Matt Novak commented to the Final Results Page:
——
Not entirely sure where to discuss such things, but I had a couple thoughts about some of the challenges that I wondered what other contestant thought…
I was much more a fan of the challenges that just said “write a story, it has to include these things (or can’t include certain things)” (Launch/Lunch, Death Machine, Mimes) than some of the other challenges that focused more on approach than content. I also found that at first I was troubled by challenges that had “flaws.” For example, Launch/Lunch; a misunderstanding isn’t really a compelling story element, and all of the stories ended up feeling like they had the misunderstanding element just tacked on. But upon reflection, I liked “flawed” challenges because that meant you as a writer had to get around the problem. I liked figuring that stuff out.
I loved the mime challenge, and seeing what people came up with for that one.
Also, I really didn’t like the music origin challenge. I’m eager to hear what other people thought about the challenges.
——
Milkman here again. I, too, am eager to hear thoughts on this. I obviously felt strongly enough about the challenges we did to run them (although I have since fallen out of love with the music origin challenge, at least for the writing version of Survivor). I like the “flawed” challenges for the same reason Matt says he ended up appreciating them: it forces the player to dig out of a hole.
Most importantly, I want this game to be fun. What were the best challenges? What shouldn’t return?
Thanks again to everyone for playing.
Casa de Leche 
101 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 13, 2011 at 11:24 am
dekautz
My favorites are the two challenges I’ve won individual immunities on: Genre Swap and Children’s Book Extrapolation. Neither of which, conveniently, were done this time around. Not that I’m accusing the producers of rigging the game or anything…
(Seriously, I’m not, I just think it’s amusing.)
June 13, 2011 at 11:27 am
spookymilk
Haha…well, I suppose, in general, a non-random amount of players’ favorite games will be ones at which they excel.
I love those too, but I’d done Genre Swap several times in a row to that point. Children’s Book Extrapolation probably should have shown up this year as well, though. Not sure why I didn’t think to bring that back.
June 13, 2011 at 12:03 pm
mbnovak
I liked the ones I did well at too, but some of them might be one-and-done challenges (seemingly useless superpower? I feel like the idea is a bit played out already). I think the ones where I enjoyed the most people’s were Mimes, Death Machine, and I Expect You To Die.
June 13, 2011 at 12:05 pm
spookymilk
I really like the idea of Seemingly Useless Superpower, but it doesn’t have the legs to be done very often, for sure.
June 13, 2011 at 11:46 am
dearsmitty
I love any challenge that allows me to have Bubba whisper “I can smell your shrimp” to Clarice Starling.
Seriously, though, I like them all (especially the ones I don’t like) because they are good challenges. I suppose I could start a contest in which the challenges were all, “Write a somewhat humorous, somewhat touching, essay on being a dad.” I know I would do well, but I wouldn’t learn anything. Until a couple months ago, I didn’t think I could write fiction at all. Now I know I can’t. So, thanks.
June 13, 2011 at 11:48 am
spookymilk
LOL, man.
June 13, 2011 at 11:57 am
mbnovak
And this is why I enjoy Tom’s writing.
June 13, 2011 at 1:41 pm
adobery
Yes! Time to turn the tables and criticize you!
Nah, you do a good job. I don’t know that there are any challenges you necessarily need to get rid of. Certain ones lend themselves to be used all the time and stay fresh, while others are one and done or need to be used only so often. An important element is knowing when in the competition to use certain challenges, and I think you do that well.
Fic 59, Bantam, Fortunately/Unfortunately for example could be used everytime and stay fresh. Ones like 2nd opinion nursery rhymes & Useless Superpower maybe need just some time off since the focus/source material is more limited.
Sometimes, I think it’s just that the entries aren’t as strong or they found a way to write around the rules or avoided having to make it the focus of their piece, that may make a challenge seem weaker.
Here are the few criticisms I have:
1) Don’t have off weeks that offer immunities for future use. It should be to save your ass the week you did well.
2) I think have double immunities late in the game is too much. 4 people left and two of them can win immunity?
3) No grab bag. May just be me, but I’m more comfortable swimming in a little pond than a lake. I was always more comfortable with the challenges with a smaller focus anyway, but then you throw out 6-7 challanges to choose from in one week and now I’m clinging to a piece of lumber in the middle of the ocean. It’s hard enough brainstorming in the first place, but then you’re not even sure which one to focus brainstorming on.
I also don’t think it’s fairest scoring when not everyone is doing the same challenge.
3) It’s no secret I’m not a fan of survivor style play itself, but that’s not the issue. I do think it is unfair that some people have relationships that others don’t know about. On the real (cough) show, everyone starts out on a level playing field. You all have to get to know each other and then go on to make your deals, side deals, DK-quintuple side deals, etc.. I don’t know that there is a way around this besides making a cheat sheet for everyone just joining the game like “so and so and so and so are friends, he and she had an alliance and were the final 2 in season 5, etc.”
