Episode FTC!

[Princess Celestia]

Coco Pommel vs Grand Pear vs Rarity

Coco is the heavy favorite but anything can happen in Survivor!

As promised, the dead avatars that won't be being used this game:

[Aquaburst]

Great dead avatars. <3 keen to see Granny's too.
This is gonna be hype!! I definitely think Coco has this but can't wait to see how Pear and Rarity turn their games around for the finale.


Really interesting format for FTC jury questions, by the way. Is it common to just split it into the three categories?--it feels slightly restrictive from the perspective of giving nuanced answers. But on the flipside, it also feels like a really sound way for jurors to weigh up the respective strengths and weaknesses of the finalists.

[Twilight Sparkle]

People are complaining about this format when all the FTCs we have over on my home forum use one thread

smh

[Aquaburst]

Gah I should have just double posted. I was curious about the format as well haha. I think I like it from a juror mindset pov but as a finalist I'd probably tank hard.

[Big McIntosh]

oh yuck this format

why cant we have threads dedicated to individual jurors?

my problems with this format:
it forces jurors to heavily focus on three aspects of the game and ask questions pertaining to it rather than judge based on what they think is the most important quality a person can have. like where am i supposed to put "x what is your favorite cheesecake recipe i need some cheesecake please"
it reduces juror individuality and gives them less of an impact on the overall season-- plus it creates some people with a need for attention who overshadow others who just want their question answered
it gets cluttered and hard to keep track of, especially looking on in retrospect
i just like one on one time between juror and finalists rather than groupthink tbh

[Big McIntosh]

not hating on the hosts for this, i just dislike this format

[Big McIntosh]

also what happens if it's granny smith v grand pear v rarity? does rarity win?

[Fluttershy]

This format made me very uncomfortable the one time I was a juror

[Flim and Flam]

I'm one of the few that like this jury format.
idk, I just feel like it becomes more of a discussion than an interrogation.

[Aquaburst]

I am yet to see it! I'm intrigued and see pros and cons.
Can't wait to see how this goes down. I think Rarity and Pear have a lot to say for themselves, in particular. So seeing e.g. Pear defending his strategic game at length while the other finalists are in the thread is going to be fascinating.

[Suri Polomare]

I used this format once from either side, I think, and really struggled. It becomes way less of a two way conversation.  It also discourages the kind of casual posting mentioned above.

[Suri Polomare]

Sorry, unfinished thoughts.

This format is super overwhelming for the finalists, as it artificially creates a situation where you are having to process potentially eight separate Bits of information at once.  It's intimidating and demotivating.
It cuts out that individual relationship
Nothing is gained from it that ..... reading other jurors threads doesn't give you.
It introduces a stupid amount of arbitrary-ness to questions and answers. If you look at last game, a lot of questioning could be boiled down to 'did tapu actually use her social skills to her strategic advantage and is deo actually a robot.' this format shuts down that discussion.

The jury reacted for a reason. The reaction against that felt really problematic. Like chrys said, the jurors just want to do their best and have fun.

[Big McIntosh]

I used this format once from either side, I think, and really struggled. It becomes way less of a two way conversation.  It also discourages the kind of casual posting mentioned above.

that's exactly how i feel. it makes it harder for the jurors to actually relate to the finalists and the games they played because the finalists have to consider responding to multiple people at once rather than just one at a time. in addition, it allows for more fighting in between the jurors if there's some sort of disagreement, taking it away from finalists who deserve it. source: actually happened in a game i played. jurors fought in public and players did not get any say. one could argue that this final tribal style has a LOT less of an impact because it's both streamlined and forced discussion that essentially is just one of those 'no fun allowed' signs

[Big McIntosh]

like, overall, i think the people who dislike this format greatly outnumber the people who do like it. and i really don't understand why this is still a thing when it almost seems to be inherently designed to take the fun out of the game. if i'm going to tear into a finalist or something i want to do it on my own terms, not make a huge dogpile that stops them from wanting to even try at all. 5 more threads would be easier to read through, more tolerant of different juror questioning styles, and just more fun for everypony involved

[Suri Polomare]

Shhhh big Mac, daddy said if we didn't eat our vegetables he'd send us to bed without any supper.

[Princess Cadance]

Ftr I did vote against this format pregame. But I think it can offer a highlight on specific parts of the game and provide clash through framing the game that's...less clear in jury threads, mostly around use of game mechanics, which we had a lot of here.

