[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by smartalec2718

Ummm...no.

Jun and Alison both played smart. The difference was that Jun played nice-smart and Alison played slutty-smart. They had equally effective but very different social games. Just because she acted like a ho doesn't mean she didn't play a shrewd and effective social game. Sure, she got in spats with people, but those were unrelated to strategy and were more based on personal reasons.

And I CAN use the bitter jury argument, as a matter of fact. Here's a couple of case studies that prove not all juries are bitter:

1) BB2. Will was the villain of that season - he was undoubtedly the mastermind behind eviction after eviction and he made it to the end by ruthlessly lying and backstabbing. He did much more to inspire ire that Nicole did, yet the jury recognized his gameplay was bulletproof and they rewarded him for it.
2) BB7. Chilltown screwed over literally every member of the jury (Marcellas, Howie, James, Danielle, George, and Janelle) that wasn't Will, and yet even those who were so angry at their evictions at the hands of Chilltown (Howie, James, and Danielle especially) were able to put their feelings aside and vote to reward Mike's role as a member of Chilltown over Erika's nicey-nicey floating strategy.
3) BB10. Think about Dan's relationships with various members of the jury - I'm thinking especially of April, Michelle, Ollie, and Jerry. He either had major fallouts or was responsible for the evictions of each of them, and they all said some awful things about him. But in the end Dan won with a 7-0 vote because EVERYONE on that jury saw that Dan had played a flawless game.

There you go. Not all juries are bitter, so thank you very much, I CAN use the bitter jury argument for BB's 3 and 4.

Clearly you need to rewatch because Jun was from far nice-smart. In fact, she won because she was up against Alison and Alison was hated more than her. Alison's poor social game garnered her one Jury vote. One out of seven. That pretty much means that she played an ineffective social game, or at least less effective than Jun's, which is what matters when she's against her. And you're last sentence is ridiculous, because personal reasons effect Jury votes and make Alison less likable, so of course the Jury won't vote for her. They might not have been related to Alison's strategy, but they certainly effected her game whether you want to admit it or not.

1) The BB2 Jury was bitter against Nicole, so they voted for Will. That's a major reason why Will got the votes.
2) The BB7 Jury didn't like Erika because she was fake, so they voted for Mike.
3) Renny and Keesha were bitter in the BB10 Jury, Dan got their votes.

You can't use bitter Juries as an argument for robbed winners. If you make it to the end and you get the most votes, you deserve to win, you DID win. Every single Juror has voted, at least partially, based on their own personal emotions, that's just human nature. You can't get around that no matter what, it's how people operate. A good winner can play to the emotions of the Jury and foresee who will be angry about being evicted and who will be a good sport and know how to deal with them individually. What you're doing is saying that the BB3 and BB4 Juries were "bitter" because you're upset Danielle and Alison didn't win. In that case, then the BB2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 Juries were bitter as well and Nicole, Cowboy, Ivette, Erika, Daniele, Ryan, Memphis, Natalie, and Lane were all robbed too right?