Why people try to ascertain that bitter juries exist. The jury is the sole decider of the winner and they can vote based on whatever criteria they want. There is no set agenda to what a jury has to decide on, there are no rules to how they can vote. They can literally vote however they want. A jury cannot be bitter because they reward honesty over game play, they cannot be bitter because they reward likability over game play. Survivor and Big Brother has never been a competition on who can play the best strategic game. It is a competition to make it to final 2 in a way that makes the jury want to vote you for winning.
Comments
If someone played the best game ever
But someone fucked me behind the shelter
I'm probably voting the 2nd
because it's my jury vote
loopspeare some juries value who played a better strategic game but insinuating that when a jury does not vote for the best strategist makes them bitter is first extremely shortsighted, second utterly egotistical, and third shows a serious lack of game play. Also since a jury sets the criteria for winning it is extremely illogical to say they are bitter because the jury did not match some strategy guideline for how they should vote
if people are voting for a person they don't like cuz they're bitter at the other person (eg josh over paul) i think it's fair to say it's a bitter jury
it's a part of the game but you can't say they're not bitter ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
bengalboy yes you can paul lost the jury votes because those people respected loyalty and or honesty. How is Paul not lining up with the values they see as a winner them being bitter. SO yeah still saying bitter juries do not exist only juries
bengalboy not all of them said that and not the majority said that either so you cannot carry that over to saying a jury voted bitterly logic still does not add up.
the whole idea of a jury is to vote objectively and not based off personal feelings and i think it's fair to say a LOT of people in big brother vote based off bitterness or find ways to justify their bittnerness
the other side to that is that contestants have to work hard to avoid a bitter jury
idc that much cuz i barely watch reality shows but i do think bitter juries exist
carsonl no it isnt lol that statement is extremely inane
bengalboy in big brother and survivor dru the speech is and now the power shifts over to the jury hands and they get to decide who wins. Not the pwoer shifts over to the juries hands and we have given them some objective list to vote off and if they do not they are just being bitter. The jury literally sets the list they come up with. There is no agenda or checklist that makes a winner
bengalboy first not many people have actually said I am voting for you because I hate you. They almost always go after some criteria. Second one bitter juror doesnt make a bitter jury. Third most juries that people claim to be bitter almost no one actually voted out of hatred for someone. Furthermore, voting someone else because you dislike someone is not being bitter. If they harbor ill feelings towards someone for how they treated them I do not call that response bitterness
bengalboy yeah and I do not think deciding not to vote for someone because they treated you horribly and lied to you multiple times is being bitter. If you value honesty and integrity and genuine personal relationships I think that is just you sticking to what you believe in.
bitterness
ˈbɪtənəs/
noun
noun: bitterness; plural noun: bitternesses
1.
sharpness of taste; lack of sweetness.
"the lime juice imparts a slight bitterness"
synonyms:
sharpness, acidity, pungency, acridity, tartness, sourness, harshness, vinegariness, acerbity More
"the bitterness of the medicine"
resentment, resentfulness, embitteredness, dissatisfaction, disgruntlement, discontent, grudge, pique, indignation, sourness, rancour, spite, sullenness, churlishness, moroseness, petulance, peevishness, spleen, acrimony
"his bitterness against his parents grew"
trauma, pain, painfulness, agony, grief;
unpleasantness, disagreeableness, nastiness, awfulness;
upset, heartache, heartbreak, unhappiness, misery, wretchedness, sorrow, sadness, distress, desolation, despair, desperation, poignancy, tragedy
"the bitterness of war"
intense cold, bitter cold, iciness, frostiness, chilliness, chill;
penetration, intensity, bite, nip, sting, sharpness, keenness, rawness, harshness, wintriness;
informalparkiness
"the bitterness of the wind"
acrimony, hostility, antipathy, antagonism, enmity, animus, friction, virulence, anger, rancour, spite, spitefulness, vindictiveness, viciousness, vitriol, savagery, ferocity, hate, hatred, loathing, detestation, venom, poison, bile, nastiness, ill feeling, ill will, bad blood, malignity, malevolence;
literarycholer
"there was irreconcilable bitterness between strikers and strike-breakers"
antonyms:
sweetness, magnanimity, contentment, delight, warmth, balminess, goodwill
2.
anger and disappointment at being treated unfairly; resentment.
