Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Madame D.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
1
Madame D. / Re: {Voting thread}
« on: October 11, 2021, 05:45:04 am »
Final Tribal Council

In making this vote, I think I do need to let go of some amount of hubris. Is my opinion of this FTC influenced by the fact that I'm actually salty about not being there because I thought I could have done it better? Yes, most certainly. I pretend that winning doesn't matter to me, but it does. Even in a game of monopoly, I will feel as if I have failed myself if I did not win.
In some ways, that is the deciding factor behind this vote. If someone is going to win this game who is not me, then I want it to mean something to them. I want it to be important, in some way. I want to vote for someone who put their all into a game, strategically, socially and in challenges. I want to vote for someone who got emotionally invested, even if that became a little too apparent during FTC. I want to vote for someone who meant something to me, even if as a rival, throughout the game.

Vote
Vote: Richie Tenenbaum
[close]

2
Madame D. / Final Tribal Council
« on: October 10, 2021, 09:04:19 pm »
Final Tribal Council


I am writing this post in part to organise my own thoughts as I decide who to vote for. It is a tough decision! But the other part is so that if any of the finalists want to know my thoughts, then they have the opportunity. In particular, Richie seemed to have a particularly strong reaction to my doubts in his... authenticity? (An imperfect word, but probably the least bad one)

Firstly, in regards to Oracle. I think that he has made up a lot of ground with his FTC performance. I don't think it'll be enough for my vote, but there are so many things I appreciate about him! The gif that he chose for me was my probably my favouite part. :P I also really respect the commitment that he has devoted to the FTC (if it were me there is no way I would have managed it).

Gustave has had a refreshingly humble and honest FTC, and against Oracle and Richie that sort of contrasting approach could be quite successful. I must admit, I was hoping that there was slightly more to Gustave's strategic game than what he has said here. He probably was indeed thinking about how he was approaching each situation, but I guess I still don't have a strong sense of the thought that went into Gustave's game. That said, out of all the finalists, Gustave has been the most receptive to criticism or beliefs that contrast with his approach to the game. From him, I truly get the sense that he wants to grow from this experience. I respect it and want to vote for Gustave for it, but is it truly fitting for Gustave to win here when in fact I believe he can build on this to play a more well-rounded game next time?

I am truly sorry to say this, but Richie's closing speech is... not good. After seeing his response to my (admittedly) deliberately provocative question, I thought I would likely vote for him. Even as I have been writing this post I have been going back and forth in my mind. But I don't know if I can!
Richie probably played the best game prior to FTC. If anything, the FTC has revealed that. But at Final Tribal Council, the game is still on. Every finalist has an agenda. Each juror has an agenda. My agenda was to assess Richie's awareness, and in particular, self-awareness, as well as how well he could tolerate being directly challenged.
(My goal with my jury questions was to explicitly target what I saw as the main weakness in each finalist's game)
I don't think that Richie has been playing the FTC-game especially well.

I liked Richie's explanations of why he would lie or withhold information from allies, as well as his clarification that he did not expect complete honesty from his allies. I also liked his answer to my confusing question about "realness". I am someone that has been accused of being "fake", even in real life, and to some extent I agree. I choose how to present myself to other people and the world around me. It is fabricated in the truest sense of the word. I liked that Richie could express that someone can be agenda-driven and real, because I completely agree.
He has this tendency to invalidate feelings and opinions that he does not agree with though. In his reponse to me he said that I was letting myself fall into an emotional trap, which obviously implies that it's my problem, not his.
Richie is right that he should not have taken me to the end of the game and whilst I saw the F3 with Suzy and Oracle as merely a means to survive F5, I can understand that it would have been of concern to him. I can understand that he didn't necessarily have reason to believe that Suzy would take him to the end (although I think that she may have). But why the big fuss? Why does he need to vindicate himself and prove that he did not betray anyone? Why does he need to so passionately defend his loyal game? I'd rather he just said that there were times where he needed to be disloyal for his own survival rather than prove that someone else commit the greater sin first.

Part of me feels uncomfortable voting for Richie because I can't shake this feeling of being strong-armed into it. I imagine Richie teling me that I am falling into an emotional trap right now. However, I am the one here with the decision to make. I can vote for whichever of the three I like and no vote would be wrong. I need to make sure that if I do vote for Richie, it is not a decision I feel coerced into, and if I do feel coerced into it (whether by implication that I would be wrong not to, or that it is based on emotion or misinterpretation that I do not vote for him), then perhaps I absolutely should not vote for him.

It is still something that I am deciding, and not a decision I want to take lightly.

FTC-vote decision aside, however, I think it is important to mention how much I enjoyed this game, and how much I enjoyed playing with each of the three finalists. My opinion on Richie as a winner-candidate is complicated, but he really was a part of what made the game fantastic, and I hope that if there are any misunderstandings, they can be resolved in due course.

I must admit that I am particularly sad to have not made FTC, because I think I had a really good shot at winning this one with my planned FTC approach, but it is a privilege to be able to vote on the winner nonetheless! The reveal is at 10:30am on a Monday for me, so my chances of being there are not looking too good, but I will do my best to at least check in at some point.

3
Richie Tenenbaum / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 09, 2021, 06:32:12 am »
Thank you Richie.

I apologise for making you write all that but it was a very good answer.

Best of luck with the FTC, and thank you for your friendship throughout the game!

4
M. Gustave / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 08, 2021, 09:34:48 pm »
Thank you very much!

I am not yet sure of where I will be voting, but I have enjoyed and appreciated your approach to the FTC.

5
Richie Tenenbaum / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 08, 2021, 09:30:07 pm »
Okay time to put you to more work! If it is of any reassurance, I am only asking more questions because you remain in the running for my vote. Well, either that or I am pointlessly making you respond to me in a twisted sense of revenge. Pick whichever scenario you prefer! :P

During the game and even now, I could always count on Gustave to be real with me. With you, everything felt a lot more agenda-driven. As the most agenda-driven person I know, I cannot consider this to be a bad thing necessarily, but I'm not sure I ever really got to know you in the same way that I got to know Gustave, or even Oracle.
I am often suspicious of others' motives so I may be wrong, but during the game your pandering to me often felt excessive, perhaps even disingenous.

Were there points in the game where you felt you were being "real" with me? To what extent was it a facade? What about me was most frustrating to you?

6
Richie Tenenbaum / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 08, 2021, 06:13:25 am »
Thanks Richie. You are right that the way you spoke about Suzy after her decision to change her vote to Young Writer contributed to my impression. Your answer does make a lot of sense to me and in some ways I was hoping that would be your explanation.

You are also right that, if you were vulnerable at Final 4, I would have almost certainly voted for you.

I don't have any further questions right now, but may think of something else shortly.

7
Oracle / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 08, 2021, 05:48:40 am »
Thanks for the answer Oracle. I don't have anything else I need to ask. Good luck!

8
Madame D. / Re: Chapter 2
« on: October 07, 2021, 08:47:40 pm »
I really really enjoyed this game though. Thank you so much to the mods and everyone else involved!

9
Madame D. / Re: Chapter 2
« on: October 07, 2021, 08:01:23 pm »
I'm mostly just really exhausted. I didn't realise how much of myself I was putting into this game until the crash after my run was over.

aaaaahhhhh

10
M. Gustave / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 07, 2021, 07:54:57 pm »
Hi Gustave,

You made a consistently positive impression on me throughout the game. Which I think is very impressive given that I am highly prone to misanthropy in my confessionals.
Plus, you consistently wanted me out! Yet I still liked you. Gah!

What I would like from you is a bit more of an understanding of your strategic game. Just like I, there were many times where you were almost eliminated. During these periods, what did you do to ensure that you would survive? I don't need big flashy moves, even just little things you did that helped you survive.

11
Richie Tenenbaum / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 07, 2021, 07:40:05 pm »
Aahhh Richie, truth be told, I feel as conflicted in regards to you here as I did throughout the game itself. How I, often simultaneously, both resented and delighted in our strange bond!

As I told you during the game, I don't doubt your strategic capabilities. I believe you played the strongest strategic game here! However, I do have concerns which make me reluctant to vote for you.

You mentioned in your opening speech, and also many times to me, about how your aim was to play a loyal game. You mentioned that you legitimately wanted a F3 with me and Suzy. However, my observation of you throughout the game was that you would indeed be loyal to someone... only up until the point where they did something that did not align with your own vision. It seemed that in your mind, you could do whatever you wanted. You could lie to even your closest allies about trivial things, keep them in the dark about certain moves that you were making. But if an ally did that to you... well that was unforgivable.

How aware were you of this? How intentional was it?

12
Oracle / Re: {Madame D.}
« on: October 07, 2021, 06:52:37 pm »
Hi Oracle!

First off, I have no issue with you (or anyone else) voting me out. I believe it was the correct decision, and you handled it in a way that I thought was respectful.

In reading your opening speech and jury responses though, I find myself quite confused. I cannot deny the fact that in the early part of the post-merge game, I was quite frustrated by you.

Quote from: Royal
we go through a vote, we come out of a vote with you telling me you want us to be more transparent with one another…and then when I try to make a gesture of good faith to take that relationship forward, you come at me or outright lie to me, increasingly more directly. Then you start the next round the exact same way—halfhearted apologies, saying you want to improve the relationship, and starting the cycle over.

This excerpt from Royal's Announcement post so strongly reflected my own experience with you. During F10 you talked to me about how you were crying at the thought of blindsiding me only to then attempt to blindside me again at F9. And then at F8 you were passive aggressive with me about how "personal interest" would ruin the group of 4 that you were ultimately loyal to, when you weren't loyal to it at all! You had tried to vote me out the last 2 rounds and I knew it.

I fully recognise that there was a shift in your gameplay after Royal's big post and I commend you for it. However, in some sections of your FTC here you appear to be claiming that your play from F10-F8 was a deliberate strategy to reduce your threat level. Sometimes you say that it was because you didn't know how to navigate different alliances with different opinions and sometimes you imply that you were going for that edgy cold and cutthroat look.