[Thorax]

This format probably means I won't bother reading the final tribal at all. Normally I'd just skip the speeches, but when there's going to be 15 different conversations having in one thread at a time, I don't think I'm going to care enough to try to sort through it.

I'd even prefer a one thread FTC to this, well provided it was also done live with a jury question order.

I guess that just means I might as well just not come online here until the live reveal of Coco winning.

At least have it kick my confessional out of the top 10 list though please.

[Aquaburst]

I've been a pretty boring spec so I'll try to keep up through the FTC! If you compare it to last game, I think a lot of the finale came to 'spin' (that sounds more negative than it's meant to but bear with me). If you line it up, Regi/Deo had a much stronger balance of strategic structural and social, and would be able to float across the three threads with relative ease. Tapu was solid socially and played a kind of strategic game in a way, but if asked questions on how he structured his game would have very seriously struggled.

I know that there's faults. And I'm not saying one format feels right and one format feels wrong (I'll be curious to see how this feels exactly ). I just think it helps to put a perspective around how people weighted the different aspects of their play and how strong certain ponies' social vs. strategic games were, etc.

[Aquaburst]

That got super waffly waaa
like for example we might hit the end and go "wow Rarity played an impressive strategic game, pear played well structurally and coco was great socially. Which one do I value here and who is stronger in their weaker categories?"

I know it's not really like that since the contestants have played pretty nonlinear games. but you know. we /could/ theoretically be asking ourselves those kinds of questions.

[Thorax]

DJ what ya gotta know is I wasn' jus' a motionless lump of social, I'm a motionless lump of sweet delicious crispness! <3

Who let Granny cover herself in cameral sauce again?

[Princess Luna]

It's just changing with the times tbh, this format was introduced in Super Smash Bros when the show changed the format of FTC. I dunno about having 15 different conversations, it seemed like in SSB it was one convo per thread with different people interjecting different things. I think for inexperienced jurors it can help to have an idea of what you're asking about instead of FTC being an overwhelming experience. People will ultimately vote for what they care about regardless.

Not asking about cheesecake is like, an intended effect. Irrelevantly turning the FTC into dumb make the finalists do tricks hunts like post the best gifs, hottest guys, or endurance posting challenges is really annoying as a finalist. (certain people would violently disagree with me on this LOL )

[Ms. Harshwhinny]

One world did it first. But the categories were wildly different because it was a wildly different game.

It's just changing with the times tbh, this format was introduced in Super Smash Bros when the show changed the format of FTC. I dunno about having 15 different conversations, it seemed like in SSB it was one convo per thread with different people interjecting different things. I think for inexperienced jurors it can help to have an idea of what you're asking about instead of FTC being an overwhelming experience. People will ultimately vote for what they care about regardless.

Not asking about cheesecake is like, an intended effect. Irrelevantly turning the FTC into dumb make the finalists do tricks hunts like post the best gifs, hottest guys, or endurance posting challenges is really annoying as a finalist. (certain people would violently disagree with me on this LOL )

[Princess Cadance]

One world did it first. But the categories were wildly different because it was a wildly different game.

It's just changing with the times tbh, this format was introduced in Super Smash Bros when the show changed the format of FTC. I dunno about having 15 different conversations, it seemed like in SSB it was one convo per thread with different people interjecting different things. I think for inexperienced jurors it can help to have an idea of what you're asking about instead of FTC being an overwhelming experience. People will ultimately vote for what they care about regardless.

Not asking about cheesecake is like, an intended effect. Irrelevantly turning the FTC into dumb make the finalists do tricks hunts like post the best gifs, hottest guys, or endurance posting challenges is really annoying as a finalist. (certain people would violently disagree with me on this LOL )

As did Civ

[Princess Cadance]

Not asking about cheesecake is like, an intended effect. Irrelevantly turning the FTC into dumb make the finalists do tricks hunts like post the best gifs, hottest guys, or endurance posting challenges is really annoying as a finalist. (certain people would violently disagree with me on this LOL )

But those questions are the best. For one they provide levity in an INCREDIBLY stressful environment and often can show how people think about the about the game in a way that may not always be obvious. So long as they don't dominate FTC they're fine and probably beneficial.

Also I'll always think the DR Format balances everything well. Each of the jurors get the personal attention they probably deserve, but none of them can just overpower anypony by posting more, usually you don't get questions reappearing because jurors don't want their questions to be wasted, and you won't have an FTC where there is too much to read or has too much in one thread. Jurors also have to actually have to consider what they value most in a finalist and choose their questions carefully which means they have to think more about the game as a whole. Also means you don't get "cheesecake" questions unless all a jurors questions have been answered or they genuinely value the answer to the question.

