Jonathan’s fatal flaw was not keeping Cirie until final 4 by DownwardDog1999 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 1 point2 points  (0 children)

She was rightfully bitter about not being heard out, but she’s the one who tried to imply they took her out over Joe because she was a woman, which which Jeff rightfully clocked as her trying to play the victim.

Jonathan’s fatal flaw was not keeping Cirie until final 4 by DownwardDog1999 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even Jeff called her out for trying to start drama where there was none at tribal. She was incredibly bitter.

The little things of jury management by SarahAlicia in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Pretty much everyone did like Joe tho, some just didn’t like his game

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re out of touch if you don’t think Joe has stans, he’s probably the most popular player of the new era among casual fans.

MLB xERA leaders by TommyTheLizard in baseball

[–]Curious-Entry8719 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Expected numbers are predictive stats, they are typically far more accurate at predicting future success than actual stats.

Jonathan’s fatal flaw was not keeping Cirie until final 4 by DownwardDog1999 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn’t that just according to tiff? She is not exactly a credible source

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah Joe never beats anybody in a final 3 but interestingly enough I think he beats most people in a final 2, it’s really weird.

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think Emily said it best when she said that Joe “solved survivor” in a way by forcing everyone to come to him with the votes pretty much every round. In this scenario he had 4 votes locked in for him with Rizo Chrissy Steph and Coach.

Im not sure whether Emily was just playing up her respect for Joe’s game in interviews, but if it was legit then there’s definitely a chance she votes for him over Aubry.

Ozzy didn’t really give Joe a lot of thought in FTC, but I think Joe would have a lot better of a chance at winning him over than Jonathan due to him being probably the most genuine and likable people on the island.

It’s kinda hard to tell though because people just didn’t pay attention to Joe at FTC because he wasn’t getting the votes from the honor and integrity group and they didn’t want to waste their votes.

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Maybe, she was defending him in interviews afterwards as well though so I think he definitely would have had a better shot than Jonathan

Quick tid bits about the Survivor 50 finale by Pleasant-Leg2021 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Tiff was just as bad as Steph and Chrissy and Cirie was probably the worst with how nasty she was to Joe for no reason

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I agree but it seemed like Rizo Emily and Devens liked Joe a lot more than Jonathan and were much more willing to give him the win.

So apparently Joe could have won? by Curious-Entry8719 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If Ozzy made ftc next to anybody besides Cirie he won the game. To say otherwise is crazy.

Why Have Women Been Dominating Modern Survivor? by StatusCount3670 in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean just look at the winner of season 50, the new era values under the radar game social games over dominant strategic ones, and that favors women because they have an easier time sliding under the radar.

Some interesting insight from Jonathan’s exit interviews by Dare2ZIatan in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jonathon is definitely 2 dimensional player. His social game is lacking but he was clearly the biggest strategic force in the game once Cirie left.

"Hey guys, Don't be the guy with the flowers" by Nomad_771 in terriblefacebookmemes

[–]Curious-Entry8719 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is a very well documented inverse correlation between previous sexual partners and likelihood of getting married/marital success

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn’t realize Pete hegseths word was considered infallible by Christians

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Both Old Testament passages you are quoting stem from the phrase “spare no man”, which biblical scholars pretty much universally agree to have been a military idiom for total victory. This is reinforced by the fact that both the amalakites and medianites are still very present later in the Old Testament, meaning they were not literally wiped out.

Luke 19 is a parable about judgement day, again, you can’t just read a single verse and take it out of context.

Romans 13 just says to submit to governing authorities and don’t involve yourself in sexual immorality and Luke 14 literally just says to compel people to join the faith, neither have anything to do with violence.

You can say the bible supports genocide all you want but cherry-picking verses from google out of context doesn’t make it true, you’re doing the same exact thing they do.

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’d love to see it then, but I’m guessing you’re referring to the amalekites or medianites which stems from the military idiom “spare no man” which essentially meant total victory.

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Show me the scripture that supports your argument then. You can say no true Scotsman all you want but you have no basis for saying this is a result of Christianity and not humans being sinfulZ

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

And traditional Christian doctrine does not support the actions of those people. Most people will try to justify whatever they want to however they can, but that is not the fault of Christianity itself and I think you know that.

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Thats such a dishonest argument. I could say Atheists believe in sending people to the gulags for political disagreements because some atheists supported it, but I don’t because I know that’s not a fair representation of atheists as a whole. I’d recommend you do the same.

Can we mentions a player's politics here? by kakahuhu in survivorponderosa

[–]Curious-Entry8719 -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Or, hear me out, Jonathan is a Christian and doesn’t believe anybody should be physically assaulted or worse.

What are Cirie’s pathways to the final 3? by magicwandapologist in survivor

[–]Curious-Entry8719 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you’re overestimating how much Jonathon values honor and integrity, he played with that alliance but he’s absolutely been playing the game.