COLDAN'S QUESTIONS

"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."

- You voted for me that night.
----

"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."

- I tried as hard as I could without putting myself in jeopardy for making it obvious.
-----

" 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."

- I outright stated that I was in favor of Pagonging all the runners up and would try to get you to 7th which I did try.  There was nothing false about it.  Unfortunately, the only other person I told about our agreement was Eddie, and he isn't here to back that up.  Others can confirm that I repeatedly referred to you as weak (which I don't actually think you are) in the chat, and I was very honest with you and told you that I would have trouble saving you over Sean because everyone else wanted him at F7.  I can honestly say I consider you a friend from our past games and did my absolute best to honor our agreement.
----

" 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?""

- Joe brought it up because you showed up to the challenge whereas Sean and Nick were intentionally not showing up.  Alex had wanted you since around the Andy vote too because of some other group game so it was uphill battle to save you even until 8th.  As I mentioned in my jury speech, it really became a whoever gets on immediately after the immunity challenge makes the call and everyone else voted for them.  I was working that round and wasn't on until three people confirmed themselves as votes for you.

-  As for what I did to try to save you, I constantly stated that you weren't a challenge threat.  Once I realized that virtually everyone wanted to take Sean to F7, I kept saying that we can beat Coldan at F8 easy and hoped that would stick.  I genuinely believe that you would have at least made F8 if you didn't show up for the immunity challenge that night.  However, you would have to ask Joe if that is true.  After I got on and found out the vote, I did try for about 30 minutes to convince those that were on that Nick could run the table on challenges if we kept him.  The problem was that several other people already sent their votes in.

- Also as I've already said, you shouldn't be that mad at me because I do believe I at least helped keep your name out of the mix for a couple of rounds.  I wasn't mad at you when you voted for me at F12.  The deal was if I remember correctly to 'do your best to save each other without endangering your own game'.  I did fulfill that deal to the best of my abilities.

^ Also, I told Eddie to campaign to keep you and against others if I wasn't able to get online right away like the night before.  Unfortunately, he did not.

RUSS'S COMMENT

"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."

- This was said after you berated me and later Jarrod that we had to vote for Sean at F5.  I said that ultimately the RUs on the jury have more votes than all three of you put together  so I have to take Sean to the F4.  You said you will lose all the Winner's jury votes if you don't vote Sean out.  I said that I didn't care.  You keep spinning my words to suit you if you choose, but in the end you were the juror trying to blackmail somebody in the game to do your bidding.

@Jeremy: If you were never planning to take Sean to the end, then why did you tell Alex that you were?

And my impression was that you were saying you outright did not care about any of our three votes. If you were at the time trying to say something else.. that's not really what I heard.

NICK'S QUESTION
"Why do your opponents NOT deserve to win?"

- We'll start with Alex.  I don't necessarily have an issue with him being here, but there are several reasons that he shouldn't win.  I won't resort to personal attacks I suppose :P.
1. He intended to go to the end with Russ who would have talked circles around him.  Even if he refutes this (I wouldn't believe it), he was gonna have a hard time beating most people from my perspective because he didn't talk to hardly anybody.
2. He certainly knew that Russ was blackmailing the jury (mostly on his behalf in my opinion) and didn't care about it.  In fact, I'd argue he encouraged it.  He can say what he will about trudging his own path to the end.  I personally think he was surrogate Russ.
3.  He confronted people that he knew were going to be on the jury.  Whether or not any of us agreed with your statements about mixing up the game, it is ELEMENTARY to know better than to more or less insult those that will be on the jury.  It doesn't matter how much the RUs complained as they were getting picked off you don't confront those that will eventually determine who wins the game.  This alone in my opinion is good enough of a reason to not vote for him.  He wasn't playing to get jury votes.
----

- Onto to Jarrod, this one is a little tougher.  He certainly earned his spot.  I can honestly say that if I don't win I won't feel all that bad if Jarrod takes.  He certainly wasn't perfect though.