[Suri Polomare]

What ^ said. Obviously forced endurance challenges are shitty but there's something great about 'find a gif to represent each juror' that really let's you see how people think and want to present themselves, even if it's a bit left field. The game should be FUN.

[Princess Celestia]

...there's something great about 'find a gif to represent each juror' that really let's you see how people think and want to present themselves, even if it's a bit left field. .

That sounds like a Social question to me!

I like this format - and strongly believe this is a better format than having separate threads for each juror - for several reasons.

1) FTC is about the finalists, not the jurors; the whole "this is MY thread" fiefdoms can be gross and offputting, especially when a juror is abusive towards a finalist and demands that they don't post in their thread.

2) How many times in Legendary did we see Tapu Lele answer a question with some variation of "Well, I already answered that in Juror X's thread..."? It was a lot.  Cutting down on redundant questions is a good thing.

3) Jurors are always free to vote based on whatever criteria they want. But by framing the initial TC in terms of Structural, Social, Strategic it reminds jurors that all three of these are valid facets of that game that should be weighted.

4) As far as Structural goes, well-played structural games have a tendency in the MS meta to be either ignored by the jury at best or punished by the jury at once.  Reinforcing Structural as one of the three areas where players can highlight their gameplay is healthy for the meta and needs to be encouraged.

5) A player with a strong Social game but a weak Strategic game gets an area where they can present all of the good things about their social game and have it stand out without having jurors in that thread ignore them and say "Yeah but what about your strategic game?" and vice versa.  The finalists can shine in the areas that they focused on.

6) A juror who has been backstabbed or not jury-managed well can be rightfully upset in the Social thread, while there is still a neutral area to acknowledge the merits or dismerits of the strategic game.

7) By not limiting threads to a single juror, it feels more like a jury asking questions to figure out how they should vote and less like an interrogation.

Again, the jury is free to choose their vote on whatever they want. But framing FTC to discourage the forced endurance challenge thing or bullshit like that is a feature, not a bug.

There's more, but this is getting long already.  I guess basically I understand why people prefer the other way, but this way has plenty of advantages and they happen to be advantages that are very important to me.  Obviously no other modteam is obligated to do it this way, and both ways are preferable to the old-school "Here's a single thread and no direction, have fun" style that early games had.

[Discord]

Rarity's speech reads much more like a sparknotes of what happened in the game than an argument for why Rarity should win the game

[Discord]

>Give each finalist in FTC their own thread for questions
>Only let a juror post twice per thread
>gg

[Princess Luna]

Rarity's speech reads much more like a sparknotes of what happened in the game than an argument for why Rarity should win the game

Someday I too will stop making this mistake other then that time i wrote about how gr8 everypony was while on Fireball

[Aquaburst]

I did like for example in the last game, floating between say Cobalion's and Celebi's FTC threads. It was kind of cool having the tone shift from super serious questioning to light-hearted fluffposting because Celi's mind was already made up, but the finalists genuinely enjoyed chatting with him.

[Princess Cadance]

>Give each finalist in FTC their own thread for questions
>Only let a juror post twice per thread
>gg

Would say 3 times but honestly I wouldn't mind this at all. Still prefer DR.

[Aquaburst]

Celestia's write-up is great and I agree with a lot of it, too. Both formats are neat in different ways, I think. Just going to be interesting to see how the flow is here

[Princess Luna]

I wonder if Coco is going to mention she had another idol she didn't bother playing, or leave that as a surprise post-game?

[Princess Cadance]

Eh, I really don't agree with most of those points, or at least think there's more beneath the surface.

I like this format - and strongly believe this is a better format than having separate threads for each juror - for several reasons.

1) FTC is about the finalists, not the jurors; the whole "this is MY thread" fiefdoms can be gross and offputting, especially when a juror is abusive towards a finalist and demands that they don't post in their thread.

2) How many times in Legendary did we see Tapu Lele answer a question with some variation of "Well, I already answered that in Juror X's thread..."? It was a lot.  Cutting down on redundant questions is a good thing.

3) Jurors are always free to vote based on whatever criteria they want. But by framing the initial TC in terms of Structural, Social, Strategic it reminds jurors that all three of these are valid facets of that game that should be weighted.

4) As far as Structural goes, well-played structural games have a tendency in the MS meta to be either ignored by the jury at best or punished by the jury at once.  Reinforcing Structural as one of the three areas where players can highlight their gameplay is healthy for the meta and needs to be encouraged.

5) A player with a strong Social game but a weak Strategic game gets an area where they can present all of the good things about their social game and have it stand out without having jurors in that thread ignore them and say "Yeah but what about your strategic game?" and vice versa.  The finalists can shine in the areas that they focused on.

6) A juror who has been backstabbed or not jury-managed well can be rightfully upset in the Social thread, while there is still a neutral area to acknowledge the merits or dismerits of the strategic game.

7) By not limiting threads to a single juror, it feels more like a jury asking questions to figure out how they should vote and less like an interrogation.

Again, the jury is free to choose their vote on whatever they want. But framing FTC to discourage the forced endurance challenge thing or bullshit like that is a feature, not a bug.

There's more, but this is getting long already.  I guess basically I understand why people prefer the other way, but this way has plenty of advantages and they happen to be advantages that are very important to me.  Obviously no other modteam is obligated to do it this way, and both ways are preferable to the old-school "Here's a single thread and no direction, have fun" style that early games had.

1) I just disagree with the underlying idea of this. FTC is not about the finalists, it's not about the jurors either. It's about the finalists realtionship too the jurors. After all the game is not decided by some all seeing specs or "survivor judge' but rather the people that the contestants had a personal relationship with. And as the jury aren't given a rubric and it's up to them to decide how to vote and as such probably shouldn't be guided. I think individual threads put an emphasis on both of those facets.

2) This is solved by given jurors a limited number of questions like in DR. If the jurors are posting less and need to be careful with their questions then you don't get redundant questions.

3) If jurors are allowed to vote on whatever criteria they want then isn't it just better to let them decide what that criteria should be. After all most jurors are already aware of those ideas in the game and have an idea of how to weigh them. Meanwhile if somepony isn't quite aware of it, it will like bias them towards a certain take rather than having it just be built up from nothing, which I think is preferable.

4) So a good structural game is usually it's own reward, as good use of mechanics likely means you will get further in the game and have more opportunities to leverage your position. Similar to how winning immunity is impressive, but is way more impressive when you use that position to do something big. Secondarily I don't think good structural games are forgotten at all, they usually get codified into a wing of strategic play and even in DR we had questions about idols and immunities and how they should be valued asked to the finalists.

5) I mean any player who is being "Yeah but what about your strategic game?" not as a genuine question is likely somepony who likely doesn't weigh the other facets nearly as high as strategic game and won't be phased by the inclusion of those other areas. You get to shine in the areas that the jurors value when they ask you questions about them. (Like i said in an earlier post with 3 questions jurors have to laser in on what they value in a game and the finalists).  Finalists also get to zero in on things like that and talk about them in their opening and closing speeches.

6) I mean I think if a juror was mishandled by a finalist it's better to be contained to ... that jurors thread rather than being in one of 3 threads. After all it clear has to deal with a relationship between the player and juror not just social game in general, and having somepony be all angry and bitter in a thread with everypony else feels much worse than them being so in a thread with just them and the finalists.

7) I mean...I think ftc feeling like an interrogation is apt. You are being put on trial for how you played the game by a jury of people you screwed over. Like without the personal aspect I feel it loses an entire dimension of the game.

I do get where you are coming from, I just like...disagree about a lot of it, and they seem to stem from a fundamental disagreement on what is important about survivor and FTC. Anyway, let's see how this one plays out, because I'm not sure how much the different formats actually change results at all.

[Discord]

FWIW I pretty much agree with all of that ^

But I also don’t think the setup of FTC threads is likely to change more than one vote at the most. It’s more about whether the jurors and finalists enjoy it. In my next game I might put a question on the application asking how they prefer FTC to be structured and only take into account the opinions of people who make jury/finalists. Absolve responsibility!

[Discord]

It goes without saying since the other two finalists have never made FTC and Coco has won multiple games, but Coco knows how to give a speech

[Thorax]

Rarity's speech reads much more like a sparknotes of what happened in the game than an argument for why Rarity should win the game

this isn't what opening speeches are meant to be?

[Suri Polomare]

FWIW I pretty much agree with all of that ^

But I also don’t think the setup of FTC threads is likely to change more than one vote at the most. It’s more about whether the jurors and finalists enjoy it. In my next game I might put a question on the application asking how they prefer FTC to be structured and only take into account the opinions of people who make jury/finalists. Absolve responsibility!

