Board Thread:Survivor 22: San Marcos/@comment-25438226-20170208233838/@comment-27845097-20170209120319

WTF Renz, this was so long!! Anyways this took me HOURS, and I hope the entire jury can read through this, because I think this is the most depth I’ve gone into my answers so far.

'''1. You said you spent a lot of time being apologetic about your moves. Uhmmmm… What moves??? And why do you think is the reason why you were apologetic about em?'''

If you don’t like the term ‘moves’, we can use the term decisions. I was definitely making most of the decisions after Austin left, as he was a shield, but I was able to stay UTR after he left because Nathaniel/Shea were occupied with Chris/Claudia/Jenna and that trio was occupied with Nathaniel. I think I’ve been apologetic about it all because of how I was constantly being told that I was making the wrong decision, and this is obviously what anyone campaigning would do, but all parties consistently reiterated the fact that Nathaniel would win in a landslide, or Chris would win in a landslide, or Claudia, etc. I felt bad voting out these people out, but they tried to make me doubt my decisions, and the fact of the matter is, I don’t. My decisions got me here, sitting at Final Tribal, and maybe they were right if Nathaniel wins, but I believe it is up in the air, so I’ll leave it at that.

'''2. You said people are quick to give you the blame, and not credit. From what I heard, you talked down to some of the people, you reply three days late, etc. Is that the blame part? If not, what is? And what should we give you credit for?'''

I don’t know what you mean by the replying 3 days late part, can you expand on that? If I was a late replier it must’ve honestly been something IRL, as I am in University, but I’ve honestly put a fair amount of effort/time into this game. Aside from that, I think this is my main point in this FTC. People will blame me for saving Nathaniel time and time again, but will give Nathaniel the credit for convincing us to save him. I don’t understand that. If Nathaniel’s fate was in my hand, is it not true that I had more control than he did? Was he not the one observing, and I the one deciding his fate? I believe I deserve credit for saving Nathaniel, rather than him getting the credit for somehow manipulating me to save him. In fact, when Claudia was voted out, Nathaniel reversed it back onto me and said Chris manipulated me (and Nick) to save him, and I don’t understand why that is. And to address to talking down to people, around Finale night everyone is talking about the end. It was very evident that both Nick and I were viewed as goats, and I’m sure that’s also sort of happening now. I just didn’t appreciate everyone, especially Nathaniel being so cocky before the game had even ended, and the jury hadn’t decided. It’s a fair assumption, but they sort of ignored the social aspect at that point. I told Shea I’m sorry if I treated him like a goat, because I had expressed going to the end with him so we could have fair shots, but I was worried he interpreted that as some sort of insult, and after I knew how it felt I wanted to make sure I wasn’t being a hypocrite in that regard. Again, this is a really long answer, and could use some clarification so please feel free to dissect this.

'''3. Based on your speech, I feel like you just went along with the flow despite claiming that you made those decisions without other people’s influence. How can you defend that when you’ve been voting correctly with people who I felt made those decisions that you just went along with?'''

I went with the flow, because the flow benefited me. Don’t get me wrong, I was an active alliance member, and I think I contributed plenty to early decisions, but later on it seemed like everyone was pushing forth their own personal agendas, so instead of trying to butt in, I let them scheme with their plans, and watched it unravel for a bit until I sort of had a choose-your-own adventure moment, where I mixed and mashed plans. I would try and delay some vote outs like Austin or Nathaniel, which made good shields, and try to move forward other sneaky threats like you and Elmo, or later on Jenna. It’s hard to judge me for a game that you never saw me play, I get it, but you’ll have to take my word for it that I was playing this whole time. I’ve influenced people more than they’ve influenced me, and when I say I went with the flow, it’s more of me saying I was adaptable more than a sheep.

'''4. How can you differentiate an under-the-radar-game from an I-didn’t-do-shit-game? Did you play a support role in the game? What is the difference between a support role and a follower?'''

I think the difference is my awareness. I was never truly blindsided, of course there were moments I was caught off guard, with moments like Claudia’s super advantage, but my biggest strength was being adaptable, and I made moves on how to rebound from every obstacle I faced in this game. The I-didn’t-do-shit game is mostly because of the lack of idols and immunities, which is what made Nathaniel a threat. However, despite looking for idols, I didn’t need them. They benefited me, but there have also been times where they’ve set me back, however I worked around them. I can understand why you view me as a supporting role, because the Catarina alliance was sort of this idol pumping immunity winning machine, but Nick and I weren’t really a part of that, and even after Nick got the pearl, I was the one that remained the most vulnerable throughout. If I played a supporting role, I believe I did it well, because I couldn’t afford to play a starring role, if it would’ve just made me a threat. I’m not a follower because I didn’t base my game on what Nathaniel did or wanted. I saved Nathaniel for my own interests, not his. Just like when I saved Chris over Claudia, despite being told otherwise. I believe if anything, I was like a voice actor, who played a bigger character, but people have trouble recognizing me because they don’t know what my game looks like, instead they can just see what it sounded like, but I hope I’ve cleared out what/why I shaped my game the way I did.

