow to win this, then my entire rant is null and void, except for Russell having no honor. That would still stand. p/o >
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
krismiss2us 768 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
05-13-10, 04:30 PM (EST)
|
|
31. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Dude! I love the way you argue! Are you a lawyer? lol. You make very valid points about my comment re: judging others. So, for that, thank you. I will keep those in mind. However, regarding the statement that Survivor is not an extreme circumstance, I have to call you out on that. It is an extreme circumstance. Let me take you from your family, friends, work, comfortable surroundings, and modern conveniences, Then tell me that you are not in an extraordinary circumstance that may skew your line of thinking.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-13-10, 10:07 PM (EST)
|
|
33. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
LAST EDITED ON 05-13-10 AT 11:19 PM (EST)"Wars have started over words." Only in very particular circumstances. Not on Survivor.
"People have lived and died over words."
Again, in very particular circumstances because no one has ever died on Survivor and those who kill over words belong in jail, not on my TV. "Merlin...responds, "Truth. It must be truth. When a man lies he murders a part of the world." Certainly in your dealings with family, friends and community, in your work and your art. In a game like Survivor there is no truth, just a vote. When we judge a CEO or a congressman, we usually rely on good investigations by journalists or law officers. In Survivor, we only have Burnett's POV. We have to be careful. "I laugh at the comparison to Survivor as "an extreme circumstance." Since this was addressed directly at me, this is what I wanted to get to. Every Survivor that played hard has said how tough mentally the game is, how much they found out about themselves and how difficult it was to keep focus on the different strategies and options. Some like Amanda and Danielle even said it felt as if their head was about to explode. Yau Man said it was so tough he couldn't remember anything. Tocantins Jerry even said it was tougher than Afghanistan. Now that may be a little more extreme than I meant and was really done to flatter Burnett but he still said it, not me. They are alone, they have no one but themselves to rely on, they have no one they can really trust and even those who call themselves your friends are trying to outwit you. Put a million dollar on the line and I'd call that extreme. When Jeff says "I'll read the votes" I know for a fact that some hearts are racing a mile a minute. When Jeff snuffs their torch, they've said that they are like in an altered state. Extreme.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Jaxxjack 34 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
05-14-10, 11:31 AM (EST)
|
|
36. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Normally, I take my daily entertainment in reading the inevitable arguments that develop between Michel and Iltarion, but I feel that I had to address the argument that Survivor is an "extreme" situation. In MY opinion, my definition of "extreme" is a life or death situation, such as a soldier under fire. What he/she does in that situation says a lot about their character. To me, Survivor is nowhere NEAR an extreme situation. They are not in mortal danger. If they decide they have had enough, they can go up to a cameraman, for example, and say, "Thats it, I quit", and go check into a hotel somewhere.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
michel 10812 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-14-10, 06:18 PM (EST)
|
|
40. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Hello Jaxxjack. I'm glad I can entertain you! Afterall, that's the only reason why we're here.I will respond by saying that it's the opinion of those who have played that convinces me. That's why I brought examples of different players. With very few exceptions, all players have said that Survivor was the toughest thing they have ever done. That is enough to qualify as extreme considering most are bartenders, sales rep and what have you. Extreme doesn't have to be Life and Death as shown by "extreme sports" which include snowboarding. Even so, if you need life and death to convince you, remember Russell Swan who came close to dying, that a staffer did die when testing a challenge or the lions and water buffaloes in Kenya.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
Snidget 43862 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
05-14-10, 06:57 PM (EST)
|
|
41. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
Well I think we can agree it isn't just situation normal kicking back and relaxing or even normal day to day activity.All Reality TV, IMO, is designed to be "extreme" in some way. It is supposed to stress you out, play on your emotions and motivations and push you to the what are you willing/not willing to do edge. After all that is what causes the drama and the characters and the story. We usually want something we don't see sitting on the porch watching the neighbors sitting on their porches. Different shows do it in different ways but all of them have some stressing you out element to it. Either from short time lines or limitation in materials to physical/mental challenges on no food and little sleep. I do think that people who have played these games almost always say it is tough and life altering in some way indicates it is outside of what most people experience in day to day life. Now it certainly isn't "life changing" as in "massive trauma" like some extreme situations, but I don't know many people that go through (to pick an example) a really nasty custody battle or other "stressful" situations and say they learned nothing at all about what they will or will not do even when pushed to the edge for something that is high stakes.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
sportsjoe 61 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"
|
05-15-10, 08:04 AM (EST)
|
|
42. "RE: The Russell Rant and Game Morality" |
LAST EDITED ON 05-15-10 AT 08:17 AM (EST)Let me get my 2 cents in before the thread is closed permanently lol. I think most of us agree Russell is an #####. I hate him more than Rob. But I will say this about him, he is one of the smartest players to play. The way he controls a game is unreal. When he sees a threat to himself he gets them out right away. Those were the people who saw right through his lies and bullshit. Smart guy. But for a guy like him to be able to make it as far as he does, you need dumbass players to follow him also. I'm really disappointed in many of the all-star players, especially the heroes. Stupid and clueless, makes me wonder then how hard the game really is if these are the best of the best. Russell has big balls like myself, and that is another reason why he does well. When Colby failed to back Amanda when she took the clue from Danielle, that showed how gutless the heroes are. Maybe I shouldn't lump all the heroes in that sentence, but many of them. That gets me to thinking, they should cast the next Survivor from all of us here. If we're all experts then we should have no problem lol. Seriously though, I think we would do a better job than some of these so called All Stars! p.s. that being said, Russell plays smart enough to get to the end, but I don't think he will ever win it the way he plays, it's a paradox!
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