1. I still think it was a mistake for him to vote out Eddie at the F5.  I know he listed reasons why he did it.  I believe that it wasn't Russ's influence that made him to it either to be frank.  However, the fact remains Eddie was still an easier opponent at the end than me (and from the sounds of it Jarrod was considering voting for me if we finished the Pagonging, so why not here).  I also believe that he had lost a chance at gaining a jury vote or at least adding a voice against me on the jury.  Alex clearly dislikes me WAYYYY more than I thought.  However, even then Alex was stating he was a jury vote for Jarrod, and I believe he definitely would have voted for Jarrod in a F3 with me and Eddie to try to prevent me from having any chance at winning.  One of his major arguments was that Alex could help win the challenge against Sean at the F4.  I would argue that Jarrod doesn't need help winning challenges.  He is plenty good enough at that on his own.

2.  This is more a ramification of the Eddie vote.  He lost some of his connection to Sean.  I'm not saying that Sean will determine more jury votes than his own.  However, I believe that you don't want to piss off the person that most of the jury is rooting for if you can help it.  I understand that Jarrod only slightly changed the original F4 deal of myself, him, Eddie and Sean by sacking Eddie.  However, that does make it somewhat of a betrayal to Sean to vote him out over a non-alliance member in Alex.  I don't know if this will affect more votes than just Sean's, but it could.

3. He didn't talk to many/any RUs during the Pagonging stage.  I understand that he was of the same mind that I was that to complete the Pagonging.  However, I tried to not ignore anyone in the game.  I feel you should at least attempt to reach out to players that you are gonna vote out and let them know your position on the matter.  Sometimes it can backfire (ie Sean blowing me up at F7), but ultimately the point isn't to just make the finals.  The point is to make the finals and secure as many votes as possible along the way.  I might not have been successful at doing this, but I tried to do it.

Alex did not encourage me to talk to Jeremy or Jarrod after I was voted out.

He did not know I was doing it until I already was.

Please do not spread blatant misinformation about things that you had zero part in.

If y'all want to hate me for that, that's fine. If y'all want to not vote for Alex for other reasons, that's fine. But don't vote against him because of something /I/ did. I was the one who talked to Jeremy or Jarrod. Alex did not tell me to do so. Jussayin'.

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

"Why do your opponents NOT deserve to win?"

MMA - MMA played an impulsive and emotional game. He trolled and put himself in unnecessary danger (self voting at the final 4). His fate was often not in his own hands and he was too trusting of people e.g. he thought he was tight with Joe and Joeker would tell him when a move was being made yet Joe voted against him and told me he didn't trust Jeremy. Luck is a part of this game (we all needed it to some extent to get here) but Jeremy needed to win 2 firemaking challenges to get here. He hadn't sured up alliances enough to avoid being a target and facing those tied votes.

Alex - Alex was quick to run his mouth and go off at people. In this game social graces are paramount and Alex would frequently go off at people and complain about their opinions. He was also incredibly indecisive behind the scenes. I came so close to voting him out at the final 5 because when I suggested we vote Eddie he continued to try and redirect that vote to Jeremy so much so that I originally gave up trying to work with him, until he finally agreed several hours later.

The main reason why neither of these players deserve to win is that I held their fate in my hand more than they ever held my fate. Maybe given some alternate moves or different luck I would have been in danger but based on the game that transpired I saved both Jeremy (F7) and Alex (F5) from being voted out by 1 vote.

JOE'S QUESTIONS

" 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."

-  I legitimately didn't talk much shit.  I know that I told several people that I thought Alex was Russ's lapdog more or less.  I stand by that.  I know I told Jarrod that Russ was being an unethical ass on the jury which I stand by.  I said some things that Alex interpreted as insults, but I'll get to those in a later post.

I definitely said some stupid shit though.  Immediately after I was blindsided in the F6 vote was probably the only time that I said stuff that I really do regret.  I immediately jumped to the conclusion that you and Alex bullied Eddie into to voting for me and more or less called you both such.  It took me an hour or so to step back and realize that he actually had good reasons for it.  I also questioned if he was really sick which I regret.  However, before he was online for a long time I thought it was an acceptable question and only Alex seemed upset at me for wondering.

