WHO Poll

collyrob 12:25 Thu Jan 18
The Traitors
Anyone else watching it.

Absolutely brilliant TV.

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

El Scorchio 2:08 Tue Jan 30
Re: The Traitors
Alfs- Amazing! I mean you may as well and see what happens, but I do think you're right- especially at the start in these shows there's a sort of pack mentality and as it's usually a bunch of people in their 20s and 30s, the outliers of that are at a big risk earlier on. I guess familiarity and relatability and 'people like me' breeds trust, as they say. And for some reason in terms of older people the women definitely get more leeway- like a sort of motherly thing?

That said, Aubery got murdered rather than banished didn't he? i can't remember what their reasoning was. He probably looked like too much of an enigma. You definitely have to play a bit dumb and play the common man at the start. Anyone who comes across different and outspoken is immediately under suspicion- actually for zero rational reason.

I do find the psychology of the show pretty fascinating.

Alfs 5:07 Tue Jan 30
Re: The Traitors
El Scorchio - I've registered to apply but am still in two minds. Over 60s don't seem to fair well so I'm mulling over how I can overcome that.

Alfs 5:02 Tue Jan 30
Re: The Traitors
Come On You Irons 7:42 Sun Jan 28

You are, without doubt, the most pathetic keyboard warrior on the entire internet.


Side of Ham 9:38 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
If that is the case Come On The Aubery.....why did you go out of your way to post on this thread?.....you thicko.......hahahaha!

collyrob 8:50 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Oooohhhh hark at her.

Come On You Irons 8:10 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Side of Ham 12:27 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Come On The Swiss = Aubrey

….it’s the only way to explain his unnecessary bitter post…..


You do realise that lame attempt at a snide dig means nothing to me, Snidey, as I don't waste my time like you watching and gossiping about a crappy TV gameshow targeted at women and gays.

El Scorchio 4:41 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
I was also wondering that, and whether they'd just have eliminated them both at that point because as you say it's an absolute stalemate. Maybe they'd have said you have to resolve this until someone backs down or vote again, which likely would have led to Jaz changing his mind eventually anyway because Molly the sheep certainly wouldn't have done. Although they should have pushed her more in the vain of 'Why do you just do everything Harry does?' 'Why do you trust him so much?'

But yeah i don;t really get why Jaz made all that noise about Harry and then just voted for Andrew. If he made a fatal error then that was it. He should have followed his convictions, but the numbers game was always stacked against him in that situation with Harry always having two votes, essentially. Jaz probably gambled that if it got to just three of them and he said his piece, Molly would actually stop being stupid and realise the obvious that Harry was a traitor exactly as Jaz and Andrew were both telling her right to her face.

No-one attacked him with enough conviction even having loads of evidence to back it up (For instance isn't it funny that you seem to know exactly what's going on all the time, are never wrong and every single traitor has been outed by you) and actually when Andrew questioned him he fucking melted and had nothing to come back with. He was never put under enough pressure but was bloody lucky he had his second proxy vote.

Anyway. It's a great little discussion piece. Gold television.

Can we get a WHOer to apply for next series? That would be great.

the exile 2:54 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
One thing that intrigues me is when there were just four left at the round table, what would have happened if Jaz had voted for Harry instead of Andrew? That would have been 2 votes each for Harry and Andrew. I don't see how they could have resolved that because any which way they re-ran the vote, they would have got the same result.

On another note, yes indeed, Charlotte was shit hot. Anyone see the skimpy little red dress she was wearing when sitting in the front row for the final Uncloaked?

On yet another note, COYI - yes, I wish we could all be real men like you, you fucking Neanderthal.

El Scorchio 2:14 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Andrew knew he was fucked if it got down to three. Harry's simp would have gone with whatever he said, which would have been Andrew, and he'd have been able to make the obvious non traitor move of throwing red which would have been quite convincing anyway. There's no way he'd have shared the money and not fucked him over in a basically unassailable position with two of the votes guaranteed.

He had no choice but to go for Harry when it was four and at least he could have got a tied vote. His mistake maybe was not doing it when there were five of them to try and manufacture a 3-2 situation.

Jaz probably left it too late, but he couldn't have done much more than literally spell it out to Mollie, along with his actions that made it completely obvious that Harry was a traitor (or at least that if she had a chance of winning she should vote against Harry) but she was just too stupid to pick what was staring her in the face vs her crush.