"he expressed bitterness over his dismissal without notice"
So to an extent can be understandable why some would say it's voting out of spite and bitterness, but at the end of the day, the Jury gets to vote on who played a better game TO THEM, not to us. We can relate to their feelings, unless you experienced Big Brother yourself. So yeah there is no such thing as Bitter Jury, utter nonsense.
koolness234 Depends on how to Jury makes up their mind
A) Someone did something they didn't like so they're not voting for them = bitter
B) After weighing up both of the F2's game-play and looking at the decisions they made and if they think that was best for them in the game(and what they themselves would have done) = fair
For me if someone doesn't look at the whole game and just focuses what was done to them and holds a grudge then there is no point in them watching the end of the season, asking a question or being in the Jury, they should just lock in their vote after they leave the house then go home xD
Although I get what you mean, a jury can technically judge their vote off of whatever the hell they want, if one made better tea than the other, if one accidentally stood on the back of their heel day 4 etc
you can't say that a bitter jury is impossible
if there are 7 people in a jury and all 7 are bitter over the game and how it turned out, then that is a bitter jury. That doesnt necessarily mean they voted a "wrong way" but saying you cant have a bitter jury is literally saying that a person cannot be bitter
and i also think its dumb when an outside force affects a jury vote, like Dan not getting votes in BB14 because he "already won and doesnt need the money". That has nothing to do with likability, or gameplay, or anything because by that logic, if the jury is sexist, then a person doesnt deserve to win because they're the opposite sex. It's simply absurd
I mean just because someone wins because of a bitter jury doesn't mean that they were robbed of the win. A player can leave a game upset upset with their ally that backstabbed them, and then when that ally makes final 2, can choose to vote for the other person simply to spite the person that turned their back on them.
Is that player bitter? Yes. Did they make their decision on who should win simply based on their feelings of resentment? Yes. Does this mean that they made the wrong choice on who to vote to win? No, the person they harbored resentment against could have had better jury management and therefore, it could be argued that he lost the vote himself by not consciously making better decisions to prevent the jury being bitter against him.
For example, we see Jocasta in Big Brother 16 and vote for Cody to win the game and her reasoning was that she was upset that Derrick had used her religion against her by fake praying with her every morning. She was bitter and voted against him for that.
Marcellas in Big Brother 7 voted for Erika in the end, not because he thought she played the better game, but simply because he harbored resentment against Mike in the game.
In Big Brother 6, Janelle voted for Ivette because she was bitter against Maggie and she would tell you that haha.
Being bitter is just an emotion and jurors can vote emotionally, since they're allowed to vote on whatever criteria they'd like.
bit·ter·ness
ˈbidərnəs
noun
2.
anger and disappointment at being treated unfairly; resentment.
"he expressed bitterness over his dismissal without notice"
Someone can lose the game due to the jury being bitter and voting simply out of resentment or anger. That would constitute a "bitter jury", but nowhere is it stated that a jury can't vote that way.
tl;dr - Bitter juries do exist but there isn't necessarily anything wrong with voting however you feel like.
I totally agree with this koolness234 people are retarded and dumb.
People overvalue the idea of 'running the game' but I honestly think in recent history President Sarah Lacina said it best as far as "making the kool-aid that everybody's drinking" or whatever.
