Board Thread:Big Brother 9/@comment-36506994-20190512233525/@comment-33060993-20190514033716

Okay whew so I just read a ten page essay slandering my game and I am ready to go like… I don’t know what that clownery was but it’s about to be shut down.

'''Admittedly, I think a lot of Dawn’s points contradict each other and have little to no validity in the grander scheme of things. I think she’s trying to hyper analyze every nook, cranny, and implication of implication to hide the fact that her game really didn’t amount to much. She played a safe game and here’s the thing - does safe increase the probability of someone making the end? Entirely. But in doing so - they often forsake their ability to impact their path there. '''

Anyways, her criticisms -

'''The first of which is her trying to make it look like I rode coattails because an ally of mine won HOH? The distinguishing factor between my relationship with Matt and hers with you was that Matt and I were a partnership - we discussed nominations together and that influence within our relationship allowed me to get a person on the block without necessarily winning the competition to do it. I stated it perfectly - I was building up a resume without a trace of it existing and in doing so, allowed myself to be shielded. She acts as if Matt being targeted over me was unintentional but it was far from it - take for example the Week 5 re-nomination, which is a move I haven’t really discussed. Matt was debating between putting you up and putting Karthik up - in my eyes, his relationship with you had been tainted in comparison to mine with you because he had put you up. If I could replicate that with Karthik, it’d mean I’d have one more person in my corner in a me v. Matt situation which admittedly felt likely given your messages to me about seeing us as a duo. Matt can confirm we called that us being nominated together was a possibility BEFORE your nominations, which shows foresight but the thing is I had that foresight for a long enough period of time to know when I needed to win and when I did not. The Week 2 veto was an example - Matt told me he had 36 and if I won, I was using the veto on Matt. Why should I win it for myself when I was already safe with you and in doing so, I’d expose how close we were even earlier in the game? Likewise, why should I have won the Week 5 HOH when we had similar goals for nominations but I could avoid the blood on my hands to maintain relationships? Plus I carried my weight in that trio by winning that early HOH to shake up the game. In your relationship, it seems like you did not see Dawn as a partner but rather someone to take to the end and that is ultimately why she didn't need a shield - because in the eyes of many she was someone better to sit against because barring a Week 2 vote and a Week 5 veto win she didn’t do anything uniquely good for her game in the slightest. I can say I did several things in this game for myself strategically and I have several times if you look at the resume on Liam’s or Matt’s speech. That is why I needed a shield - because I was playing this game hard from the get go and had the foresight to know it was something I’d be targeted for down the line.'''

'''Another claim of Dawn’s is that I would have left if not for winning competitions in the late-game. Was this true to an extent? Yes. But to another extent? This is exactly where Dawn begins to contradict herself. She talks about how she had the power to evict me Week 6 as if it’s some big game changing revelation that she… had a vote like ?? But she didn’t evict me and that continues to highlight the strength of creating a shield in the context of this game. In trying to show how she was powerful because she had 1 out of 4 votes she reiterated just how I manipulated her strategic perception by holding back in competitions - reiterating how my relationship with Matt was advantageous and not a case of coattails. Then in her response to Liam she goes onto say that Chelsea was her ideal boot for F6 before I won veto… Idk about you but that seems to be surviving without competitions. And then for F5 apparently had she won, you were the target so once again, surviving without competitions. Whether it was building relationships with individuals, constantly pleading to make new allies in this game, I was adapting to the circumstances in front of me by doing more than just winning competitions. Winning competitions accomplishes safety on one level but on a deeper and more analytical level of the game it allows someone to make a shift in the power structure and that was what I repeatedly did. I’m running on a tight clock right now because I have 90 minutes to get up a rebuttal to a 10 page mess so I’ll reiterate that I went into how I used my strategic insight from conversations with you and Karthik at the outset of the seventh week to realize exactly what my position was and adapt accordingly. You’ve said it yourself perfectly though - I was a power player in the late stages of the game and survived despite a target and based on her own words, it seems like I would have been around for quite some time.'''

'''And the final one is that I’d have no idea how I’d do in the final competitions because we didn’t know what they were - that’s true to a degree. I didn’t know the composition of it but I knew I’d give it my all and that would go well for me. In the average survivor ORG, I win three individual immunities. In challenges, I was ALWAYS top 2 or top 3 with the exception of the Week 3 veto when I asked the VL to vote Anabel and not me. I knew I had challenge proficiency and that I’d been holding back and that if I gave it my full effort I’d likely succeed and that’s exactly what I did. I spent two straight hours deconstructing and reconstructing combinations of the scrambler to make sure I was the first person to submit for the Week 7 veto. For the Week 8 HOH I practiced typing times versus pasting times and practiced keyboard sequences for the names to maximize my speed and my knowledge before going for it. For the Week 8 veto I literally made an insanely comprehensive study guide analyzing each person’s competition statistics and traits, then researched what the questions were like in past seasons. It’s how I knew all eight answers immediately. For the Week 9 HOH, I also knew about timestamp technicalities and would always send a message to myself on Facebook and use a phone/computer to make sure the time was correct for my posts on top of going for 12 straight hours in the night before the hosts told me I could stop. Dawn tries to make it sound like luck but the underlying variable in success in a variety of competitions was the sheer amount of effort I put into them. That’s how I knew I’d win them - and even if I didn’t I planned for how I’d work from there.'''

