*walks up*

I know I had a minor role this season, being on the Runner Ups tribe, and frankly, not having much to do with strategy. I tried to wiggle in tight spaces to make myself survive, but I'm gone and I'm okay with that.

I'm going to start off by saying that I think that the person most worthy of getting to the Final 3 was the person you voted off last Tribal Council, and seeing you 3 here is quite disappointing in my eyes.

Alex, I haven't talked to you all game, not a word exchanged. Some fault lies on me because I became complacent, but nonetheless, no words at all. The only way you'll get my Jury vote is if the other two deem less worthy. You can say you thought of all this strategy, but there really is no way to prove it in my eyes, because it's coming from the mouth of a person trying to do anything they can to win the game. So my question is, "What were the qualities you used to advance yourself further in the game that the Jury collectively lacked?

Jarrod, again, no words exchanged, but from what I saw from my limited point of view, you were in a good position. I respect your game and I respect your immunity wins. My question to you is, "Did you think you needed to win all those immunities, and if you didn't win, how would you have saved yourself?

Jeremy, I'm probably the most disappointed in you. Early on in the merge, we had a conversation that I would save you over here, if you would save me as the last Runner Up. Obviously that didn't happen because I got 9th place. Well, I don't believe you when you say you tried your absolute hardest. I think I would've stayed if you tried hard enough. But it also proves your inability to respect other people. I don't think you cared about any Runner Up, and if that's what got you here, then good job, but I will always see you as a false dealer. But I very well could give my vote to you tonight. My question to you is, "The night I was voted out, who brought up my name, and what EXACTLY did you use to try to convince the others into keeping me, if there is any?"

^lol I am not butt hurt one but I find it funny cuz everyone knows you have no chance we as runner ups mock you for all I know. So if you do get some votes than kuddos but honestly you ain't winning shit. I played a solid game and I know yall saw it so yes if I was in finals I would of gotten the jury's votes meaning there's. So to think they wouldn't listen to what I have to hear as a juror myself is inclusive as of course they would take what I endured into account. Because you and Russ hater Jeremy and yet campaigning against is prolly only helping tbh. But whatever to each to their own. You said he has no social game uhm Hun look at yourself you had not talk to me personally til f4 when you tried to ploy me to vote jer over tying it with you which you didn't even do which I didn't vote jer because of you I did it cuz jer actually told me to do so and lets do it as I saw thru your fake ness and intentions behind the vote you wanted me to make. So actually your social game sucked and got no where but a sheep carriage ride.

Jarrod: You weren't /as/ lucky as Jeremy, because you did talk to Sean... but the points still stand: It was a luck challenge that got you past the final six in a majority, and if I hadn't tried to oust Jeremy at 7, you would not be here. On the other hand, Alex was in on the plot to get rid of you guys in 6th/5th. He ended up in the minority after the luck challenge, yet still managed to end up here. But on the other hand, I do believe you played a better game earlier on than he did. Why shouldn't I vote for him -- someone who was set up well, ended up in a bad position due to someone else's poor decisions and a luck challenge, but still got here -- instead of you, who was set up poorly and primarily ended up in a good position due to my poor decisions and a luck challenge?

I don't think we can just assume what would have happened had Jeremy gone home final 7. The night you went home Eddie and Joe both came to me letting me know that the target was Jeremy. If they were onboard with the plan and I was simply set to go home next then they wouldn't have filled me in on what was going on. Also in regards to the luck challenge at the final 6 had Jeremy gone home I would have been in a bad position but I still would have had means to turn things around. For one thing I think I would have had a good shot at pulling out wins in the challenge and secondly by that time Eddie self voted at the rest of the tribal councils so I definitely could have used that to my advantage at the final 5 (sean and I both vote for Eddie and send him home). Basically you're saying that a poor decision and luck put me into a position of power but all moves are essentially a poor move for somebody what's not to say a poor move and luck got alex into the position he was in. I was observant and made the ties necessary to get wind of what was going on. I put myself in a position where I could call the shots when need be while Alex needed my help/advice (the final 5 Eddie vote and I suggested he get sean to vote jeremy at final 4). I may have needed luck in terms of the firemaking challenge but Alex needed luck too (Eddie's getting sick and self voting).