5. What percentage was strategic and what percentage was personal when it came to talking to people?

I genuinely like getting to know people. That wasn’t fake, I want to know where people are from, what they do, and what their lives are like. That’s one of the beautiful parts of ORGs, because it’s people from all over the world being thrown into this social game, and you have this huge icebreaker, the actual game. I’m not a very social personal IRL, so I definitely enjoy that aspect. However, small talk is something I don’t fare well with. I know I was inconsistent talking to people, but I tried not to be. I made efforts to continue my relationships with everyone, but at the same time I don’t want to be lying indirectly. The thing is Renz, I would’ve talked to you more if I saw a reasonable future that benefited us both in the game, but I guess the circumstances were rigged against us. I can’t say an actual percentage, because you can’t quantify a feeling, and I’ve definitely made some friends that I will keep outside this game, but if we were talking strategy, it was legit, and I tried to be as straightforward with people as possible.

6. WHY DIDN’T YOU GET RID OF NATHANIEL?!

Many reasons factored into this. Mostly convenience / timing. I have offered voting out Nathaniel at various points in the game, where Chris, Claudia and affiliated parties had very clearly denied it, whereas voting Nathaniel out at Final 7 was not going to help me, because I knew Jenna was closer to Tacana, and letting a duo get to Final 6 would’ve been shooting myself in the foot. The fact is, if I wanted Nathaniel out, sure I could have, but I didn’t see any reason to. I’ve expressed interest in taking him out, perhaps for being a competition / idol threat, but those things don’t last, they just make him seem flashier to a jury. I saw Nathaniel as a loyal number, even when he wasn’t loyal it was better than the alternative, so I kept him around because blindsiding him was never as big as a priority to me as people made it seem.

'''7. Do you agree with me that you watched things happen? If not, who do you think between Nathaniel and Nick mostly watched things happen? '''

Yes and No. I was adaptable, and I guess that can be interpreted as a submissive game, but not completely. I didn’t just “watch” things happen, I was actively aware of what was going down, and formed my own plans on what would be the best course of action to be able to take a more active role in the following tribal council. I liked to plan ahead, and if I was ever actually watching, I was setting up a future in the following round. However, this all shifted after Austin’s boot, and I didn’t like being left out of a vote so I ensured I was in a position of power for the rest of the merge, and kept a crucial swing vote position that lasted up until Final 4. I know I’ve been trashing Nathaniel a lot, and I don’t mean to, that’s not my strategy here, but you recognize him as the leader, which is a bit inaccurate. He was the one watching things happen after Final 7. He had flipped to take out Austin, however every other time he was saved by me and Nick choosing to do so. The same could be said for Chris being saved at Final 5, and the only person who saved themselves after Austin had left was Claudia, with her super-idol fiasco lol. All in all, I just want to clarify, Nathaniel wasn’t manipulating me as much as I was sparing him to use him as a vote/shield later on.

A. PHYSICAL

'''1. What is your definition of a great physical game? '''Pre-merge, contributing enough to not be useless AF. Post-merge, winning challenges when you need to, but not becoming a threat because of it. Yeah, you could be a comp-god, but what’s the point of flaunting off how good you are if you stumble upon a comp that you’re not so good at, or you came so close. It’s not worth building up a reputation you can’t live up to when your life is on the line.

'''2. Do you consider yourself a physical player? '''Absolutely not. Competitions hold very little value in the game for me, especially post-merge, however I’m sure some people feel different due to Nathaniel being here because of his 3? immunity wins.

'''3. Which is more risky: winning challenges or not winning? ''' Winning. We clearly saw a pattern early on, about who was being targeted. I understand the logic behind it, although I was also aware that not even Nathaniel or Chris or Brandon or Austin, or any of those deemed comp-threats could keep it up forever, and it became evident when the winners of these competitions diversified, along with the style of comps. I appreciate that about ORGs tho, the diversity of competitions presented to us.

B. SOCIAL

'''1. What is the most memorable conversation that you had with me? '''Your career. I didn’t want to berate you but I’m so curious to how it works. You seem to have a million jobs, but it also seems like a risky career. I won’t ask your pay or anything like that, but what is life like? It seems awfully fun but there must be some trade-off involved. I was truly in awe.

'''2. If you could rate your social game with 0 being the lowest, and 5 being the highest, how would you rate yourself? '''4. I say 4 because my social relationships were a big part of my game, and how I got so far, but I could’ve made a better effort to reach out to you Renz, or Malik and Claudia for example. I could’ve made a better effort to consistently check in on people, but instead I relied on their lasting trust sometimes, which was a mistake because this game changes on a dime. I tried to keep my lies to a minimum, and there were situations where I was openly dishonest, but I believe I was genuine with the actual connections I’ve made, that might bloom into friendships outside the game.

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #454545} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #454545; min-height: 14.0px}

'''3. Which is more risky: having multiple connections or having less connections in game? '''This is a tough one, because you have too many connections you become a threat like Elmo did, and you have too little and you’re not actively involved as the game as you could be. It’s all about balance in my opinion, but I’m going to say having less connections is better than multiple ones. You’d rather be honest to a few people, than lying to a lot of people. Yes, lying is part of the game, but unnecessarily it’s just a hindrance later on.

I'll have to finish the rest when I get more time, but I wanted to submit at least this much for now because it's a lot to absorb at once.