Board Thread:Survivor 24: Caracol/@comment-30582641-20170606184308/@comment-27018217-20170606193647

Alright I mean gonna address the bullshit now

Roodman claimed he played a more flexible game than me. But at Final 5, he said to me "I'm voting Forrest you can't change my mind". Hownin the world is that flexible? That's basically trying to shove his view onto mine.

Roodman also claims that in doing so, he had control over my vote. But my decision was my own. We deliberated for a long time on this, and my reasoning to go along with the vote was to keep our group together, and to convince Roodman I was completely his, when I was still working to build my game. Also, him being inflexible during F5 revealed to me how he wanted Luis as that second option, and what pushed me so hard to win F4 Immunity. If he had been more discrete, I may have pushed less, he could have won Immunity, and had options (like scare me into voting Anna). I had to swallow my pride and pretend I was being used, when really it didn't fully matter to me who left, as long as I got closer to the F3 I was setting up. Like I said, he didn't control me, because we debated for a long time, and I relented because it was better for my game to convince Roodman he was the full on leader.

He also claims my ideas were based on personal relationships, but let me ask you jurors. Why would I try to be fully honest and work with people who clearly didn't trust me, were against me and wanted me out? Anna and Roodman were sticking with me, and so I played with those that were loyal to me, because it was the best interest to my game. I did say that I wanted The Outcasts as Final 3 for some personal reasons, but I remind you that it was the best case for me! A Roodman, Forrest/Luis and me Final 3 would have been better for Roodman, yet he clearly didn't push hard enough to make that happen.

Also, he claims he had more to overcome, but who's fault was that? Roodman didn't think as much and made more problems for himself, while I was working to fix mine. I didn't wait until Rites of Passage to fix relationships, I still talked to people even as I deceived them. Roodman would make mistakes because he was super confident people would do what he said.

Next, Roodman claiming to have better judgement was surprising to me, and he's lying about certain details. Anna can back me up on these facts. During Thiru's tribal, we did debate whether to use the idol or not. I said trust Thiru because Roodman wasn't coming up with any better plan! He tried to get Lori on our side and it flopped. And at FINAL 6, there were huge signs that Lori wasn't trustworthy. The split vote plan would work better if Roodman used his idol, since it wasn't crucial we have two. But he was very much leaning to not use it and CONVINCED Lori was his sheep, even though Anna and I both have evidence and feelings that Lori wasn't to be trusted. It took Anna telling him Lori had told her she was thinking of voting Roodman to get him to use it. But oh yeah, Roodman was quite flexible.

Roodman was not flexible. He wouldn't admit that Luis, Forrest or Lori had a chance at beating us, saying "is three (The Outcasts) could easily beat those three", while I'd admit the good parts of their games.

Finally, I want to point out that I at least backed up some of my actions with evidence that showed. Roodman backed up stuff with shit I've told him and what others told him. One thing he should have considered, and didn't because I built myself up this way, is that I may have been bullshitting him. Anna offered him a F2 because I told her to, stuff I said during the debate at F6 and F5 was my way at testing if he was loyal to me and how much he wanted to be in control. Clearly, he was so obsessed with being in control, he blinded himself to many things.

Everything I did was for a reason. I'm ready to answer your questions and prove why these claims are wrong