I thought I'd put up a discussion thread about the comments on the front page. Their comments about Vee's victory are disappointing, but discussed elsewhere. I'd like to focus on their theory on lowered ratings. They say Survivor 3 had lower ratings due to Tina's win over Colby.

I say this is hogwash! Survivor: Outback may have contributed to lower viewing for S3, but only due to the extreme predictability. I didn't know about this site then, but on my own I knew who was going down every single week from Alicia on to the Final 2.

The main reason S3 had low ratings was that it sucked. The location was unappealing and so were the players. Talk about a boring Final 4!

I think that S:Marquesas has reinvigorated the series! It was by far the best since the original. It will be next to impossible to ever recapture the feeling of the first one, because we didn't know what to expect.

S5 may be good again, if they pick characters as interesting as those from this season. My hesitancy is that they're filming during monsoon season, and Survivor is at it's worst when the contestants are dealing with things like rainstorms. YAWN. But we'll see. I think the excellence of this season will guarantee high ratings for the first couple episodes of S5, at least.

• RE: Front Web Page Comments--S3 ratings, etc.,The Rusty Survivor, 11:53 AM, 05-21-02
• RE: Front Web Page Comments--S3 ratings, etc.,nailbone, 02:09 PM, 05-21-02

Obviously the people who run this site are appallingly biased.

"Judge not that you be not judged yourself".

For Survivor 5, let's hope they make some major changes.

As for the tiebreaker, it should only apply to those who were tied for votes. I haven't seen it yet, but it sounds pretty unfair.

>I thought I'd put up a
>discussion thread about the comments
>on the front page.
>Their comments about Vee's victory
>are disappointing, but discussed elsewhere.

Agreed.

> I'd like to focus
>on their theory on lowered
>ratings. They say Survivor
>3 had lower ratings due
>to Tina's win over Colby.
>
>
>I say this is hogwash!

Agreed once more. I joined the Survivor family late in S1, and LOVED S2!!

>Survivor: Outback may have contributed
>to lower viewing for S3,
>but only due to the
>extreme predictability. I didn't
>know about this site then,
>but on my own I
>knew who was going down
>every single week from Alicia
>on to the Final 2.
>
And yet it was fun to watch, IMO. Especially with the Jerri-hatin'. Plus, I was a big fellow-Texan fan of Colby.

>
>The main reason S3 had low
>ratings was that it sucked.
> The location was unappealing
>and so were the players.
> Talk about a boring
>Final 4!
>
Boring all the way through. Even with all the friction betwen the oldsters and the mall rats, I couldn't feel myself acring about any of them. I mainly watched to see who Lex was gonna screw up next.

>I think that S:Marquesas has reinvigorated
>the series! It was
>by far the best since
>the original. It will
>be next to impossible to
>ever recapture the feeling of
>the first one, because we
>didn't know what to expect.
>
And yet, if MB will play his cards right, and stop this repetition of challenges, etc. and REALLY introduce changes (other than the "pick a rock" tiebreaker which SUCKED!!!!) he can bring back the unpredictability.

>
>S5 may be good again, if
>they pick characters as interesting
>as those from this season.
> My hesitancy is that
>they're filming during monsoon season,
>and Survivor is at it's
>worst when the contestants are
>dealing with things like rainstorms.
> YAWN. But we'll
>see. I think the
>excellence of this season will
>guarantee high ratings for the
>first couple episodes of S5,
>at least.

Or at least edit the "dealing with things like rainstorms" better, like the flooded camp episode from S2. It does take some of the excitement out of it knowiing that they won't be allowed to be swept away to drown , but it can be done. MB is starting to get formulaic (see the Munson rules), and could really shake things up.

The road goes on forever and the party never ends - Robert Earl Keen