Did you think you needed to win all those immunities, and if you didn't win, how would you have saved yourself?

No, for me winning immunity was more down to my competitive spirit and preventing others from winning rather than protecting myself. Looking at the 3 times I had individual immunity. The first time you were voted out. At that point the winners were sticking together people had other options if they wanted to flip. The second time was the night Jeremy went home. Jeremy was going to be the target of the winners no matter what. Russ wanted him out, Joe didn't trust him so if I didn't have immunity I don't believe anything would have changed. The third time was last tribal council which it was solely important that sean didn't win. I think the vote could have varied depending on who had immunity that night but I had ties with both jeremy and alex so the worst I was in for was a tied vote if sean had won the challenge. If I didn't have those immunity wins I would have approached the votes the same way, talking to people individually and ensuring everybody was on the same page and bringing it to a group chat if needed.

Before I answer your question, I do have to point out what you said.
"because it's coming from the mouth of a person trying to do anything they can to win the game."
Isn't that what everyone's trying to do? Jarrod's trying anything he can to win this game, as is Jeremy. It's a part of the FTC, it's to sway the jury into your favor that you should win the game. That doesn't set me aside from any of the other finalists here tonight. What I've told in what strategies I planned were true. I have no reason to lie about them, especially when I have people who can confirm these ideas (Russ and Jarrod, mainly).

"What were the qualities you used to advance yourself further in the game that the Jury collectively lacked?"

It was probably knowing when to hold my tongue and when not to.
Yes, I do agree that I probably should have talked to you and the other Jurors more. The only Juror I talked to pre-vote was probably Amf7410 because he talked to me if he was going home and I answered honestly.
In terms of knowing when to hold my tongue, there were many times where I felt strongly about something that was personal (when Russ/Jeremy had their many fights, for instance). I didn't really say what I wanted to, because I didn't want it to fall on my shoulders and rather fall on Jeremy's and Russ's. I didn't want to cause any conflict in the group, mainly because I knew Jeremy could be unpredictable and do whatever the hell he wanted in a moment's notice.
With that as well, though I don't like using this as an example, it seems as though holding my tongue and not talking/being open about what I wanted to happen made me seem like a nonentity. Which caused the Jurors to have the false approach of me not being able to win. So to the Jurors, thank you for making me seem unimportant so I wasn't considered a threat until it was a tad too late for them to do anything about it. I think you, as Jurors, despite wanting to save yourselves, some of you did it a bit too late. We already had the game plan going and it was too late to talk us out of it (i.e. Amf, Sarge)

With NOT holding my tongue, this more so came towards the end. I started to really talk to people, and I mean REALLY. I ended up getting Eddie to flip to me when he was 100% with Jarrod/Jeremy at the time, which was a big accomplishment. Even if the end result ended with Joe going home instead of Jeremy, I was still able to do it by opening up at the right time. As for the Jurors, again, you guy seemed to like to be boisterous (some of you) and this got on some peoples' nerves. You may have also ended up simply annoying people based on wanting to mix things up and then people finding out because you didn't hold your tongue and talked to the wrong people. (i.e. Sean and Russ).

I feel like I was aware of my surroundings, and knew when to talk and when to shut the hell up.

"Honestly don't feel you giving jer a shot because of how pissed you couldn't influence him to do what you wanted and hello it's their games not yours since your ass got blindsided and handed to you."

No, dude, Jeremy literally told me that he does not care if I vote for him. He specifically said, in very clear and direct wording, that he does not care about my jury vote, he does not care about Joe's jury vote, and he does not care about Eddie's jury vote. I have absolutely zero reason to vote for somebody who specifically says they don't care about my vote.