I love this

[Princess Cadance]

Can somepony verify that they can see the FTC forum with the speeches posted. Want to make sure I did everything right.

[Twilight Sparkle]

Can somepony verify that they can see the FTC forum with the speeches posted. Want to make sure I did everything right.

I can

[Princess Cadance]

Thanks!

[Aquaburst]

I feel like all of the FTC speeches were a little flashy and showponyish. I suppose that's the point of Survivor, but I'm not really sure I found any of them more convincing than the opinions I already had of the players. (maybe that's because I'm not in the game!!)

Rarity is being pummelled by the hard questions. Must be rough being in her hooves right now.

Edit: just read her confessional and oof
she is not coping

I'm not sure Soarin really has any requirement to let her off easy. It's often inquisitions like this that let the most self-aware people shine. Rarity, if you're picking up my psychic energy here, turn that frown upside down, get in there and kick Soarin's butt with respectful and well-considered logic! <3

[Thorax]

Chrysalis claiming to have been going full loyal to Coco is interesting. I guess that makes it even earlier that Coco has had this game won.
(No wonder I couldn't flip chrysalis on wonderbolts, same traits as pinkie. I personally would have flipped had somepony asked me to help vote out Coco, or at least I feel like I would have played the flipflopper game had I processed further)

[Aquaburst]

When the sun rises in the west and sets in the east,
When the seas go dry and mountains blow in the wind like leaves.
Then I will vote for you to win, and not before.

Nice ref DuurJ


Man Rarity is taking this hard. She hasn't handled the jury well at all, though. Soarin asked some pretty pointed questions, and given she's proud of her game I think she may have benefited from taking a little longer to reflect on how to project that, so to speak. I felt like she was on the defensive the whole time, rather than saying anything all that convincing.

DJ's post was rough; but if you can't win every juror's vote, focus on the ones you can. If you handle a situation like that with a bit of of grace (ignore it or just try to empathise), I think you can really elevate your position in the jury's eyes.

Why am I typing this.... idk I guess I feel for her and think the situation she's in is really rough and hopefully some random newbie outsider input helps with post-game reflections or something ().

Rarity I would give you the hug you asked for in your confessional 100%. Hope you get a chance to step back and process this soon.

[Princess Luna]

I agree with DJ that Rarity's speech reads like somepony who was laser focused on getting to F3 at any cost, without considering that she didn't have to sacrifice everything to get there. I think the deeply emotional response of not giving in to emotional terrorism is the kind that would appeal to people who might vote Rarity though.

Walking into this my predictions for FTC votes were:

Coco - DJ, Soarin, Granny Smith, Rainbow Crash
Rarity - Pinkie Pie, Queen Chrysalis, Starlight Glimmer
Pear - Derpy even knowing Pear isn't likely to win

[Suri Polomare]

@thorax, I don't think chrys is presenting an accurate picture of what happened, just FYI. Im not sure why

I'm super conflicted about the rarity thing. I think both dj and soarin' flagged their frustration and made it clear that this was game related way better than some jurors I've seen, and tonally its not many steps up from some of the heat the other two are getting. I also , after having some time to think, don't think soarin' knew at all how that pm to rarity would come across - he wasn't just slagging her off, which I've also seen in those negg-y pms

 ( I kinda wanna run a seminar on 'heres a way to send a pm about somepony's end game position that doesn't make you sound like a dick').

Her response was way too emotional. Agree that it'll appeal to some, but it was an over-reaction. Im also super leery of her posting soarin's pm, as it's just feathers for coco. I understand she's upset but it's an odd thing to do to position yourself as the victim here, when at least structurally that's not true.

[Twilight Sparkle]

From my point of view, Rarity’s problem is that she doesn’t know what the jury is looking for.

[Suri Polomare]

I've perhaps been too forgiving of DJ

Also, starlight is lovely and just needed better friends.

[Flurry Heart]

On one hand, I really do feel really bad for Rarity. Soarin' and DJ are asking some extremely pointed questions and not exactly sugarcoating their statements about the game.

On the other hand, they're also not really trying to be personal, and I definitely feel like Rarity is taking their questions far more personally than she needs to.

[Flim and Flam]

FTC is a rough place

[Iron Will]

DJ's post was too rough for me, even though I agree with the general thrust of it.  Being a losing finalist at FTC can already be pretty emotionally difficult as it is.  (Otoh I don't think Soarin was really trying to be mean.)