It's one thing to demonstrate complete strategic dominance as far as the GAME (cliche examples but Dani Reyes, Russel Hantz, Dan BB14 say hello), and yeah maybe the Jury WILL respect that, but IMO being in touch with people's values & perspectives on the meaning of the game is a commonly overlooked key aspect of Survivor/BB strategy (or anything with a jury vote)
sam_hamwich the juries you have described so far have never happened. Or has been proven that someone one a jury because the overal jury was sexist. I never made the argument a juror can be bitter. However a jury can not be bitter. It is a majority vote. There has never been a majority sexist vote in reality game history. One persons prejudice does not dominate or sway a jury preference.
grrrimabear the jury describes the conditions of winning. Bitter juries are referred always by people to a jury that voted against the clear strategic mastermind of the season. Give me a bitter jury that doesn’t fit that narrative. People that are arguing bitter juries are doing against who they see the clear mastermind being robbed by emotions. But a jury almost never rewards trickery. You can’t claim this is out of some personal fault of bitterness. There has never been an undeserving winner of a reality television. A jury also cannot be bitter because they do not fit or agree with how you think gameplay is being rewarded. I certainty would never vote for someone who lied and betrayed me. Does that make me bitter or do I value integrity and honesty more. Most times it is the latter. Sorry voting for someone you hate isn’t going to be bitter you hate them because you do not see them as deserving in any fashion. So I guess we will have to agree to disagree I think we see the game in two different ways.
mahogany preach sister I won many game on this site by paying to people’s personal emotions before I have being a gamebot. People just get mad when faves lose and yell bitter juries.
koolness234 yes but I'm describing a hypothetical situation where a jury CAN be bitter, not one that HAS, because you arent saying that they CANNOT. If it is possible for one juror to be bitter, then it is entirely possible for 5 jurors to be bitter and thus a majority of a jury.
You say that a jury cannot be bitter but I say they can if they are voting based on an outside source and nothing to do within the house. People to me, jurors should always vote based on the confines of the game, that doesnt mean only strategy, that can mean literally anything that happens in the house; personality, likability, honesty, everything you've stated before when listing credible voting criteria. But not liking someone and voting against them due to an outside source or opinion like sexism, racism, what color their house is painted, etc is also a bitter jury to me
Just because there is no specific criterion to voting, voters can vote bitterly, as being a "bitter voter" would just be an adjective for the way they voted. They didn't vote for a certain person because they didn't like them, which can be accompanied by a reason that is usually more critically understood and is the reason why some believe bitter voting doesn't exist.
It obviously exists, but there's no rule against voting based on grudges.
also, bengalboy's argument of saying people said they voted bitterly makes sense regardless of the majority of people saying they voted bitterly, as all it takes to be a majority of the people who voted bitterly against Paul would be 3 statements (out of 5 total votes against Paul) suggesting they voted bitterly.
Also, imo, it does not take a majority of voters voting bitterly to constitute a bitter jury. Rather, if the swing votes are bitter, then it constitutes a bitter jury. I believe this because the swing votes effectively make the decision of who wins, not those who already have their decisions set in stone. If those voters are bitter, then its a bitter jury.
One would believe, in this case, that bitter juries ARE impossible because bitter people usually have their votes set in stone. However, with the way Survivor and Big Brother are supposed to be commercial competitions, we aren't supposed to know who is set-in-stone and who is undecided. Thus, those who vote differently than they were originally expected, especially in the context of working with someone all game and once they got out they didn't vote for that person, would constitute a bitter juror. If enough swaying voters vote this way, then its a bitter jury.
The person that wins played the better game.... that's why they WON. I am a strong believer in the best player wins. No matter what happened, or who ran the game, or who threw what challenge for whatever reason. They adapted to the circumstances around them and made it to the end and received the votes.
I mean I agree there is no set criteria, and as a player you need to read how your jury is going to vote. This jury really valued honesty and not really gameplay. This is evident cause all of them that voted marissa said they went with who played the most honest/straightest game rather than "best" game. I do think as a viewer though, it is fair to criticize the validity of the jury based on how they make their decision. Especially when you look at superfans like Shannon and Omarosa, you naturally expect them to value gameplay more than morals.
