In summary:

Give no one your full trust, always look for the ulterior motive because it's got to be a setup, try to figure out what others are doing before they do it to you, and whatever happens, don't start feeling. It's not personal, after all. You were just there to be attacked. Happens all the time.

Pick strategic points to strike, don't display power unless there's no other choice, never be arrogant, glide for short periods if it's at all possible, and always watch your back.

Oh, and go through the rulebook and every challenge description as if the smallest loophole would let you save your life. Then, whenever possible, dive through it.

(Not necessarily my play, but I've been told it works.)

I'm a casting lock for the VH1 show of my choice. CBS, not so much.

That's pretty much what your character Alex did in your fanfic.

If I applied and got on, I'd start out by telling myself that lying is part of the game. Once I got there, I'd try to get myself into two mini-alliances within a larger one and set myself up as the person who's in between and then I'd take it from there.

I'd try to get myself into two mini-alliances within a larger one and set myself up as the person who's in between

So basically (for example) two blocks of three within a group of five, and you're the third person in each block? That's risky -- the cliques tend to keep an eye on each other and make note of who's been spending how much time talking to the other side. You'd have to work with serious stealth to keep a double agent position under the radar, and all it takes to blow things up is for someone in a mini-block to consider jumping ship and start scouting the other side. '..what do you mean, 'she's been with us all along'?'

I wouldn't lie. For one thing, like Amanda, I'm not very good at it. Secondly, I don't believe it is necessary to win. Rob, far from the JFP the jury painted him as, essentially lied to two people- Grant and Ashley. Both of which could have been avoided. Grant was in no position to contest his ouster. Rob had immunity when they booted Ashley. He could have told her straight out she was going. No threat to him.

Lies are typically the path of least resistance. They can be usually pretty easily avoided, with merely the right twist of words. I believe deception is part of the game, and I wouldn't have a problem with that. But deception can be done without outright lies. It just takes more thought.

I have always said players like JFP and Russell who are willing to forego all rules to win show a LACK of mental aptitude. They have to play dirtier than everyone else because they CAN'T win otherwise. In other words, they need the advantage the morality of others provides them. Without it, they are clueless.

I believe I would mostly play it by ear. Keep my mouth shut at first, until I felt I had some respect. Pay attention to the dynamics and give the tribe whatever it needed, whether it was a leader or a follower. I would be straight with people, as much as possible, and hope that would lead to trust. I would avoid the typical pitfalls of Survivor and remain humble within the game. Yes, Rob might have gone overboard in some of his confessionals, likely for comedic effect, but he always remained aware that his game could end in one bad move or break.

Essentially I would be myself. I personally think I am an entertaining enough guy that I wouldn't have to become a caricature to get screen time.

>

LAST EDITED ON 05-16-11 AT 10:00 PM (EST)

Did you not hear what Rob said? At one point, everyone thought they were going to the end with him. Those were the lies, not just what he said the day he voted out Grant and Ashley. He played a 38 day "long con" with those 2.
But that wasn't all:

- Andrea thought he was her big brother. Was it magical thinking or was it because he led her to feel secure with words he didn't mean.
- Matt confessed his thoughts of betrayal and Rob shook his hand, thanking him for his honesty. Rob certainly needed for Matt to believe his handshake was sincere because Matt had an escape route.
-Even his buddy system was presented to his allies as a way to keep the other tribe away but it was done so that Zap would hate the Omes. It worked when we heard that they thought Natalie was creepy.
- He lied to Natalie when he told her he was giving her FTC pointers because he told us he wanted her to say things that would help him.

No one, not even Tom or Yul, played and won without lies. It cannot be done.

I think we have had this discussion before. I am delineating between outright lies and merely being dishonest. You can say it is splitting hairs, perhaps, but it makes a difference to me.

For instance, if Rob always told Grant he was F3, planning to boot Ashley at F5 and Natalie at F4, but Ashley wins immunity at F5, whereupon Rob boots Grant, I don't consider that constituting a lie. I consider that a change of plans. Plans change. If you tell me you are stopping by for a drink, but then a good friend shows up and delays you, did you lie to me? No. Plans change.

You can easily befriend someone, make a connection, earn their trust and even form a special bond without lying about the end game. I doubt Rob promised anyone outside of Grant, Ashley, Phillip, and Natalie a trip to the F3, which is why I say he likely only lied to Grant and Ashley. And even if he did, I would consider those promises broken, not lies.

An outright lie has essentially no element of time. It is a lie at the moment it is said. It does not BECOME a lie, So, Rob may have made promises to Andrea that he didn't keep, but I consider those promises broken, not lies.

If I played, I would have no problem telling someone I was taking them to the F3 and then booting them at F5. I wouldn't consider that a lie. It was a promise unkept or a change in plans. However, if they asked me at F5 if they were going home, I would find a way around the question, just not answer it, or tell the truth. I wouldn't just lie to their face.

So, yeah, I accept a certain amount of dishonesty and deception within the game, but I don't accept lying. Lying SUX.

>

"I accept a certain amount of dishonesty and deception within the game"

That is the way the game works but I think this is the first time you've stated so directly.