Now I had an alliance going in (even though it never had a chance to be used and my alliance mate unknowingly shared our secret-alliance with the whole world), so it’s not like I didn’t try to exploit that. I asked Beau some questions about people, to which he said he could not answer due to playing strategy and secret alliances, which I understood if it comes to things known to the judges that have formed/happened during this particular season. But other players having an edge knowing 3 other people in the game that newbys wouldn’t possibly know about, nor could be told about by the judges seems a little uneven. They can make deals with newbys and have deals with their friends in their pocket.
Anyway, it was fun and I don’t care about winning it anyway. Was just fun to play.
June 13, 2011 at 1:43 pm
adobery
3) Oh, and change the configuration so that your users can edit their own posts. 😉
But seriously, do that.
June 13, 2011 at 1:58 pm
spookymilk
I’m not sure why they can’t. I didn’t even know they couldn’t.
June 13, 2011 at 1:57 pm
spookymilk
Wow, thanks for this novel.
First: I agree about fresh challenges vs. those that need time off. You basically nailed them all, as I do indeed run Fic59 and F, U almost every time.
1) I’m not entirely sure how I feel about this yet. I’ve never done it quite that way before and I’m not sold on it entirely. I think as this game splits more in two; with the strategy game and the writing game, you’ll see more of that in the strategy game and less in the writing game. That sentence sucked. I want you to know I know.
2) That’s probably true, but I honestly only offered two because it had been that way all game long and I truly thought we’d end up picking the same one. In the end, with the way it shook out, we were robbed of what could have been a real interesting vote. In the strategy/variety game, you’ll probably see two Immunities offered at first post-merge, but once there are 7 or so people left, I’ll be done with that.
3) I don’t know how to handle this either. Interestingly, part of the reason I made a big deal of this in this season was because I didn’t want to have to come out and say “By the way, Ryan is Beau’s brother.” My siblings and most of my best friends have done poorly in this game, largely because of their ties to me. I don’t favor them at all, as the idea of cheating disgusts me. On the other hand, I can’t deny that these people have a special knowledge of what I like and what I don’t.
I like the fact that people have to figure out about existing alliances on their own, but yeah, it sucks when I see a reasonably strong player on a team with four close friends, and I know they’re the walking dead. The only real solution is to play a game between sixteen or more strangers, and that ain’t happening.
Oops, forgot the Grab Bag. That was a weird one, I know, and I doubt I’ll ever get the itch to do it again (in the writing game, anyway) but I really was blown away by every single suggestion this season and wanted to run them all. I don’t think the scoring was a problem, though. If I’m scoring them against the parameters of the challenge, everyone has the advantage of doing the challenge they’d be best at. I’m not sure what the problem is. I couldn’t really do that one with a forced curve, but with the Netflix scoring, I just don’t see an issue there.
June 13, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Beau
In Survivor VI, one team was dead in the water, because they didn’t know Dean knew both Brooks and me, and our teammate didn’t know that Brooks and I knew Dean. We were able to string along everyone.
This probably wouldn’t work, but what if everyone had to create a new e-mail address and be totally anonymous except to the judges? Then, you could choose to reveal to whomever you liked who you were.
Now, some people may recognize the writing styles of a Brooks or a Bizek and catch on, but at least they’d have to work at it.
June 13, 2011 at 3:07 pm
mbnovak
I kind of like that idea for a pure strategy perspective, but I’m kind of ok with just letting the writing rule. I think in some ways it really did so this time around. Well, to some extent. I know I liked all of the final 4 a ton and was ok with any of us winning, though I’m thinking about changing my mind on that position, since it wasn’t me… 😉
I guess it depends a lot on the personalities involved. I think it was ok to figure out who was who. And next time I won’t hold it against Ryan that he’s related to you. I will, however, hold it against Brooks that he’s won twice. And I’ll probably be wary of Dean bribing Oprah into sending me to hell. And I’ll probably discriminate against Shawn because of her elephantiasis-riddled balls. Much like society, I hate people who are different from me. So I actually want to know who’s who. It makes it easier to pick on people.
Oh, and if Kelly plays, I sure as heck want to know who he is… He needs to pay.
June 13, 2011 at 9:17 pm
adobery
I don’t see this as helpful to the new person either. It would benefit known strong writers in that they couldn’t be targeted early, though if they kept getting good scores, they make themselves a target anyhow. It would help existing strategists as well because they can contact their buddies at their real email address and find out their aliases and still form those alliances. The newbie is still left in the dark and now can’t even find out the known threats that they normally might be able too.
No real solution, and that’s OK.
June 13, 2011 at 11:06 pm
spookymilk
Bingo. I like a game full of Mystery People in theory, but players who know each other in real life would be crazy not to talk about who they are in the game and the new players would be even worse off than they are already.
June 13, 2011 at 6:43 pm
daneekasghost
Since I just now got home, let’s see if I can organize my thoughts on this.
