Peasy
Registered User
That's fine, and ultimatley it is a subjective thing.
However, they aren't just social experiements. The premise is yeah, a social experiment. How will people react when locked into a house, or placed on an island together. However, it's still a game, or a competition, within that experiment.
The Jury decides who wins the game. However, they do not necessarily decide who deserves to win. Those are two different things. Just like in the Court System, a jury ultimatley decides ones fate/verdict, even if that decision isn't always the right or deserved verdict/fate.
For example, in the most recent season if Big Brother U.S, many people would admit that Paul deserved to win, however due to not owning up to the things he did to deserve to win, he ended up losing. That doesn't take away the fact that he deserved to win, it's just the jury felt Paul didn't give them the answers they wanted in order to support him to win.
Which is part of the game and a huge blunder on his part.
Wendell had a better social game, it was evident. You're not going to win if people don't like you, look at Russell. Everyone knows that. Michael was extremely annoying at the final tribal council basically telling people to disregard the social impact that Wendell had on people. And it's not like Wendell was some dope in the gaming aspect of things.