Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 5/18/2010
I'm saying, being mean isn't a good enough reason to not be voted for. I get what you're saying and I understand why the jury voted the way that they did...I just think that its an incredibly weak stance to base a vote for a million dollars off of. Again, emotion over logic will NEVER win in my book...NEVER.
That's all well and good, and if you were on the jury, you could give him your vote. But he has to know the people on the jury, and tailor his strategy to give him the best chance at getting *their* vote. Not yours.
Russell seemed to have an obsessive need to be seen as being in control of the game, when it could have been MUCH better for his end-game strategy if he just let things play out a bit and just make sure he's not on the chopping block. He always seemed to be making a move, even when not necessary. You clearly don't need to orchestrate everything to win the game, and when you're stirring thing up for no real reason, it can come back to bite you.
Had he not voted out Danielle and just stuck with his Danielle, Parv, Jerri alliance, they could have picked off Rupert, Colby, and Sandra in order with no trouble. I think he would have had a much better chance of winning once he got to the final 3 in that scenario. I think the jury members would have respected that a LOT more than his constant scheming.