Obviously, I like the writing aspect more than the strategy aspect of the game, so that informs a lot of my perspective.
— The thing that I missed in this game were the team challenges early on. I think that goes a way toward addressing Ryan’s point about prior relationships. Those give you a chance to interact with your team members as opposed to only talking when there’s a vote to be decided.
— Favorite challenges (tried not to let my own performance sway me) –
Useless Superpower (I think there’s more here than others, but maybe I’m wrong)
Meeting of the Mimes (so much creativity from everyone)
Bantam Bulwyr (these always crack me up)
Punch to a Quick End (the different strategy element is fun)
— Take ’em or leave ’em
Resignation letter (didn’t like it in VII or VIII – preferred the Eulogy challenge from VII)
Song lyrics
Cliches
Fortunately, Unfortunately (I know its a staple, and I don’t hate it, but I kind of think the best ones are same-y)
— I think one of the issues in the game is that strength is under-rewarded. I’ve said this to Spooky before, and I’m sure there are those who disagree (also I may be biased). I like the immunity opportunities that were introduced this time and Matt demonstrated how well they could be exploited. I especially like when they were placed within the game, those first challenges after the merge are the hardest to win immunity, so if one knows that they are a target, they have a couple of chances to win some protection.
Maybe I’ll think of more stuff, but that’s what I got right now.
June 13, 2011 at 6:48 pm
spookymilk
I’m with you on the post-merge protection, and that’s how I want the writing game to go, for the most part.
I think it’s possible that Seemingly Useless Superpower could be awesome, and that we just didn’t have a particularly great week. I’ll do it again eventually and see what happens. I love Meeting of the Mimes. Love it. Ditto Bantam Bulwyr, which I’ll probably run in both versions of the game.
As for having so few team challenges, that was largely due to Sam. I’d said I wouldn’t do any as long as there were any teams with two or fewer people, but Sam just WOULD NOT DIE, until the merge. I scrapped two team challenges as a result.
June 13, 2011 at 7:52 pm
dekautz
That’s funny, I thought (and I’ve expressed to Kelly) that strength was significantly over-rewarded in this particular iteration.
June 13, 2011 at 8:00 pm
dekautz
I mean, to be honest, I hated that I spent about a third of the game with that damn asterisk next to my name for a challenge I was trying to throw.
June 13, 2011 at 8:09 pm
mbnovak
Dan, it wasn’t that asterisk that made you seem like a threat, it was your formidable strategy.
And let’s be honest, I got my asterisks more for strategy and less for writing strength.
I like the idea of rewarding stronger writing with the bonus immunities, but maybe fewer weekly immunities post-merge? Also, more forced curves.
June 13, 2011 at 8:23 pm
spookymilk
I probably should have cut off the possibility of two Immunities once there were about six or seven people left, yeah.
June 13, 2011 at 8:22 pm
spookymilk
Strength vs. strategy has become more of a thing that I ever would have imagined. I didn’t realize that in focusing on one, I would REALLY end up missing the other.
Hence, the return of the cutthroat variety games. I’m psyched.
June 13, 2011 at 8:27 pm
daneekasghost
Heh. VIII was closer to that than VII for sure.
I think that the players (not the rules) were responsible for that to a large degree though. There were certainly some votes that did not follow the optimal strategy. Had it always been played toward eliminating the largest threat while maintaining numbers (which is how the game is geared since there is no consequence for eliminating someone, regardless of their connection to the voter), I feel pretty sure that there would have been a different final three.
I don’t know, obviously we come at this game from different angles, so I doubt there’s a solution that would satisfy us both completely – and I am not intending to complain about the setup as it worked out pretty well for me this time – so I’ll say that I liked the addition of the immunity challenges as a step toward making it a little bit more difficult to eliminate the players who would be the default targets otherwise.
June 13, 2011 at 8:30 pm
dekautz
You know, I have also argued for the reinstatement of the jury vote at the end (which, ahem, may in fact be returning for the variety game…?) in order to create the potential of in-game consequences for eliminating people.
June 13, 2011 at 8:37 pm
spookymilk
It’s indeed returning, DK. Probably just five people, since getting eliminated folks to follow along is like pulling teeth, but it will be a part of that game.
June 13, 2011 at 9:42 pm
mbnovak
I think we should retroactively reinstate it for this game… I’d rather lose to Shawn than Brooks. 😉
June 13, 2011 at 9:53 pm
adobery
I’m not a fan of a jury. When you have to overcome pitfalls with whatever route you take just to get to the finals, why should you also have to be subjected to a jury vote which is objective how? Everything is fair game as to how you play this game within the rules, so why is any one way to get there better than another? Even if you play lame duck or were naturally sucky at writing for the first 18 weeks, but got to the finals and wrote a masterpiece to win it, why should that be taken away by a jury?
June 13, 2011 at 10:27 pm
spookymilk
That’s why there’s a jury in the variety game and not this one, Ryan, and both will be staying that way.