- I can honestly say that I gave people more props behind their backs than insults.  I know that I was very complimentary of how verbose Russ is.  I appreciated how you were playing the game and told people I was impressed that you were making the calls from the bottom of the totem pole (which you were actually in the middle :P).  I both of you + Alex props for recognizes I needed to go for yalls games.  I respected Eddie getting himself into the swing vote spot.  And of course I praised Jarrod's loyalty to more than one of you.
-----

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

- I can't really put after body voted out before the F7 here simply because I don't know there games well at all.  I don't think any of us know the dynamics of the RU tribe for certain yet.  So as much as I enjoy pandering for votes I'll remain honest.  I will say that I'm looking at the perspective from most likely to win if here while playing similar to me.  And with that, my answer is you.  I think like me you were in a really tight spot going down the stretch in this game, but you never stopped working on getting jury votes.  I also think that you could have won if you got here but there wouldn't have been a guarantee.  And frankly, as guilty as I do feel about the Sean situation.  I felt just as guilty for not including you in my original real alliance though you adapted well.

Jeremy, if I misinterpreted what you were saying regarding my jury vote, then I might actually be willing to vote for you -- but some things would need to be cleared up first.

First of all, when some of the RUs were going home, on their way out they'd talk about how you were the most powerful player, how you were guaranteed to make finals, etc. -- yet in reality, if the Pagonging had been completed, you were slated to get 6th place.

If you want a chance at my vote, I would like you to say what you know is true: that you were not the perpetual "top dog" some people saw you as -- that you weren't "running the show", for lack of a better term -- and that you were actually probably on the bottom of the alliance. The main thing that would bug me about you winning is that I think it would retroactively make the incorrect image of "Jeremy Is Running Everything On The Winners Tribe" look correct, so I would like you to just admit that, no, you were not always on the top of the tribe the way people thought you were and, if anything, you were probably #6. Not that that's necessarily a knock on your game, because you still got here; I just don't want people to think it was a case of Jeremy always running the show when that wasn't really the way it was.

A second thing is you keep talking about how what I did was "unethical" -- but the problem is, during that conversation itself, you didn't say or act upon that. In fact, multiple times, you said you weren't going to respond to me anymore... but then continued messaging me. If there is something FUNDAMENTALLY, MORALLY wrong about someone who is out of the game trying to influence it... then why didn't you just directly tell me "Fuck off, I am done talking to you"? You kept the conversation going repeatedly, and /I/ was the one who ended it. You did not stop talking to me until /I/ stopped messaging you -- so how can you be this paragon of morality, ethics, and game validity when you were engaging me in conversation up until I decided to end it? If it were really a matter of "ethics" -- if there is supposed to be this impenetrable wall between jurors and the game -- then you wouldn't have listened or responded to ANYTHING I had to say, yet you did. I am seeing a disconnect here between your words and your actions, and it makes me believe that it was a matter not of ethics but of strategy -- that if I had had, say, seven of nine jury votes on my side, you'd have done whatever I said, but because I couldn't in any world even say I had more than three, you felt safe in not doing what I wanted you to do, and are now trying to make it look like an issue of "ethics" to make yourself look good and to make me look bad. That is my impression. So I guess my questions here are... is that impression wrong, and if it is wrong and it really /is/ just an issue of "ethics", then how was it not hypocritical to engage me in conversation? And how can you paint yourself as somebody wholly concerned about the validity of the game when you weren't even the one who ended our conversation and when you never told me to back off out of principle?

I don't have a big problem with you winning so much as I have a problem with you winning /under false pretenses/, so that is why I would like you to acknowledge that you were not always #1, and that is why I would like you to admit that you were continually engaging me in conversation about the game until /I/ stopped the conversation and explain how that can possibly jive with your image of yourself as someone concerned about the "ethics" of the game.

Joeker
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.

Rich: "sarge is such an idiot"
Russ: "you lost, go home"
Sean: "annoying"
General: "ponderosa bitch fest"

That's about it. I didn't slam people much this game, I tend to be less outspoken than others.

