Posts

Levels of Big Brother Campaigns

In most cases, when a Big Brother player is on the block and about to be evicted, there are multiple days before the fateful night to campaign to stay.  In one of the many cases where someone is in the position to know they're in trouble from the time an HOH is crowned, there is a whole week.  There are still other times where someone knows they're in a tenuous position to be evicted a couple weeks in advance and can work to prevent that, but this post won't focus on them. In this period of time, there are multiple "levels" of campaigning that a person can partake in: Level 0: Lay Down and Die.  Somehow, a Level 0 campaigner finds things to do in a house with little sources of entertainment, and no contact with the outside world, for multiple days, without putting any significant effort in attempting to stay in the house.  Frankly, there really are very few excuses for a HouseGuest to play this role, except for in some rare circumstances (good luck to Jameka in

How Many Players Would Do What Erik Did?

Image
On the face of it, Erik's decision in Survivor: Micronesia to give up immunity to Natalie is something only an idiot would do- after all, not only did he give up immunity, but he gave up immunity while he was in the final five with a four-person alliance!  And he gave it to the fourth person in said alliance to boot. Thinking about things from Erik's perspective, though, I've wondered whether a decent amount of Survivor players would have fallen for similar tactics as those used on Erik by the Black Widow Brigade in the leadup to his fateful decision. I'll try to go over the beliefs and actions of Erik in his boot episode, and try to see how many players would have fallen into the same traps. The episode starts out with Erik talking to Natalie; they promise to send each other to exile if one of them wins the reward, so one of them can get the idol.  Which leads to the first belief: Erik believes that Natalie is on his side against the remaining Favorites. I thin

On Survivor Rankings, the variance of Survivor, and where winners could have lost

Preface: I originally intended this as an original r/survivor post, but it got too long. SPOILERS: If you do not wish to know how any of the first 29 seasons of Survivor went, or how Survivor Oz's rankings of Survivor players up to that point (done around the start of 2015) went, do not read this post. I've been getting back into Survivor for the past few weeks, and listening through Survivor Oz's pre-Worlds-Apart rankings of every Survivor player up to that point (yes, I listened to all of it in the past week) was really illuminating- particularly in the end, where it really exposed a strange attitude that seems prevalent in the Survivor community. The worst winner (Natalie White) came in at number 40.  Given that there were 442 Survivor players at this point, this means they thought the worst winner of Survivor was better than roughly ten out of eleven of the other players, and more than 97% of the non-winners.  The best non-winner (Cirie) came in at number 20.  Thi