Following that, Cynthia Florine and Jasmine Hudson came up.
This time, Jenny Kirk learned her lesson.
Instead of showcasing her "uniqueness", she synthesized the opinions of previous judges before speaking.
Although it did not make much difference, at least it prevented her from making mistakes.
However, it only made people look down on her even more.
At first glance, it's clear she lacks solid substance.
Just a while ago when she came on stage, she bragged about how she worked with many renowned chefs and amassed phenomenal knowledge.
She claimed she had learned so much from these masters.
So we thought she would have some insightful ideas.
The audience does not necessarily need her to say something unique, just something that makes sense.
But what did Jenny Kirk do?
She merely repeated what the other five judges said.
What's the point of having her as a judge then?
Isn't that just annoying?