Fucking hell she was gutted though. Probably got trust issues forever now, as well as looking like an absolute mug on national TV.

Russ of the BML 1:02 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Andrew panicked and showed his cards too early. He allowed his dis-trust of Harry to ruin his chances. They should've had a plan to vote Evie then Jaz, knowing Mollie would vote to end the game.

I suppose Andrew felt he had nothing to lose by going all in because he probably felt he Harry was going to do the dirty on him anyway. But I think he jumped too soon and should've held his nerve.

But anyway. regardless of who, what and why and all the connotations, it's simply compelling TV.

Willtell 12:45 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Possibly but it’s obvious now that she had the hots for him anyway

Side of Ham 12:40 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
That 7 grand moment could also have been the thing that cemented silly draws decision of not being able to banish him.

Willtell 12:35 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Yes possibly. However, I am saying that Andrew turned attention onto himself by turning on Harry when he did. He would have got further if he hadn’t done that and concentrated on Jaz who was probably the smartest one there.

Harry wasn’t as smart as he appears now. He was lucky to get away with a few mistakes. For example, he should have taken the £7,000 cash prize instead of adding it into the pot. Most faithfuls would have done knowing that they were more likely to lose to a traitor…

Side of Ham 12:27 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Come On The Swiss = Aubrey

….it’s the only way to explain his unnecessary bitter post…..

Rossal 12:20 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
Harry would have turned on Andrew, he was driven by the money. No way he would have done most of the work to share with him at the end

Willtell 12:15 Mon Jan 29
Re: The Traitors
El Scorchio 3:23

When there were 5 of them it was right to banish Evie when they did leaving 4. If Andrew hadn’t turned on fellow traitor Harry, they should have paired up as planned and taken out Jaz next to get to the final 3.

If it had been Andrew Harry and Mollie as the last three there was a risk that Harry would go for Andrew but would he? Harry had said all along that he wouldn’t. Andrew said all along that he knew Harry had turned on several traitors before so expected it but I’m not sure he would have.

That’s the game so who knows but Andrew’s chances would have been greater than turning on Harry when he did. It got him banished instead of Jaz and probably made for a more exciting ending.

There was always a risk that Harry or Andrew would throw green to continue with the banishment votes as a way to turn on the fellow traitor. But would they have settled for sharing? At that late stage I think there was a good chance they would have…

El Scorchio 8:52 Sun Jan 28
Re: The Traitors
Hammer I am 7:03

Yeah that’s pretty much it. She knew that it had to be true but then he batted his eyelashes at her and just just changed her mind because she was a simp for him. Gullible for sure but I will add stupid as well!

They did well to make it good drama until the end when it was looming like a foregone conclusion. The power of editing.

Come On You Irons 7:42 Sun Jan 28
Re: The Traitors
What a bunch of old women in this thread obsessing about a shit gameshow for queers and birds. Get a grip!

Hammer I am 7:03 Sun Jan 28
Re: The Traitors
Like I said though she did put Harry's name firs and considering how much she liked him, she must have reached that conclusion first using your logic.

Then he gave her the puppy eyes and she went with my theory which is admittedly a lot less likely. I do t believe she was just completely brain-dead, just gullible

Wish they did a two minute interview with each banished and murdered so they explain their thoughts and we see their reaction to finding out the Traitors!

El Scorchio 4:56 Sun Jan 28
Re: The Traitors
She may have thought that definitely but Jaz would have been beyond stupid as a faithful to gamble on increasing his winnings from 1/3 to 1/2 especially knowing the situation was that Molly would always side with Harry and the huge likelihood was going home with nothing. It’s a risk no-one would take under those circumstances. You might do it if you’re in Harry’s shoes if you’re faithful as you know Molly will always vote in your favour but not in a month of Sundays if you’re not getting that backup.

Her knowing she’s faithful and knowing Jaz threw red should lead her to the conclusion that just Harry or both of the others have to be a traitor. Jaz also wouldn’t throw red as a traitor knowing the other two are faithful and a team because he then goes from a 100% winning position to a 100% losing position.

Hammer I am 3:57 Sun Jan 28
Re: The Traitors
El scorch I see your point but she thought they were all innocent,

She might have come to the conclusion Jaz was trying to just boost his split taking a gamble he could get her to vote harry because following your logic it makes it almost a certainty it's him.

I mean she did put Harry's name first so I think a lot was cut in the edit for her to almost vote harry, she probably saw your logic too

Page 1 - Next

Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: