[SoBig]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

I'm a well aware of why and how she lost but it's not like it was unfair. It was known that the jury wasn't going to be sequestered since BB2 even, and Danielle clearly didn't factor that fact into her game well enough. Saying "she could've won if they were sequestered" is a bit of a ridiculous argument because the jury was never sequestered up until that point. It's like saying someone on the first season of Survivor could've won if their was a tribe swap. Maybe they could've, but that wasn't even an element of the game so it's just an argument on intangibles.

And it's not like it's unfair that the jury was bitter, that's how things are. The jury didn't exist coming into the game, it is reactionary and the players themselves make the jury. Danielle made them bitter and there's nothing unfair about it.

Danielle said she didn't even watch the first 2 seasons of Big Brother. She didn't even know who Dr. Will was or what the live feeds were.

Danielle played a fantastic game in BB3 and she was certainly robbed, because of a bitter jury. I doubt her DR's played that big of a factor. They were just pissed off that she was the one behind their eviction.