cant wait for him to make a lot dirt squirrel jokes

It's a bit unreasonable to think Natalie and Mick played the same game, imo. Mick never integrated. IIRC they brought it up several times at the jury and reunion that Nat took the time to learn about the galu members. She arguably got galu to get rid of Eric. Natalie was 10x the player Mick was. She wasn't flashy but she played a better game than Mick. The edit certainly shows her playing worse than Russell, but Russell was a marketing tool so that is possibly the least reliable edit of the 21 season run.

10x the player is a bit strong considering we only see what the ediotors show us. getting rid of eric was an amazing play by natalie.

Good call. Someday I will learn to stop using hyperbole. Today is apparently not that day.

Everyone on the internet is either a white male or an Asian male ldo.

I'm a white male, and since I like Tom Westman more than Yasmin from Samoa, I'm clearly a racist, misogynist pig.

They're off at some wedding, so I'm guessing they don't have the podcasting equipment handy.

Rob C. said in his last podcast that he'd be away this week, hopefully we'll get a 'cast on Thursday.

re. Natalie/Mick: Jaison actually came up with the idea to get rid of Erik, Natalie managed to sway Laura and her posse but - sexist ban - I think none of the Foa Foa guys would have been able to accomplish that simply because of the fact they were guys (remember that Galu itself was largely split by gender, with Laura/Kelly/Monica/Brett vs. Dave/John/Erik). Other than that one time, neither of them really deviated from the other at all (aside from Natalie's apparently very strong FTC performance).

I think Kos actually annoys me more than Clovis. Clovis is just a complete lost cause while Kos is knocking on the door of intelligent.

There is sort of a weird line in Survivor, but it actually makes sense if you think about it. Think about the men they cast on this show. Some are handsome idiot kids, some are brainiac strategists, and some are strong (physically and/or mentally) middle-aged guys. Now, think about the women they cast. A lot of them are models/actresses, some are girl-next-door types, and very few are middle-aged moms.

If you break down each group, you'll find significantly fewer "winner types" in the females. It's not because women are less adept at winning, it's that the show is going to cast way more of the model/actress/girl-next-door females (most of which are stupid) than they will of the mature, wise, intelligent, middle-aged females. They need brain-dead bikini babes way more than they need brain-dead Brad Pitts. In other words, they will consistently cast guys like Marty and Russell (middle-aged strategic males with no sex appeal) than they will women like Jill and Cirie (middle-aged strategic females with no sex appeal).

To answer your question: yes, aggression from males is probably more accepted than from females. However, if they cast more Ciries, the difference wouldn't be noticeable. Women are only "handicapped" because the females cast for the show are, in general, more attractive and less intelligent than the males.

Rotfl I wish we could wager on any measure of intelligence, be it education level, IQ, job, salary, anything. I would bet a lot I crush you on all of them.

I'm not talking smack either I would happily bet you.

i sure hope naonka is on the internet so she can see how much she sucks

CLOVIS VS KARTINKEN GRUDGE MATCH. LET THE BATTLE BEGIN

This is gambling forum I say lets put some real money it although I am sure KK will cower like a bitch. There I go being all sexist again.

I think I win just because you consider these things remotely accurate measures of intelligence.

And I assume you think you are joking, but that is you being quite sexist.

Let's not forget, the highest IQs on Survivor amazon were Heidi and Roger.

good point education level and IQ have no correlation with intelligence. Did I mention I LOVE kk logic. It makes me so happy.

As I predicted you are all talk.

Well I think I am nearly a lock to have a higher IQ, but I still think that number is BS. And yeah education level is completely irrel. Education level has literally NOTHING to do with intelligence. It's a much better measure of the income level of the family you were born into. You should be embarrassed to think that has meaning while posting in a poker forum.

you are a lock yet wont bet. There really is no end to the greatness that is kk logic.

lets see some heads up pokerrrr

It wouldn't prove anything, but seems impossible I don't have a huge edge, so I'd take it.

Clovis: if you REALLY want to bet on IQ I will, but you won't be happy...

Edit: plus I don't really want to validate your arguments, b/c I really don't think IQ is a good measure of intelligence.

I just don't prop bet as a rule. There's obviously some slim chance I'd lose. I'd put it at under 5%. I just don't prop bet.

decathlon:

IQ
HU poker
weiner size
hotter significant other (i'm so PC)
rubix cube
mile run
case (of beer) race
pole vault
remote island survival
ping pong
sperm count

tie breaker if it if 5-5 (because we can't do point values): OOTV vote

lol! those are all as valid as the criteria Clovis wanted to go on, so might as well

I like how clovis responded instantly to all posts until I flirted with the idea of taking him up on his bet (which I have decided to take the high ground and not do).

If I knew for a fact that Naonka was going to read my posts about her, I'd probably feel badly about suggesting that she might be mentaly ill a while back. It might actually prevent me from being so snarky. As I said, I wouldn't be good TV. I'm not really looking to hurt people's feelings. Especially individuals who already seem damaged. I only blast you guys with impunity because everyone seems to have an overinflated sense of self around here. ...Myself included, natch.