Which one was it? And if your strategy was deliberately treating people poorly to reduce your threat status, why should I reward that over someone like Gustave who got here whilst treating me with the utmost respect the entire time?

13
American Empirical Pictures / Re: Jury forum
« on: October 07, 2021, 05:50:48 am »
I'm excited about the format too!

(Also secretly hoping for 3-3-3)

14
American Empirical Pictures / Re: Madame D.
« on: October 06, 2021, 09:02:44 pm »
Quote from: Buckley on October 06, 2021, 08:34:59 am
My shoulders literally just slumped when I saw the third vote on you

So close. :(
Okay it really is hitting me now.

That was close, wasn't it?

15
American Empirical Pictures / Re: Madame D.
« on: October 06, 2021, 08:57:09 pm »
Okay time for my thoughts and observations on the finalists!

Oracle

I honestly think that Oracle has a big heart but struggles with the fact that Survivor is a game where you have to cut people who helped get you further in the game, and doesn't quite know how best to handle that. I have definitely been there so it was something that resonated with me.
I had a very similar experience to Royal and Margot in that Oracle and I would be having conversations about loyalty and transparency and then he'd blindside me. But also after blindsiding me he would go on about how hard it was for him to have made that decision and I'm just sitting there thinking "well how do you think I feel?"
He also got annoyingly passive-aggressive a lot and I just had an incredibly low tolerance for passive-agression or bullshit this game (unless it was me doing it, I'm a flawed human being okay?).

BUT

I really do think that Oracle seriously took on board what Royal said in his announcement post, because I noticed much greater effort from Oracle to be transparent and honest with people after that. And even on a game level, it was part of what made me want to work with him instead of voting him out at the Final 6. Plus despite my complaining here, I actually liked Oracle and I've got to admit that he did have an impressive social game.

I would be hesitant to vote for him because there were a few merge rounds which left a sour taste in my mouth, but I'd still consider it? Especially if he talks about his growth in how he handled difficult conversations over the course of the game, I could say that potentially winning me over.

--

Gustave

Even though I knew that Gustave not-so-secretly wanted me out from Final 9 onwards, I actually liked Gustave the whole way through? Which I think is impressive! Out of the three finalists, my conversations with him felt the most real. He had this way of just making trivial conversation out of nowhere, of topics that he thought would interest both of us, and I loved it!
I know it's been mentioned in the jury forum that Gustave often lacked tact in being too honest with people, which got him into trouble, and I do agree with that, but I personally found the honesty and straightforwardness incredibly comforting. It's also possible that others did not have the same positive social experience with Gustave that I did.
But yeah! I guess I like the fact that someone so honest and straightforward with people managed to make it to the end. I would want to know a bit more about Gustave's gameplay, because obviously there were many moments where it felt like he almost left the game, and I'm not sure what he did to ensure that didn't happen.

--

Richie

Uggghhh, where do I begin?

I truly do believe that Richie was INCREDIBLY enthusiastic to be playing this game, and that I have so much respect for. He really gave it his all, socially, strategically and in challenges. On paper he feels to me like the most fitting winner of this game. But I just can't help but feel conflicted about it?

I believe at least part of his FTC argument will be that he played a loyal game, but how much can you claim a loyal game when your loyalty is on the condition that people do exactly what you want them to?
I would say that I played quite closely with Richie from Final 9 onwards, in some ways by necessity after I accepted his offer of the Team Zissou rings, but I think it's important to consider that this occurred right after he almost successfully blindsided me. Obviously it was my decision to accept the rings, but I think that Richie had this way of asserting what he thought was the best plan in a way that strongly discouraged alternatives. Which could be considered strong gameplay, but when someone did something that he didn't approve of (for example Suzy changing her vote to YW, me&Suzy voting out Margot, probably other examples), he would consider these slights against him and to me would seem genuinely confused as to why (for example) Suzy would make this move against him when he was just being loyal to her.
But then, as Royal mentioned in his announcement post, Richie would keep vital information from and/or lie to even people he considered his closest allies, all while expecting complete honesty from them.

It felt to me as if he legitimately didn't understand how a working relationship in Survivor could occur with an equal power dynamic, or at least without him in the driver's seat.

Richie made a lot of flashy moves, but to me they often seemed unnecessary or even making people uncomfortable. For example, I still don't understand why or how Richie got Royal to change his vote to me at F10. The F5 idol play on Gustave was also pure flex, unsuccessfully (from my perspective) attempting to coerce Gustave into tying the vote for Richie if Richie did not win immunity at F4 (even though Suzy probably would have been an ally for Richie even there). And again seemed like a vindictive move on Suzy... just because?

Those are my complicated thoughts at least. It neglects to mention that I legitimately did enjoy playing with Richie, our conversations were very fun, even if I thought he was overly saccharine in the way he spoke about me (that could just be because I'm old and bitter). I could definitely see myself voting for him if I'm impressed with his FTC performance.

--

So yeah, those are my observations and thoughts and opinions and I'm sure everyone will have differing opinions! I did a lot of complaining here (well except not about Gustave really), but I actually really like all three of the people contending for our votes! I suppose my thought was that if I cannot make my case to win then I will just think EXTRA critically about where to place my vote!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15