June 13, 2011 at 9:39 pm
adobery
I guess I’m cool with that post-merge immunity opportunity, it’s probably just that one person was able to win two. I can’t really say if strength was over/under rewarded. I do think that with the prior relationships aspect you have to have opportunities for writing to balance strategy.
My personal favorites were the shorter ones, as longer ones were beyond me:
Fic 59, Bantam (even if it was a bitch)
Fortunately/Unfortunately
What’s That You Said?
6 Word Reviews (or whatever it was from last year)
Mimes
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
Probably others from last year I can’t recall anymore.
You definitely need to make the Death Machine a staple. Also need to bring back Punch to a Quick End. That was an awesome idea. Maybe the scoring needs to be worked out still, but it’s very interesting. How long is everyone else making their entry? Ahhhh! Maybe a forced curve for both elements, with no bonus points, and grouped in threes. 666,555,444, etc.. Length is half the score (with cohesive story) and rest is the other half.
Did not care for as much: You’re so Vain, Grab Bag, Dewey Defeats Truman (writing it was OK, but didn’t like a lot of the entries).
Once you get towards the end of the competition it doesn’t matter too much. You throw anything at these guys n’ girls and they’ll come up with something imaginative. I think I would have had a stroke with a 1,200 word limit and beyond, and am glad I didn’t have to write them.
June 13, 2011 at 9:45 pm
mbnovak
Yeah, Quick Punch is awesome. Some tweaks maybe, but that was a great challenge. Come up with more like that one.
Also, towards the beginning, with shorter challenges, would you ever be willing to do shorter submission weeks? I think game play could be sped up a little for that, and that’d be good, since this went on a long time.
Oh, and Ryan, it wasn’t so much that one person won two bonus immunities as it was one person won a bonus immunity and stole the other one. Mwa-ha-ha!
June 13, 2011 at 9:50 pm
adobery
Stole what? You earned them both. You can’t be faulted for Kelly’s short comings. 😉
June 13, 2011 at 10:29 pm
spookymilk
No, believe him, he stole one.
June 14, 2011 at 6:35 am
adobery
There some shenanigans I’m not aware of?
June 14, 2011 at 6:44 am
mbnovak
Let’s just say I played a smart game.
June 14, 2011 at 6:49 am
adobery
1) Are you referring to the double immunity win week?
2) Cough it up, the game is over
June 14, 2011 at 7:09 am
mbnovak
1. Yes. 2. No way, I’m using that strategy again. Ok, fine. My 20 questions submission was a group effort. I suggested that Dan and Dean and I all contribute to a single entry, we pick the best ones and submit those under just 1 name.
June 14, 2011 at 7:14 am
adobery
1) Boy did that bite them in the ass!
2) Why wouldn’t you use it again besides noone would trust you again?
3) You truly are souless lawyer.
4) Bravo. Bravo.
5) Now I want to know how many were yours.
6) I am so inadequate in this game
June 14, 2011 at 7:16 am
adobery
I’m sorry Dean and DK, but HAHAHAHAHAHA. Wow did you get outplayed there.
June 14, 2011 at 7:20 am
adobery
This feels kind of icky rules-wise.
June 14, 2011 at 7:34 am
spookymilk
It is kind of icky, but I find myself more impressed than annoyed.
It’s the kind of move that will be right at home in the variety game, where I’ll be running challenges that encourage all manner of shenanigans.
June 14, 2011 at 7:35 am
nibbish
Since this and the subsequent betrayal led pretty directly to my elimination, I should be upset about this. Instead, I find it kind of hilarious. This does explain the ire, though.
True Survivor drama! Spooky ought to be pleased.
June 14, 2011 at 7:38 am
spookymilk
It’s pleasing, sure. It’s also a little surprising. For a long while, I was under the impression that I was getting a very straightforward game from people, and there wasn’t much strategy going on, with one exception.
When that exception was eliminated, he emailed me something like “Believe me, there’s a very good strategist still in the game.”
True that.
June 14, 2011 at 8:04 am
adobery
Don’t get me wrong, I applaud the move. The other part of me just feels bleh cause I wonder if I would have won that challenge since that type of challenge is right in my wheelhouse. Plus it also just illustrates how little foresight I have, and my lack of any strategy.
I would like to see the email correspondence on that one. “Hey let’s team up and come up with the best answers possible. Then we’ll submit it under one of our names for the best chance to win. Whose name should we submit it under. Doesnt’ really matter I guess. Well, I’m at my computer right now and I wouldn’t mind doing the brunt of the work for submitting it. Let me know. -Matt”
June 14, 2011 at 8:24 am
mbnovak
That’s not far off on how the e-mail went. I made the suggestion, they went for it. Then I asked whose name we should submit under. I was the obvious person, so I was revealing myself as the biggest threat, but I sure wasn’t going to recommend myself. I think Dan suggested either Dean or myself, and Dean deferred. I worked my butt off on the video to win that second one. It was a good weekend for me.