By your own assertion they can be bitter just not for the reasons people list...If they vote based on bitterness however still their vote to do with as they please...its part if a game you have to get to know the other contestants so you have a solid idea of what their voting criteria is and then use it to your advantage...its why social matters...
sam_hamwich sorry but I don’t consider hypotheticals lol. Using hypotheticals to argue the existence is contingent of those hypotheticals happening which until they do my assertation stands. nexuscainamanyaman @ krisstory in almost all your arguments you are still maintains and basing your bitter jury argument off what you all think would constitute a bitter jury. And once again as every person with your argument has done you use an example of a bitter jury voting against someone who played a better strategic game. The argument for a bitter jury is never a jury that votes for the clear mastermind because they did not like the other player. That type of jury isn’t bitter. Stop arguing the existence of bitter individuals who vote against the strategic better player as proof of the existence of a bitter jury. Because the argument is non transferable meaning. Juries are never categorized as bitter when they vote who you all think is the better strategic player. Furthermore, I am not arguing that people cannot be bitter and therefore yes the logic exist that in a special case all 9 people could be bitter which has never happened yet in countless seasons of reality show. However juries are never bitter when they pick who you all think played the best games. The argument you kee using to validity your argument is essentially since they are voting off criteria that you either would not vote on or voting against who you and maybe the general public thinks is the smart choice categorizes those people as bitter. The argument you are using once again takes into account your own personal perferences and tries to transfer them into the jury but when those feelings arnt transferable that is when people say a jury is bitter. Please find me a “bitter jury” that does not fit the criteria and narrative I explained above.
sam_hamwich also my argument was never that a bitter jury can not exist merely that they until this date have not existed. I know there can be hypotheticals were every person gets up and says I am casting this vote against you because I hate you. However the argument I am making is that until this point these has not been. So my assertion bitter juries do not exist maybe I should have included so far to rule out all crazy hypotehticas
queenisha exactly right I find it funny people always say a jury is bitter when they do it vote for who they think should win a game that they were not apart of or when their strategic fave doesn’t win
of course, people still like to pretend that bitter juries exist and russell hantz should win every survivor season ever because juries are "supposed" to vote objectively instead of //however they want, which is what all humans do and will continue to do// despite the fact that these people who make this argument probably cant even vote objectively in they own frookies games :3
koolness234 I never once said anything about strategetic superiority warranting a bitter jury. All I stated was what constitutes a bitter jury and that they do exist within those contexts. They obviously do exist, and it doesn’t take every juror to be bitter to be a bitter jury. All it takes for a jury to be bitter is if a swing vote’s vote is determined in a bitter nature, whether that be because they were backstabbed or along other lines. The other jurors are generally obsolete in the term because they aren’t a swing.
What I’m saying is a jury can be bitter, but it doesn’t have to be only in situations in which the strategic mastermind loses. All it takes is for someone to vote based on a bitter feeling for someone. They’re allowed to do that, and they choose the winner, which there isn’t a problem there. But just because there’s no guidelines for a juror’s vote doesn’t mean his vote can’t EVER be a bitter vote.
To me this all kind of falls under the social aspect of the game. Making sure you have strong and reliable bonds to help actually get you there too the end but strong enough bonds that they'll vote for you in the end over the other finalist.
there are no such things as bitter jurors, just bitter audiences who throw popcorn at their tv screens when their fave loses for being an asshole to everyone.
koolness234 like I said its their vote they can vote how you want...A good player learns what makes each tick so they know how to swing and maneuver them...If you allowed yourself to get trapped by a bitter jury it proves you did something wrong...Simple as that...Fact is some do vote just because they are bitter for losing...Its just like those ppl that leave a 1 star rating for a restaurant that wouldnt let the customer cheat them so they get angry...End of the day though know your jury and for the love of all that is holy if you know you have people that are bitter dont try to blow smoke up their ass come question time that is only gonna make the situation worse...
But someone fucked me behind the shelter
I'm probably voting the 2nd
because it's my jury vote