But the conversation about splitting hairs was also shared by Terry and Nick. Terry said he didn't shake Ruth's hand so the promise he made to her didn't mean anything. Nick called it hollow rationalization.

I do like the "It is a lie at the moment it is said. It does not BECOME a lie" argument however. It sounds true but it falls short when you consider he said the same to everyone. The F3 cannot contain 6 people so, yes, Rob knew when he said it that he was lying. He may not have known to which player he was lying but he had to be lying to someone!

If I tell you and 4 other friends that I am stopping by each of your place at the same time but then wait at the last moment to choose which invitation I prefer, then yes, I did lie when I accepted all those invitations. And some promises are more important than others: How would you feel if I promised to pick you up at the airport but cancelled last minute because a good friend invited me for a drink. Would you shrug it off as change of plans?

Anyway, it seemed that Grant was most upset after seeing Rob on TV switching the idol clues. That was a blatant lie.

"If I tell you and 4 other friends that I am stopping by each of your place at the same time but then wait at the last moment to choose which invitation I prefer, then yes, I did lie when I accepted all those invitations."

I wouldn't consider that lying. At the time you accepted my invitation, you didn't KNOW that you wouldn't be picking mine. You have to first know the truth in order to lie. What you are referring to there- non-full disclosure - I consider that being dishonest, true, but not outright lying. Again, I accept dishonesty as part of the game, but I believe most lies as being avoidable. Natalie lied to Ashley when Ashley asked her if she was in trouble before TC at F4. Natalie KNEW Ashley was going home when she told her there was no trouble. Why lie? What could Ashley have done if she told her the truth? Rather than lying, Natalie could have simply said that Rob and Phillip were going to vote for Ashley (true), and that she was still deciding whether to vote for Phillip or take the safe route and vote for Ashley. Ashley still would have been upset by Natalie voting for her, but it would have been mitigated by Natalie at least being honest about it. Natalie might have gotten Ashley's vote, not that it would have mattered.

>

Or Ashley could have gone to Rob, telling him that Natalie had told her his secret and Rob could have turned the vote on Natalie. I know, at that particular stage of the game it was unlikely, but still, that's why people lie: Self-preservation. Anyway, Natalie's lie was dumb; I was talking about the web of lies, or dishonesty if you prefer, that Rob spun. Switching the idol clue, presenting the old clue as if it was the new one, that was a lie, right?

As for the drink invitation, how do you know yours was the first I received? But hey! I'll have that drink! Cheers, old friend!

No, for Grant it WAS a new clue. Sounds like deception to me. I'd have to watch it again to see if actual lies were involved.

And actually, it just occurred to me, where the heck has Aruba been??

>

True, but there's a way around it -- tell both cliques that you're only pretending to be with the other one. That should keep the heat off of me enough for me to decide which side I should stay with -- which hopefully shouldn't take long.

LAST EDITED ON 05-16-11 AT 07:59 PM (EST)

Most likely ineptly. At least when it came to strategizing. I'm not social enough. Tribe would probably keep me around a while for hard work and fitness unless they bounce me early because of age.

More like Rob or Grant? More like Grant.

I think the most difficult thing in this game, is what happens in confessionals...I think that the reason why Grant still was so upset, was because they JUST WATCHED the final 2 hours when Rob hurt him...he didn't know any of that until we saw it.

I would have a very hard time not seeming like Philip or Natalie...I think one minute my game play would be both...rather goofy and trying to be everyone's mom.

The one thing that the past couple of #2 player winners did that Natalie didn't do...she didn't allow the jury to know that she did exactly what she set out to do...put her self with the strongest team player and help him with the best moves and not make any enemies...her youth...didn't know how to work the jury.

Other than Phillip calling Rob the MENTALIST and David making his brilliant closing argument. How could Rob not win?

LAST EDITED ON 05-17-11 AT 06:43 PM (EST)

I view Survivor mostly as a game separate from life, somewhat like playing a board game with friends. I realize that it is a tricky distinction, though, because instead of manipulating pieces around a board, you're manipulating people... So ethics do get a little involved.

Me and my friends play a lot of board/card games together. And, to be perfectly honest, some of those games do get a little, uh, ruthless. Is it unethical for me to build a bunch of hotels in Monopoly when I see players coming around the board? Sure, you might say it's mean-spirited, but it's part of the strategy of the game. In real life, I would most certainly show mercy because real life (unlike Survivor or Monopoly) isn't a zero-sum game.

Is it unethical for me to break a treaty in Risk? Yeah, probably, since then you're lying in a social sense. But, even still, lying is a bad strategy anyway. In game theory, there's a concept called the "kingmaker" where a 3rd place player who cannot win gets to decide which of the other players does win. And, in my Risk example, who do think that player is going to reward? The guy who broke his treaty? The guy who acted like a jerk the whole game? No way.

One of my friends in particular can never, ever win a board game because he seems so smug when he's in the lead (or, at least, I try to fuel that sentiment). So those games are basically me playing a solid 2nd-place kind of game waiting for one of my friends basically handing me the game by screwing him over. When he moved to California, it suddenly meant I had to win games on my own.