I know I used the big strategy in this game, but honestly, so much of what I did was geared towards loyalty and good writing. Shawn and I were tight from early on, and when Dan and Dean included her in their list of future targets I started thinking I would have to flip. It wasn’t so much backstabbing as it was loyalty to Shawn.
Oh, also, Dean would have won that challenge outright. I think I would have tied for second or something.
June 14, 2011 at 12:11 pm
mbnovak
In all fairness to Dean and Dan, this was a move the benefited them too. They thought their biggest threats were Brooks and Ryan, and this helped make sure one of them didn’t get the immunity. If I hadn’t been loyal to Shawn, they would have benefited from this move. So it wasn’t like I just played them. It was a good move for them too, it was just a better move for me.
June 14, 2011 at 1:15 pm
dekautz
My gameplan with regard to the optional immunities was primarily to keep them out of the hands of Ryan and Brooks, since post-merge I wanted the best possible chance to get them both out first and second, and then continue culling the non-Nibbish DSK herd. With that in mind I agreed our best chance at securing the 20 questions immunity was to collaborate (as an aside, I think my own contributions didn’t count for more than two or three of the points) and since I was already planning my own video submission with the intent to do my best to win that one, I didn’t want to go into the merge with two immunities in my possession. That’s why I agreed to let someone else take the best 20 questions entry, and at the time I really didn’t care who it was, since it didn’t affect my goals either way for that stretch of the game. In that sense, it was a beneficial plan for me since Ryan (and Brooks, for that matter) did come out of that with zero extra immunities.
Obviously, Matt had a better gameplan with regards to the successive votes, but I don’t think him having that extra immunity had an effect on how those eliminations went one way or the other.
June 14, 2011 at 1:29 pm
nibbish
Which brings up a good point. If I had actually been around and able to engage in the strategic side at all that week, would there have been any way I could’ve gotten Tom to vote with me? Or was that a lost cause?
June 14, 2011 at 1:54 pm
dearsmitty
Before I joined the “Final Four” alliance no one had talked to me. I was just an innocent lamb, writing on Sunday mornings. So, yes, I would have voted with you, against Brooks, and the Final Four would have been DK, Dean, you and I. Talk about a missed opportunity! My only strategy was to write entries that were not so bad that I embarrassed myself, not so good that I was perceived as a threat, while paying attention to what the judges liked. When I joined the alliance, I ditched that strategy and tried winning immunities, just in case I was in bed with a bunch of lying, conniving, rats. And I did win two, but then my luck ran out.
June 14, 2011 at 2:04 pm
dekautz
Tom, I am sorry I never talked to you. I felt after the first time I played that my only big mistake (other than relying on someone to actually, y’know, submit something) was not talking to all the players in my group (whether my original tribe or the merged group) enough about what they were thinking, and in this game I started out with the intention of not making that mistake again. But, I did. I wish in hindsight that I had tried to pull you in on the Brooks vote myself. I kind of relied on Pete to do that instead since I thought he might have more history of communication with you, but not making the effort myself was a huge mistake.
June 14, 2011 at 2:08 pm
mybiggirlshoes
May I admit that I actually had no strategy at all?? I literally just did whatever I was told to do. I had an aliiance with Matt early on and did whatever he said. LOL I was just there to write and if I stayed a long time, great, if not…then I was ok with that.
June 14, 2011 at 2:18 pm
dearsmitty
you certainly may not!
June 14, 2011 at 2:30 pm
daneekasghost
Shawn, that sounds remarkably like my “strategy”.
I told exactly zero lies in this game. I voted with those I promised to, I told people when I was voting for them if they asked, and I was pretty open about my strategy and alliances (as an aside, I’d like to think I would have fared pretty well in a jury vote for those reasons).
If you search “Brooks” in these comments, it comes up 10 times, and every single one of them is someone commenting on how I was a threat, how they wish they hadn’t lost to me, or ways they could have voted me out or denied me immunities. Nobody’s hindsight needs corrective lenses, I guess.
/too cocky?
//fuck it. I won.
June 14, 2011 at 2:38 pm
dearsmitty
i put my earlier post in the wrong spot. I meant to add that I fell in with a fine group, every one of whom kept his/her word, as did I, and as I always will.
June 14, 2011 at 2:43 pm
dearsmitty
Brooks, I didn’t mean to say I had wasted an opportunity. I got to the final four regardless. My point, which is true, was that if they had asked me first, I would have joined that alliance ( I assume they didn’t because they thought they had Matt and Shawn). The vote, apparently, would’ve been 4 for you, 3 for Peter. So, yes, Peter missed an opportunity. And as much as you earned victory, clearly there was luck involved (as there will always be in this game.)
June 14, 2011 at 2:56 pm
daneekasghost
Tom, I understood your meaning. It would have been the strategically right play on your part as well.