Even if he hadn't said that, he was on the bottom of an alliance and got here due to blind luck and did random shit "for the lolz" and considered sinking his own game just to troll. I can't imagine what reason there is to possibly vote for someone who was on the bottom and did things that he knew weren't in his best interests in any case. But when that someone also directly tells me "I don't care if you vote for me or not"... well of course I won't vote for that. That isn't me being "pissed." That's him literally saying he does not want my vote, so of course I won't give it to him when there are two people who would probably like it.

@Jarrod:

"I don't think we can just assume what would have happened had Jeremy gone home final 7. The night you went home Eddie and Joe both came to me letting me know that the target was Jeremy. If they were onboard with the plan and I was simply set to go home next then they wouldn't have filled me in on what was going on."

I meant if I hadn't made the anti-Jeremy move and if Sean had gone home at 7 instead. If Sean had gone home at 7, Jeremy would have gone home at 6. Joe wanted you out after that (unless he was lying to me?), Alex did, I think Eddie would have voted that way as well.

"Also in regards to the luck challenge at the final 6 had Jeremy gone home I would have been in a bad position but I still would have had means to turn things around. For one thing I think I would have had a good shot at pulling out wins in the challenge and secondly by that time Eddie self voted at the rest of the tribal councils so I definitely could have used that to my advantage at the final 5 (sean and I both vote for Eddie and send him home)."

Fair.

"Basically you're saying that a poor decision and luck put me into a position of power but all moves are essentially a poor move for somebody what's not to say a poor move and luck got alex into the position he was in."

Well, if you think that's the case, then feel free to argue it.

"I was observant and made the ties necessary to get wind of what was going on. I put myself in a position where I could call the shots when need be while Alex needed my help/advice (the final 5 Eddie vote and I suggested he get sean to vote jeremy at final 4). I may have needed luck in terms of the firemaking challenge but Alex needed luck too (Eddie's getting sick and self voting)."

Well you just said that what would have helped you survive is Eddie's self-voting -- so I think you and Alex are probably on an even playing field there.

Hmm.

Another problem I have is that you never talked to me... ever, throughout the game, really. And, of course, I didn't talk to you either, so it's just as much my fault, so if I were in finals and you wanted to vote against me because of it, I'd totally get it -- but that's not the case, I'm the one voting. How can I justify voting for somebody who did not ever attempt to reach out to me? Why did you never message me?

Alright, I think it's been enough time to wait. Here is my one question

"Why do your opponents NOT deserve to win?"

Only thing is that praising them and saying "They were good, but..." will not be good enough. I want to hear the negatives about your opponents. Simple as that. My vote will be based off of these answers.

Fell asleep... Get home from work around 3 PM est.... guess I'll answer questions then.

How can I justify voting for somebody who did not ever attempt to reach out to me? Why did you never message me?

I suppose it was simply a matter of never really needing to talk to you individually from a game standpoint. Like I said I didn't want to be caught talking game to everybody individually because that would have painted me as a social threat and potentially put me in the firing line, so I picked my relationships to build up. I saw you as a duo with Alex and as somebody who I'd never be the number 2 ally of. Plus many of the group bonding sessions did occur when I was asleep because of the Aussie timezone.

However it's not like I actually ignored you. I started the winners group chat at the merge and I tried to get everybody involved with socialising with one another by asking people's opinions about Survivor and the like. I told you about my China rewatch we discussed Todd and then we moved onto how disappointing Caramoan was who we felt didn't deserve to return, Phillip hate, etc. I got to watch you debate the credits of Vecepia with Jeremy we talked San Juan Del Sur. I suppose those conversations could have taken place in a two person setting but I hate to appear fake and simply start social conversations as a means to a jury vote down the line. I much getting to know people outside the game and their interests/thoughts in the group chat.

"Why do your opponents NOT deserve to win?"

