Follow Zap2it:
TV Query: What does 'feckless' mean?
Question: During the final Tribal Council on "Survivor: Samoa," Shambo called Mick "feckless." He didn't know what it means. What does it mean?Answer: "Feckless" means something -- or someone -- that is ineffective, incompetent or futile. Also? Having no sense of responsibility, indifferent, lazy. Need more? How about lacking purpose or vitality? Or careless and irresponsible?
Basically, Mick.
Follow Zap2it on Twitter and Facebook for all your movies, TV and celebrity news
Related:
'Survivor: Samoa' finale: Natalie White wins Russell Hantz's game
Photo credit: CBS
Follow Zap2it on Twitter and Zap2it on Facebook for the latest news and buzz
Zap2it Elite Sheet Must Reads from the Web's In-Crowd



I have had it with stupid juries on Survivor and watching them give a million dollars to someone who just follows along, and does nothing. I will not watch this show again. I am done with it.
Russell was the best game player-come on JURY-this is a game not a popular contest. I feel that the jury was mad cause they were out done by Russell-they knew he was the best player. i know if Russel had not been on the show it would have been BORING. Love you Russell
All these comments are dead on... this is the first survivor that I watch in 4 seasons... stopped watching for the very same reasons... someone needs to let CBS know what perception is out there...
Here's another angle. Mick knew after the show he was going back to a job where he would be a doctor and it would be very important that he keep his reputation in good shape.
His arguments for winning weren't great, but they were much better than Natalie's. Meanwhile Russell just backed up why he shouldn't win...because he's too cocky. He's like a DA that makes a great case, but presents it in a way that the jury finds him unlikeable so the verdict comes back wrong. A smarter Russell might apologize to people as he's voting them out, not taunt them.
Seemed like Russell was the only one playing the game most of the time. Why didn't anyone attempt to vote him out....ever? He deserved to win. He PLAYED.
Russell lost because he didn't give the jury enough consideration - he lost fair and square.
Russell is the best player ever on "Survivor." It's a GAME! In GAMES, you're supposed to use all available strategies to win, except for cheating. There was no cheating on "Survivor," except for the jury that refused to name the real winner, Russell. Shame on them.
Shambo was correct in her assessment of the final 2. Neither Mick or Natalie worked to win. They hung on to Russell to make it to the end, because they knew they could not do it on their own. They knew who he was and what he was doing almost from the start. The jury that hated Russell so much could have tried harder to blind-side him. When they did try, he out-smarted them with the immunity idol he found without a clue!! Out-wit, out-play, out-smart is the name of the game, and that name is Russell !!!!!
The game is OUT wit, OUT last & OUT play, not most popular or who played with ethics!!
RUSSELL DESERVED THE WIN!!
Russell's shenanigans to eliminate players did not cost him the game, in my opinion. It was his giant ego that did him in. Anyone with a brain knew he deserved to win on game play, but his insistence that he had it "in the bag" pushed the jury to "prove him wrong". Too bad he didn't humble-up a little at final jury.