Survivor April 8, 2010

That’s why I laughing the whole time Sandra was talking about how smart she was. It’s pretty easy to get away with telling a “lie” when it’s true (as Coach was shown throughout the episode to be heavily considering going after Russell). If she was really smart, she would’ve talked to Coach and Jerri and voted out Russell 4-3. Sure, Coach probably wanted Courtney out instead, but that’s where the true test of manipulation/convincing abilities comes in.

I mean, in the end, she did save her/Courtney’s butts, and I guess that’s important (since players who fly under the radar can go so far in this game), but, wasn’t earth-shaking.

Oh, and Probst’s blog is up:

Because she thinks (and somewhat proved this week) that she can manipulate Russell far better than she can Coach. Also, that she can pretty easily beat Russell in a jury vote.

As well as things are going for Russell you have to admit that Sandra looks 1000% better this week than she did last. She seems to be a lock for the merge, when lots of new options will open up for her.

Please, PLEASE tell me Parvarti isn’t in the finals. Please? I hate her more than any other person who’s ever played this game, by far. When she got in the finals of All-Stars with someone equally hateable, my hubby and I were so incensed we never watched the episode or the reunion. We’d seen enough of those people.

I don’t want to see the complete order of elimination or who won, but I’d feel 1000x better if she weren’t in the finals. No one else pisses me off the way she does.

I almost don’t want to know, because I don’t want to know she DOES make the finals…but, gah, I want to know she DOESN’T make it. Gah.

In short, she sucks.

People, please remember – they’re called “spoilers” for a reason. If you’ve got info on what happens later in the season, use spoiler boxes if you post any of that information.

Thanks,

twickster, Cafe Society moderator and “Survivor” fan.

“Next week on…” previews are not forbidden and do not require spoiler boxes unless the OP specifically gives instructions to that effect. I’m not sure why you felt the need to post this; just wanted to clarify that your instructions are against precedent (regarding “next week on…” previews) and therefore should not be binding.

I’d hate to see someone reference the “next week on…” bit and then get a warning for disobeying moderator instructions. So what’s the ruling? Are we allowed to do as we’ve always done, or is this a new rule?

I believe twickster was just cautioning anyone who might respond to Ruffian’s request for information.

I don’t think anybody has posted a spoiler in this thread yet but some are hinting at it or getting very close and I think that is what twickster is referring to.

Agreed with both of you, but she emphasized the word “any”, so I’m wondering if that is now the law of this thread.

An explanation for why I’m concerned can be found in this post of this thread.

The “Final Three” is a piece of news that I wasn’t aware of and if it hadn’t been announced would qualify as a spoiler. A minor one, but nonetheless…

Please, it’s obvious she’s talking about Polerius’s post, and any responses that might come from it.

I understand some people get bent out of shape about “spoilers” from the preview for next week. I always watch the preview, so it doesn’t bother me. I’m curious how the people that don’t like to see the spoilers from the previews avoid the Survivor commercials that CBS shows during the week, where they tend to reveal MUCH more than they do in the “Next time on… Survivor” previews.

I agree. Again, for those who don’t want to click the linked explanation, what if we continue to discuss the preview openly and someone complains that we aren’t spoiler-boxing it? Can you guarantee that twickster won’t issue a formal warning on the grounds that we disobeyed her instructions?

I definitely wouldn’t call the revelation of the final three a “minor” spoiler.

I wouldn’t either, though I don’t care about, uh, “structural” spoilers. (?) If I heard names of who is or is not in the final, yeah I’d be pissed, but just knowing how many will be in the final doesn’t bother me. But it is a significant spoiler.

On that note, anyone know when was the last time there was a final two? Season before last?

Yes, Ellis Dee, I meant names, not the fact of whether it’s a final two or three.

I don’t watch the previews because I think they give too much away. However, I don’t get “bent out of shape” about information from the previews appearing in this thread - I know that others like to discuss the previews. I simply skip the post as soon as I realize it is discussing the preview.

As for how I avoid the Survivor commercials - same way I avoid all commercials - DVR.

Last season. Russell and whats-her-name.

P.S. I meant the fact that there would be three finalists instead of two. Knowing who they were would be a huge spoiler.

Nope. Russell, the doctor guy that got no votes, and the unmemorable gal that won.

Apologies, Lamar. I realized what you meant about two posts later and agree with you that it would be minor.