I'll start with Jeremy.
Jeremy, throughout the entire Pre-F7, was supposed to go home. He got lucky and was saved. But luck is needed to win this game, I'm not denying that. But Jeremy was never in a good position until we tried to do something a round early.
In terms of just a social standpoint, Jeremy is a wildcard. During our skype chats he would berate me in multiple ways. He told me "Frankly my dear I don't give a damn" when asking about why he was voting me. When he screwed up Sean's game, all he said was "I did it for the lolz". He obviously didn't care about his standpoint in this game. And it wasn't just that time, either. Jeremy on multiple occasions told me he wanted to do something crazy just for the sake of it, even if it didn't benefit his game. It seems like his objective wasn't getting himself to the end, it was getting Sean to the end so he could lose to him. Which, might be a good decision now that Sean's on the Jury, but that in itself is a reason to not vote for him. Jeremy played Sean like a whistle, and he knew that if Sean was on the Jury he'd be his major supporter. And in turn all the RUs. I don't like the fact that Jeremy put all his cards in one person just to play the Jury. The goal of Survivor is to make sure the Jury will vote for you in the end, but Jeremy's made it so he only had to clutch onto one person so that the Jury would vote for him. That's something I don't respect.
I also think Jeremy is ignorant in terms of this: Discourteous or rude.
Not once in my time here did I think Jeremy was a nice guy. The entire time he decided to make arguments to make them, made stupid moves to make them, and berated people just to berate them. Do I think that's a good winner? Not at all.

As for Jarrod.
Jarrod's, for one, too trusting it seems. He made deals that he intended to keep the entire time, but at the cost of potentially hurting his game.
He made the F4 deal with Sean, but knew it was a mistake. He had to get me to come over just so they wouldn't make a plan against him in the F4. Just the round before, Jarrod past also came back to haunt him in that Sean considers him to have betrayed him when Eddie was voted out. He made too many deals than he could handle, and it could have easily backfired. I myself made deals according to what I needed. I talked to Eddie to get him on my side. It didn't backfire at all for me. I talked to Jeremy, which was pointless, but because everyone knew I was after him it didn't matter what I said to him. I feel like I didn't make deals with the intention of breaking them. Neither did Jarrod, but he put too many eggs in his basket where it could have easily costed him.

Okay first off, congratulations to the three of you! I've had several 1-on-1's with all three of you so I'm glad I see you're all doing well in the final three. I wish I was there but I digress.

Seeing how this is one of those FTCs where the jury really wants the finalists to feel their wrath and face the music, I might as well add my fuel to the fire too to try and see who really deserves it. I know the Winners 6 had lots of conversations about various topics and several people got mentioned in a lot of our talks regardless of if it was strategy or not. So I want each of you to pick the worst things you said about all of us and I know there was a lot of gossip this season amongst us winners so don't try and hide it.

Follow-up question is if you three were on the jury, who would you have in your place and why?

Nothing personal about my questions, I just want to see who really wants to fight for a vote that could give you the win. Thanks and congrats!

Finally on... getting my speeches ready.  Sorry for the inconvenience if people were waiting to ask questions.

THE GAME YOUR MY EYES
(a novel by Jeremy MMAjunkie [this is a bad joke])

NOTE: Cliffnotes are at the end, and each section is highlighted if you don't want to read a novel.

PREMERGE A

        To start= I will outline the game from my point of view.  In the early days, I started an alliance with Alex and Jarrod whom I perceived as the most trustworthy.  Russ joined the game and was added to the alliance by Alex.  I also talked to Piddu at the beginning of the game and made a F2, because we both seemed to enter the game in the same situation, with him before he quit.  When Eddie rejoined I offered him the same deal because I liked the kid.  I would argue that I created the dominant alliance [The Dominant] in the winners tribe.

        Additionally, I talked to Joe early on and tried to get tight with him while acting vulnerable.  He invited me into Shadi's Alliance [The Shadis] with himself, Shadi, Mearl, and Jarrod.  I suggested early that Eddie be added to this alliance as a 6th member, but I don't think he was officially part of it until later.