Absolutely, I got lucky. Multiple times. But it’s just funny to me how many machinations were set in play to eliminate me in particular, and, without any subterfuge, I managed to not get eliminated. That was my point, it ended up sounding kind of cocky, I know, but there it is. it amused me.
June 14, 2011 at 3:15 pm
dearsmitty
I share that sentiment a bit, as someone who didn’t get too involved in “playing the game”. Not that anyone was angling for me (maybe my strategy worked!), and I obviously didn’t win, but I get where you’re coming from.
June 18, 2011 at 1:25 pm
freealonzo
Oh so this is out in the open now. I came up with by far the most winning entries and would have won the immunity hands down. This definitely led to the bitterness of my last submission and I almost spilled the beans in that submission but wasn’t sure how Kelly would react.
Matt really played DK and me. I am both still pissed and quite in awe of the audacity of it all.
June 18, 2011 at 10:07 pm
Beau
know how Rusty feels now?
June 19, 2011 at 7:44 am
freealonzo
Oh no doubt payback’s a bitch. But in my eyes I see a big difference. I was on a team with R and R but we didn’t strategize and I didn’t work with them. They would say “vote xyz out” and I would do that. I just went along for the ride until it was time to vote Rusty out.
Matt worked with us as a team. Not only the 20 questions thing but we talked about how few characters we had in that challenge where you wanted as few as possible, we brainstormed the mashup challenge. We had multi-email discussions about who to vote out and when.
His game playing was unquestionably brilliant (except not removing Brooks when he had the chance)
June 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm
adobery
“Audacity”. Really? I know this must be the first time an alliance was broken, and let’s not forget the oath of honesty and straightforward play Kelly made us take before being allowed to play, and combine that with the huge cash prize for winning…oh, wait.
June 13, 2011 at 11:12 pm
spookymilk
Punch to a Quick End has most definitely not been done for the last time. Many thanks to Tanya for that one. I really like Ryan’s idea of a forced curve for the word count element of the challenge.
I’ve kicked around shorter submission weeks for ages. This next time, I’ll probably be judging most or all of it alone like I did way back in the early days of the variety game, so coordinating with a co-judge is unnecessary.
June 14, 2011 at 10:21 am
adobery
I think having two judges is better and because you value my opinion more than the air you breathe, I will tell you why.
1) Twice as much feedback for the contestant
2) Parity: Contestants can’t solely write to one judge, especially those that know what a judge might like over a newbie. Judging is subjective, but you two have agreed when it’s come to awesomeness most times. Drama is easier, but humor could tickle one while not the other. Also, the other judge picks up the slack when one of you totally missed something. God forbid both of you totally miss something, but I don’t see how that could happen.
3) More message board interaction.
4) It’s twice as likely someone will say something nice about what you wrote. Or if you did bad, you have two judges to tell you and pound the idea in that your head sucked so you can accept it and move on (unless your name is Tom.)
June 14, 2011 at 10:24 am
adobery
Damn it, I need that edit button. “…pound the idea in your head that it sucked..”
June 14, 2011 at 10:35 am
spookymilk
It’s occasionally happened that one of us has missed the gimmick, and the other has pointed out what was missed before scores were handed out. I’m pretty sure both of us missing something has only happened once.
At least it wasn’t during an important time in the game!1111!!! Sigh…
Also, I’m judging alone because a lot of the challenges will be objective. I mentioned it elsewhere, but a second judge will probably be employed on subjective challenges, they just won’t be at my side all game long.
June 14, 2011 at 10:39 am
adobery
Oh, so you are mixing in talking about the variety game in the post about our opinions of the latest writing Survivor. I hope so, because you must not mean that any of the writing challenges could possibly be objective.
So, carry on then. I don’t care about the variety game 🙂
June 14, 2011 at 10:42 am
dearsmitty
Adobery, you rat bastard! After everything I did for you! No one tells me I’m a less-than-perfect writer. No one!
June 14, 2011 at 10:49 am
adobery
That’s funny, I thought it was lots of people.
June 14, 2011 at 12:14 pm
dearsmitty
Certainly many California brewers are not huge fans today
June 14, 2011 at 1:56 pm
dearsmitty
By the way, I was not in bed with rats. Everyone did exactly what they said they would do.
June 13, 2011 at 8:45 pm
mybiggirlshoes
I just want to let you know that I love all of you. That’s all. Carry on!
June 13, 2011 at 8:46 pm
spookymilk
And we you, Shawn. And we you. Well, I you, anyway. I can’t speak for everybody, I suppose.
June 13, 2011 at 8:50 pm
dekautz
You can speak for me, there. She’s definitely my favorite chick I’ve ever been backstabbed by (and there’s been plenty of those).
