Quote:
Originally Posted by Dream Crusher
I feel it was EXTREMELY inappropriate of Jeff Probst to act as judge, jury, and executioner by deciding that there would be no private vote tonight.
Agree with most of Dream Crusher's commentary on Probst being wrong not to have a vote. As likely as it is, there's not a 100% guarantee Varner goes home, and there's no way that public discussion of it can accurately reveal that or not. It may not have changed things this time, but if Probst keeps doing this like this, he will almost certainly change the outcome at some point.
And yes, Survivor may not be subject to strict game show rules, but the intergrity of the game still matters. Probst just wanted to look like a good guy here and like somebody said, totally SJW'd it unfairly at the end. He can shame Varner (although Probst's own words/thinking were shameful as well imo) and still have a vote.
Quote:
Jeff Probst, you are just a host, not a player. Don't get me wrong. You are a damn good host but that's where your role should end. You need to stop trying to control what happens in the game.
Probst has been the showrunner for a while now. He is probably single-handedly the most in control of the entire show. He has the power to make executive decisions, change things as he sees fit, tell the stories he wants to tell, etc. That could be all well and fine, but as we've seen, it is also compromising his role as host, and he is inserting himself more and more.
Quote:
I post this here because I know you read this thread.
Lol. Is this a joke or true?
Quote:
The more I think about it the more slimy Jeff becomes. There is a decent chance he wanted to go without the vote so there wouldn't be an option to edit it out.
This too.