Now let’s talk about Dawn’s game in turn since we’re apparently criticizing

'''~ First off, Dawn keeps reiterating that this game is primarily a social game and that’s why her game was primarily social. For someone who’s game was social, why are 3 out of 4 of the jurors who have responded thus far frustrated with her? Why was Dawn literally voted to be the most annoying person in the house at Touchy Subjects? That doesn’t scream successful social game. I think Dawn shoved herself down people’s throat but there’s more to a social connection than quantity and the fact that her non-allies seem to not regard her social game as the best has a pretty noticeable comparison to the criticism that my non-allies didn’t see mine as the best? Like there’s also more to a social game than what you do in the game - it’s the note you leave on and how you manage your relationships after the fact - she didn’t do that well judging on the responses. The difference between her and I not being super tight with non-allies? I intentionally pursued that route and went out of my way not to mismanage these relationships by talking profusely to people I intended to evict. The very principle is exemplified in Dawn’s relationship with you - you practically took care of her in this game and she bit the hand that fed her safety during several weeks. That’s poor management of a relationship. She KNEW for every week that she befriended you that she didn’t want to go to the end with you and she led you on regardless - that’s not a good social game, that’s overpromising and under-delivering and the fact that it left you hurt speaks to the fact that her game has FLAWS. I think she fully expected that she’d be able to backstab you when you did NOT deserve that from her and write some long ass apology and expect your vote. Why? Because I’ve pulled the same tactic before and I grew to not do that anymore this ORG. Not only did she not impress strategically but she under-delivered to several people and just left them hurt because of how wish-washy and inauthentic she was strategically? For someone who seems to rely on their social game in their answers, it seems like she’s upset a good amount of people on the jury.'''

'''~ Second, I think Dawn’s speech uses an insane amount of hindsight and she’s continually editing her stance on things in an attempt to salvage some votes. She says I’ve relied on competitions yet she planned to keep me at F7, F6, and F5? Konstantinos apparently did as well since he wanted you evicted at F6 as a face nom and then again at F5 over me. Like for someone who was dependent on competitions, I sure had a lot of people contemplating keeping me around in this game. Furthermore, she talks about how proactive her game was but in her opening speech she literally said ‘I would have been successful if not for Jake’s wins’. If she was proactive, why didn’t she identify this? Why didn’t she see that I was the better window to be taken out over Matt at F7? Because I love Matt to death and he slayed competitions but my stats are literally better than his at this point in time even with competitions I intentionally lost - that shows my survival was the result of my manipulation rather than some sort of foresight. It seems like Dawn is just like ‘I intended for this to go the way it did’ which is extremely easy to say AFTER it has happened and no one can check her conf thread to argue it. I also think the biggest moves that she attempted to claim didn’t amount to much? Like she kept Taylor over Liam and then landed on the block next to her a week later? And she talks about how she wouldn’t have gone up during my HOH but Matt and Chelsea can confirm I was THIS close to putting her up. Like I literally only did not because I couldn’t talk to her beforehand to placate her and that’s a timezone issue not some sort of ‘social/strategic maneuvering’. So for someone who was in danger for three weeks following her biggest move it doesnt seem like the smartest move and it seems like a series of luck caused her survival rather than skill in my opinion. During Week 3 it was time zones. During Week 4 it was a quit. During Week 5 it was the fact that her one good comp was the comp jhksdhjk. Like I truly feel like Dawn dodging a target was either luck or the fact that there were better people to evict. For someone who is trying to articulate foresight, it seems like she stumbled her way through a good portion of this game. I started my speech by saying making the end is combination of luck and skill and her game seems to have taken substance in luck. For an example she had no clue I was even putting you up or any sway so for her to claim credit for it is interesting like up until that point, her understanding was that I was loyal to our faux F3 so idt see how it was predictable and she made no attempt to influence things. She didn’t carry her weight in your relationship, she barely dodged a target, she played it safe, her biggest feature wasn’t strong enough to have any of her non-allies put her as a contender for their voting, undermining the idea that it was even strong in the first place'''

Here’s my genuine opinion.

'''The fact that Dawn has to write ten pages trying to make her game look good explains exactly why it wasn’t. She’s reaching, mis-interpreting, and contradicting to attempt to make up for having little to no strategic/physical game and for burning you. I think you’re a bigger part of her being here than she is and that’s why she had to take you out. I said a primary feature of my game is how I challenged myself to play an individual game so that I had a case against my allies at the end. It’s clear Dawn did not challenge herself, she hid because the safest route was to be what she was… unimpressive. She pitches my game as reactionary when I don’t think she ever had a tangible impact on nominations. IDK your dynamic but she always said you did your own thing which I can believe, she didn’t control my noms or Matt’s noms so for someone who claims they were thinking ahead, she never did anything outside of half a campaign for the vote? Like Konstantinos being in the middle during the Liam vote is more his move than hers and if it’s not his, it’s yours imo because he decided based on his relationship with Liam/Taylor, not his with Dawn. If her biggest move is one that three people have mixed credit for, it’s not a big move nor is it hers. And I think that just about sums up exactly why Dawn’s game was not deserving of the win - she did so much and yet it still amounted to so little.'''

'''Sorry that this is short but I only had like an hour window to get it in! if it's like too harsh sorry I've been doing endurance or work all day and I'm not here for it!'''

'''Thanks if you read this because I think there's more to the story than Dawn's version! Woo!'''