June 13, 2011 at 9:07 pm
mybiggirlshoes
Aw, sweetie, I never made any promises to you…why are you so in love with me??? 😉
June 13, 2011 at 9:41 pm
mbnovak
Me too. Except, obviously, for the backstabbing part. We made a pretty awesome team. 🙂
June 14, 2011 at 2:25 am
mybiggirlshoes
Totally. 🙂 And I DID make promises to you and kept them. 🙂 I am a loyal chick. LOL
June 13, 2011 at 9:12 pm
mybiggirlshoes
And I’m so glad I got to reconnect with Kelly and make some new friends!! I honestly liked everyone that played…well, I never got to know…Tara?? Scott?? Well, anyway, YAY!
June 13, 2011 at 9:17 pm
spookymilk
I can vouch that Tara and Scott are good kids. Tara has nothing in common with people like you and me (she’s a UFC-loving, horse-riding redneck I graduated high school with) but she’s pretty cool. Scott is a very funny actor. Very tall, too. At 6’6″ he might be the tallest person ever to, um, “play” the game.
This was a really easygoing season. And, yeah, “hanging” with you again was awesome, Shawn. I can’t wait to do it in person now and then.
June 13, 2011 at 9:24 pm
mybiggirlshoes
Then, hurry your ass out to L.A. The weather is getting fantastic! (I say that like it’s not always 75 and sunny…LOL)
June 13, 2011 at 9:40 pm
mbnovak
I wonder if I’m the shortest guy to ever play? I round up to 5’5″.
June 13, 2011 at 9:59 pm
adobery
Don’t be so hard on yourself. 5.5 is perfectly average. Ohhhh, nevermind.
June 13, 2011 at 10:30 pm
spookymilk
Winner of Survivor III Patrick Kozicky is no taller than 5’5″, if that.
June 13, 2011 at 9:57 pm
adobery
One other tiny suggestion. Title the Eliminations to correspond with the Challenge number. I know the Elimination number is accurate, but in the Title it throws you off scrolling back through pages. I don’t care what # they got eliminated at. I want to find the elimination that corresponds with the challenge they were eliminated in.
June 13, 2011 at 10:31 pm
spookymilk
I thought I was the only one that was bothered by that. Thanks for mentioning it.
June 14, 2011 at 6:34 am
adobery
If only you ran this thing, you could have changed the things that bothered you.
June 14, 2011 at 6:44 am
spookymilk
What I mean is that it’s always bothered me, but I figured it would bother other people if I changed it.
June 13, 2011 at 9:58 pm
adobery
test edit
June 14, 2011 at 6:22 am
nibbish
Huh. Yeah… Let’s see.
Challenges to keep: F59, Bantam Bulwyr, Meeting of the Mimes, Eulogy (I know we didn’t do that this time, but it was a winner last time), Machine of Death (wish I had been able to do this), I Expect You To Die, Rashomon
Ones I Really Didn’t Care For: You’re So Vain
It did feel like there were way too many immunities floating around toward the middle of the end, but maybe I’m just grumpy because I squandered my best chances to get a couple of them.
Big seconds on Ryan’s suggestion to make the elimination and challenge numbers line up. That drives me batty looking back on things.
June 14, 2011 at 2:43 pm
spookymilk
I have to say, I’ve never seen anything like this.
In seven seasons, the amount of strategy I’ve heard about, put together, might not equal what I’m hearing here. Suddenly what happened in the game is ten times more fascinating.
June 14, 2011 at 4:42 pm
mbnovak
Beau led me to believe that strategy was essential when I signed up. I tried to avoid it, to be honest. My strategy was “I liked Shawn’s writing/commentary, so I e-mailed her. Dan contacted me, so I was in a group with him and Dean (and apparently Pete). Then I realized Dan was very strategic and since I was becoming a bigger threat he’d probably vote me out. So I picked a different group of people I liked, because I didn’t want to be voted out and that allowed me to continue teaming up with Shawn.” It’s not that much strategy,
And I think that’s kind of what people are realizing… “If I’d only talked to X, then this would have happened…”
Brooks and Shawn employed the “pawn” strategy and it paid off.
I feel like this is just going to escalate the strategy in the next writing game. I dunno… maybe writing survivor should involve the judges making the decision of who gets booted, if you want to avoid more strategy. Maybe it should be more like America’s Next Top Writer than Survivor? Of course, then we could just call it “Who gets to place 2nd to Brooks?”
June 14, 2011 at 4:47 pm
spookymilk
I feel like the last thing I want is to tell people they were the very worst of the week…every single week.
It’s a tightrope figuring out how to run the writing game, that’s for sure.
June 14, 2011 at 5:37 pm
seeann
Or finishing second to CH.
June 18, 2011 at 1:36 pm
freealonzo
Matt had a great alliance with Shawn and Tom with the fatal flaw of not eliminating Brooks when he had the chance. There was even a chance to get Brooks the week I was eliminated. If Matt would have e-mailed early saying here’s the deal, I’m with Shawn and Tom but I give you a one week reprieve if you agree to eliminate Brooks this week, after that you are on your own. I would have taken that and not submitted my divisive entry. We eliminate Brooks and Matt would have had a pretty good shot at the title. Ah hindsight….
