>I have disliked Shelly all season,
>so I'm thrilled she's gone.
> I don't care if
>she played more game than
>the others. Good game
>is game that lasts to
>the end and doesn't blow
>up in your face when
>people start putting two and
>two together.

But, again, Shelley's game didn't blow up because people talked, it blew up because production decided to blow it up. She's leaving ONLY because of that twist.

Rachel has a game that simply will never win. Even if she and Brendon were to win every HoH comp in a season, she'd still lose the jury vote.

>For some reason I can't explain,
>with BB it matters more
>to me if the person
>has attractive qualities and pure
>game doesn't count if the
>person disgusts me. Example:
>Natalie, or Maggie.

Well, if you can't explain it than neither can I.
From my POV, game is always game, I always prefer the one that plays a good game but BB is much more random than Survivor. Maggie did play a good game even if she was detestable. One of the best listeners ever, at least the only one that could intimidate someone just by listening to him.

>Survivor is one where I really
>prefer the winner to be
>strategic.

You mean like Andrea and Fabio?!!!!

>So NO to Shelley, NO to
>Kalia, NO to Porsche because
>she had no presence for
>way too long and she
>has no depth to her.

Porsche didn't have presence because of that stupid Golden Key twist and the fact that Keith was a doofus that had to be eliminated first, leaving her with nothing to do. At least, Porsche was the first to see the future was with the veterans. And she had her eyes opened wide enough to realize they were only using her, so she switched. That is game.

>YES to Jordan,

She's an adorable moron. She has a game that is equivalent to absolute Zero and an IQ to match. I would only enjoy seeing her win as proof that someone can win twice (ie Sandra) and be a dumb player.

Rachel (unlikely but
>I would laugh so hard
>if it happened),

It won't...