Ethan Zohn - Saboga

[Gher]

OK, maybe Ethan is a nice guy, I certainly think he did do a good thing with the soccer charity thing he started, but why is it necessary to go around and keep saying he won because he is a nice guy. It makes me think he is not as nice as he thinks he is.

[lalol]

Why thank you fluff, I'm here to support Ethan, too. And those are good points!

Now what KK? *cackles like the wicked witch of the East*

Sorry KK I forgot to add LC also defends Ethan to a great extent and look at what I predicted jk

[ref guy]

A nice person doesn't have to go around telling everybody they are nice, and if they do, people are not required to believe them.

I question did Ethan win the game? I question is Ethan a nice guy?

He may have been chosen by Kim J to go to the final two because she thought he was a nice guy.

But when it is uncertain whether Kim J won that challenge or not and she came to be in that position by mistake, it then becomes uncertain if Ethan did 'win' the game by being "nice" as he puts it.

It is not possible to make a statement of certainty about the reason for an outcome if the validity of the outcome is in doubt.

I don't see how the producers error invalidates his win in any way. It's like saying a team doesn't deserve a win because a foul was or wasn't called in a match. It's part of the game and people need to except that. If we use that logic, every sporting event in history could be invalidated. There have alway been certain judgment calls even in survivor. Minor RC or TC rule violations that JP only warns them about. If he enforces them to the letter, it invalidates that challenge and that winner is also not legitimate because that may have changed the game? Of course you don't have to believe Ethan's a nice guy, but your later post suggests that he may be even in your opinion, or at least does good things. The "nice guy" win idea has been generally excepted by many people, it's not just an idea Ethan floated himself.


You called it lalol

[Gher]

Yeah, I don't think he is really the winner of Survivor 4 because of the producers' mistake. I don't know who the real winner of S4 is.

Sorry, I don't understand your argument.

Ethan may have played the "nice guy" last time as he keeps reminding us lest we ever forget it. (Just like Tina reminds us 'good people' like her deserve to win.) This time... who knows?

This Survivor I think we have to be prepared for anything.

[lalol]

By S4... Ethan is already announced as Winner of Survivor: AFRICA by the way :rolleyes

[ref guy]

Yeah, I don't think he is really the winner of Survivor 4 because of the producers' mistake. I don't know who the real winner of S4 is.

Sorry, I don't understand your argument.

Ethan may have played the "nice guy" last time as he keeps reminding us lest we ever forget it. (Just like Tina reminds us 'good people' like her deserve to win.) This time... who knows?

This Survivor I think we have to be prepared for anything.

Ethan even stated in his video that he may have to approach this game in a different manner than S3 Africa. He is not the one who constantly says that's why he won, we just here the same quotes over and over. The ones who say that are people like me who do repeat it over and over and over ................ and over

My other point is that just because something happens during and event that is not quite right or handled 100% fairly, the results are not automatically invalidated. To do so would invalidate almost every event. If we take that approach, why have any events to begin with if they end up having no meaning.

[fluff]

Ethan won S3, not S4 Gher.

Ethan saying he is a nice guy in a video hardly means that he "keeps reminding us".

The mistake made in the fallen comrades challenge should have resulted in a tie-break question being asked, Kim J might still have won. That error alone did not rob Lex of the vistory in that challenge, he still had work to do to win.

I agree with ref guy, one error does not completely invalidate the ultimate result, even if it is a pretty big error.

[Gher]

I think an error does. It means nobody can be sure how the game would have really turned out. I don't know, Ethan doesn't know, in fact, nobody can say, unless you think you are God.

He may be the official winner of Survivor.

He may not be the "true" winner of Survivor.

Often "official" and "true" do not equate.

So to say he 'won' Survivor through being nice is a statement based on a false premise. He may say he got Kim J's final vote by being a "nice guy" though (I am not sure about the reason for this either).

To sound all high and mighty about it makes him less of a nice person. A truly nice person would be more humble about how they "won" Survivor, especially if their win is in doubt. He comes across as boastful and judgmental and despite all the good things he has done for the soccer charity in Africa, I still do not like him.

[Paulie]

I don't think the error "completely" invalides the end result, but it does raise many questions. Lex's illness still would have played a role, but the final 3-person challenge may have played out different had Kim been voted out by Lex at F4. I think Ethan is a legitimate winner, but I am very disturbed that the producers would have allowed such an egregious error to have crept into the game. It's inexcusable, really, that they had not checked their sources two and three times for every single one of those Fallen Comrades questions.

[fluff]

I agree Paulie, I see Ethan as a legitimate winner.

I could really not care less what comments he or the other Survivor's make about themselves.
He doesn't come across as anything other than a nice person to me.