June 17, 2011 at 1:18 pm
adobery
This Survivor thing has really evolved over the half-years hasn’t it? Brooks, I was reading your blog and went to look at your survivor VI entries. Well, after that I wanted to read the complete season. Kelly hooked me up with the facebook site for it.
You definitely should be more proud of this season VIII victory. Season VI had, what? 16 contestants? Double eliminations for several weeks to start out which were mostly non-subs? No DK to contend with. The final was a joke winning by default. Matt and Shawn make a much better three-way. Your facebook challenge page was very good though.
The challenges this season were also much more involved and of greater depth this time around.I think the critquing was better this season too, though the more involved challenges may have something to do with that. I will say though that I did enjoy Ben’s in depth judging.
“Nope”
“Gah. Sucko”
“Meh”
“Yucko”
“I hate”
“I don’t want to come up with a reason for why this one is getting zero points.”
“Stupid with a capital S”
“God dammit, this is the best we could do?”
“This was close for me. But close sucks. – NO POINTS”
“The only way I could hate this idea more is if my ex-wife had come up with it. She’s still hot, though.”
Here are a couple other amusing things I came across from contestants.
“I believe children are their own damn future. My future is a mortgage, school loans, and a cold, cold grave. ”
—————
6 word evaluations:
Adult diapers
What do seniors smell like? Depends
—————
Andrew Rustleund
I’ve learned that sometimes I can only keep like two things in my head at once, and March Madness kicked this out. I’m not sure a cash prize would have helped in this instance, unless it was like a lot of money (more than $5).
Kelly Wells
I love that you suggest that over $5 is a lot of money, and I’m sad to say that I agree.
Andrew Rustleund
Actually, I’m really rich and have no concept of money. I just assume you huddled masses think $5 is a lot of money.
—————-
And what was up with this?
Kelly:
Will you take the last challenge too seriously and delete the page from your list because you have no humor about yourself (that’s right, I noticed)?
June 17, 2011 at 1:28 pm
spookymilk
I can’t tell you what was up, exactly, with that last comment of mine. I’ll give you this much: one of my very best friends in the world takes his or herself way too seriously on occasion. You know? It’s not even that. It’s the fact that he or she is excellent at dirty humor, but wants the world to think that he or she has no interest in dirty humor.
The End, as far as that goes.
Survivor VI was, for the most part, a bad season. I didn’t want to run it yet, but Rusty was aching for another season and Ben got on my back until I ran it. Then, Ben seemed to have very little time for it, and as his excitement clearly waned, mine followed. I did a four-team, two-elimination-per-week thing at the beginning that totally worked when I ran Survivor III with 24 players, but with 16 it was a stupid idea. Still, there were a ton of non-submitters. Then, when the game got good, there was a public meltdown and it totally stopped being fun. THEN, the one thing that could have made the final interesting ceased to be, as the steamroller that was Roman Feeser didn’t have time to enter, and Dean’s entry was basically half done.
This was definitely a more impressive win for Brooks, but I get why in his eyes, they’re closer to equal (1991 was clearly a better WS win for the Twins, but 1987 was the first time they won it, so…). Survivor VI would be a completely forgettable season for me if it hadn’t had such crazy interpersonal stuff late in the game, and the final submission with just one person really entering was a bummer. I wish I could say, though, that that was the only time it happened.
June 17, 2011 at 3:03 pm
Beau
That adult diaper joke is 4, 743 years old. But I suppose if it’s the first time you heard it…
June 18, 2011 at 1:12 pm
freealonzo
Yeah, I really blew that finale. I just didn’t have time and to do it and with like a day left I just said Fuck It, Brook deserves the thing anyway. I never even went back to read the reactions. Funny thing is, if I would have survived to the finale this year, same thing would have happened. The week of this year’s finals I had my daughter’s high school graduation, then graduation party. On top of that I had to plan a 6 backpacking trip to the Black Hills. I am sure Kelly would have been pissed (rightfully so) if I had half-assed two finales.
Probably wouldn’t have mattered because that Death Machine submission would have chewed me up and spit me out even if I had made it one more week.
June 22, 2011 at 5:37 pm
daneekasghost
One more suggestion. I think it would be awesome to have a page linked at the top that links to all the challenges (and maybe the eliminations) from previous versions of the game.
Going back to specific challenges is currently kind of a pain, and it’s something that I do more often than I will ever admit.
June 22, 2011 at 6:13 pm
adobery
Rereading your entries on your blog not quite set the mood as compared to rereading them amidst all our inferior entries?
June 22, 2011 at 9:17 pm
mbnovak
I go back quite a bit too. This set up ain’t the greatest for that.
June 22, 2011 at 9:19 pm
mbnovak
Also, I really just wanted to leave the 100th comment on this thread. So, here it is:
Elephantiasis-riddled giraffe porn.
June 22, 2011 at 11:56 pm
mybiggirlshoes
Boom.