Board Thread:Virtual Tribal Council/@comment-27638357-20160519221405/@comment-27391152-20160521012457

Zypker124 wrote:

Tozza6 wrote: Aubry and Cydney clearly headlined the game and orchestrated the voting procedures, dominating and dictating the game, and all of a sudden people think Michele is a threat? Why?

Because she won the game. That's why. Having KNOWN who was on the jury (AKA Jason and Scot who both had an extremely high chance of being bitter towards the people that voted them out), Aubry realised that Michele was the only one that could beat her since she did not control Michele like she did Tai and Cyd. In my opinion, this is circular reasoning. You can see what I mean based on this fantastic tweet: https://twitter.com/domhrv/status/733297779267776514 You're saying all of sudden people thought Michele was a threat because she won. That doesn't make any sense. Michele won after people started to think she was a threat. In my opinion, we're just all revising history and thinking that because Michele won with the jury she had, she HAD to know the jury she was up against would benefit her. That doesn't make any sense, at all. Let's say someone baked 10 cookies, and one was chocolate chip while all the others were oatmeal raisin, and there were 10 kids who were tasked with trying to select the chocolate chip. THen let's say each of them grabs a cookie within five seconds, and one of them gets the chocolate chip cookie. Do we revise history with hindsight and say "Oh, that person must have know it was chocolate ship based on odor and texture?". No. There's a high possibility he just happened to get lucky. I'll refute your other points later. You aren't making much sense to me right now, because you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I didn't mean she was a threat because she won, I mean that AUBRY REALISED THAT MICHELE WAS THE ONLY PERSON THAT COULD BEAT HER BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T CONTROL HER LIKE SHE DID EVERYONE ELSE. Besides, that tweet has flaws because if you think of it like this:

Michele won b/c the jury respected her game the most (or played a better social game, whatever).

Why did she have a good social game?

Because Michele had formed better relationships with the jury, who respected her game over Aubry's. This was PROVEN CORRECT by the vote.

And can I just say, that I think Aubry played a far better game than Michele personally, but Michele simply got the votes at the end, and Aubry should have realised that with the jury that they had, Michele was the only one that could beat her.