Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_
Or it's testament to Paul's social manipulation skills that he convinced over half of the house that he is loyal to them and their partner only, that he isn't betraying them, and that they need to do his dirty work (including arguing with a particular week's target while he befriends them) because it's to the benefit of them all and not just him? I mean how would you even qualify 'follower mentality' in the casting process? How do you look for that? It's hardly a perceivable or foreseeable trait.
The dumb cast thing is just a excuse to not give him any credit, Paul's social game this year has thus far been impeccable and some of the things he's managed to achieve are absurd. If people were objective about it they would admit that
|
I'm sure follower-mentality is easily assessed. It's quite simple from a viewer's perspective to notice who has follower-mentality and who doesn't. I'd say all of Paul's allies fulfil the criteria of follower-mentality (Josh is slowly coming out of his shell and making his own game for himself). I mean, he told Raven to bark (for example) to which she did, but that says more about Raven than it does about Paul.
Well, you've jumped the gun there because I definitely give Paul credit for being the best candidate to win, but in the realms of the game, especially in comparison to when this show displayed far better gameplay and quality of cast—his social game ain't ****. Fair enough if you want to classify that as a good social game, but I think the testament lies with the people he's playing with as oppose to Paul himself. Similar to Derrick, I won't take away that he deserves to win, but I just don't think they deserve credit or to be heralded as such.
Just my opinion, didn't mean to spark anything.