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

Rich: He made an effort to talk to members of the opposite group and had a coalition formed between the bottom feeders of each group he could have been set up in a great position to win.

Russ: While it backfired, Russ was the person who was the first to make a move to break up the winners. He put on this air of not caring but it's plain to see he was working things behind the scenes and initially rallied up the votes to take out Jeremy and put himself in the kingpin position. Plus I think Russ has the vocabulary to make any type of game look great.

You (Joe): You controlled a lot of votes early merged and despite wanting Rich out earlier you were able to set up a voting pattern that people fell in line with. You had plenty of options and obviously wanted to keep them open as shown by you approaching me about the Jeremy vote at the final 7. If Jeremy went at 7 I'd say you probably had an 80% chance of being in the final 3 which proves you played a solid game.

Oops misinterpreted that question.
If I had to pick one person I'd say Russ.

RICH'S QUESTION

"Oh Oh OH!! The big weasel of the game.  You are a sly one and you did attempt talking to me and made me feel assured and comfortable. I appreciate the few words even though I know they were just buttering me up for the jury.  Start telling some truthful statements on why you deserve to win this game or you could lose it all just for that."

- I'm not positive on what you mean about truthful statements.  I really didn't lie hardly at all in this post merge game due to the people I was going to even betray slightly always betraying me first.  I mean nobody can be too mad at me because EVERYONE of you on the jury voted for me at least once which probably not something that happens too often.   As for why I deserve to win.  I gotta a couple of good reason in my opening speech but I'll highlight them/others.

1. I played this game to win if I got to the end.  I think most people put 80-90% of their efforts at minimum into making it to the end.  I probably put 50% at most into it.  I always wanted to make sure that I had a decent shot (if not a damn good one) to win if I got here due to the relationships I made along the way.  Retrospectively, I probably should have made some more false promises to Russ, Alex, and Joe to secure myself more, but c'est la vie.

2. This is more of an addition to the first argument.  It is clear that nobody else even cared about trying to get you guys support on the jury.  I don't deny that it was a bit 'weaselly' as you put it.  I certainly did it to try to garner jury support.  However, I also was trying to start legitimate outside the game conversations.  These didn't really happen, but I certainly made an effort to explain why I was doing what I did with almost every juror.

3. Additionally, I do think it should pay some credence that I was probably most loyal to the last of the RUs.  I was the only person that did genuinely put thought into voting off Sean without pissing him off.  Obviously, he doesn't determine the rest of yalls votes, but I feel most of you supported him.  Therefore, I think those of you that are unsure would be more prone to throw votes at the person that was most honest and loyal to him.  I do feel I was as loyal as I could be to him without pure carelessness.

- NOTE: If you wanted me to tell the truth about something I'm not understanding then just ask about it because I'm a little confused by the tail end of your question.

"Oops misinterpreted that question.
If I had to pick one person I'd say Russ."

You cheater :P... I actually had 3 done and did the same thing. before I noticed it.

Thank you Jeremy.  The statements you made is enough.  Thanks for whatever type of conversation you tried having with me.  Unlike, others in the Final you were at least not ignoring me.

Alex:  You never once even attempted to talk to me.  So, again if you were playing a social game and knowing all the Runner-ups were going to be on jury.  Don't you think you should have been nice and at least attempted some type of conversation?  You will not get my vote just for that simple fact.

You're saying in everyone's question that you aren't going to vote for them.
Did I ignore the social aspect? No, I talked to people on my own tribe. Talking to you guys could have been used as a sign to get me out if I'm "fraternizing with the enemy" so to speak.
Should I have spoken to the RUs? Maybe, but it's not going to do much good now.
I was nice to people, it was just a fact that you weren't nice to me so I wasn't going to attempt to try to be nice if you already didn't like me. I did talk to people who approached me in a calm manor, but Amf was the only one to do so.
You attempted to talk to me, but at the time talking to you was considered "taboo" because everyone knew you were talking to everyone.