From what I've gotten through, Rarity is coming out the gates first and coming out the hardest, which I admire, but in some places she's doing more harm than good to her case, so I'm pretty comfortable in saying she's not going to pull out an underdog win.

I don't mind her responses to Soarin and DJ really, but from her very first post in the social thread, she was already losing me...

I know that there was a lot going on for you, but how could you just sit and be so passive after everything? It's incredibly difficult to see you in your own right, and I need you to convince me that you didn't just coast along here. Where is the fire and fight you have?

If I did go after her in a blaze of glory, I didn't feel confident that I would actually make it to the end.

Hmm, but why? Well:

I just never felt I was in a good position or had social connections to fall back on.

This is possibly true, but why would you ever say that in a venue where you're fighting for jury votes?!  What case do you have left when your very first post to the jury says, "I never really was able to do much, but that's only because I never had good social connections or good positioning."

From the strategy thread...

Hi Starlight. It's nice to see you again.

1) For your original challenge, I think you are referring to shaping the game and not just going for easy votes. I believe I performed fairly well, as I would not consider the subsequent Derpy vote as being an easy one. Additionally while I didn't cast a vote for her directly, I was complicit in the power house Rainbow Dash being eliminated, which was doubtless a major shake to the game.

2) Jury threats were definitely something I considered, and were another reason I was apprehensive about letting DJ and Soarin anywhere near the finals. One thing I could count on with Coco and Pear was that we had all betrayed about the same ponies more or less, so there was likely to be equivalent bad blood to wade through. Other than them, I was slightly worried about Granny, but I figured I still had a reasonable case to argue against her.

3) I think I most regret letting Rainbow Dash go how and when I did. I skipped out on the forums for that TC after choosing to use my ring, and I told myself it was fine because there was nothing I could do and I had hectic life circumstances to deal with anyway. While I still believe I had to betray her for a shot at victory, that is not how I should have done so. Additionally it really set Chrysalis in a bad position, which meant I lost two friends for ring gambit later. That's not how I wanted to see it go down.

Like, ouch, you just said one of your two biggest moves and your biggest mistake were one and the same.

[Discord]

DJ’s speech was a little harsh, but this is one of the least antagonistic juries I’ve seen on MS and I lean toward allowing people to air their grievances as long as no personal attacks are being made. I think it’s clear that DJ and Soarin’s gripes start and end with what happened in the game.

I definitely sympathize with Rarity’s situation here though. This seems like a clear case of her just not understanding what the jury wants. In the case of DJ and Soarin, I don’t know if it was possible to win those votes.

[Flim and Flam]

Rarity framing herself as the victim is a little icky to me tbh.

[Flim and Flam]

Although if you read this postgame Rarity, you're a solid survivor player. You're more than capable of winning a game. Sometimes it doesn't work out, and you were in a game with one of the most dominant players ever. Don't take it personally. Getting grilled at a FTC is something a lot of players go through lol.

[Aquaburst]

The reason I spectate these days is post-FTC drilling trauma! And my jury was lovely! It's always a lot to go through, even when it's constructive, I think.

[Fluttershy]

 

Idk if I could handle 48 hours of interrogation like this

Will post cute animals at reveal for everypony if im there

[Flim and Flam]

The first time you do it is a bit shocking because the power imbalance swing is so harsh. You have literally no power and the jury can do whatever they want to you, when most will likely have reason to be upset at you. nopony plays perfect games so there will be negatives that can be picked at.

I think the key is you have to get in the headspace that it's a game, and this is the final hurdle to get over. The final boss.
If you take it personally, then the people you voted out will take it more personally as well.

[Flim and Flam]

Coco: Also, my computer tried to autocorrect 'genuine' to 'ginuwine'.

Flim: goode goode my supar amaze computor viras is werking!

[Discord]

The power dynamic SHOULD be unbalanced. The finalists held the power throughout the game to get themselves to the end, and now the jury has power over their ultimate fate. The fascinating dilemma in Survivor is that the people who decide whether you win or not are the people you had a hand in eliminating. The jurors have these strong feelings because the finalists didn’t manage them well enough.

[Flim and Flam]

Yeah, it truly is the most fascinating part of the survivor experience. I love it.

Coco: Also, my computer tried to autocorrect 'genuine' to 'ginuwine'.

Flim: goode goode my supar amaze computor viras is werking!

omg, hello my other head