Changing someone's mind about a contestant is not the only way to get them to change what they post.

Some people may tire of all the hassle they get when they criticise Hayley, or of all the posts that seem to regard negative views of Hayley is hypocritical or as driven by dubious ulterior motives (such as supposedly Hayley being a threat to their fasvourite), for example.

Are people being so nasty, vicious and personal? Apart from a few isolated posts?

The vast majority of complaints are about how the judges treat her (their marks and comments) or about the way Hayley performs her routines (such as the facial expressions) or about the content of the routines (such as how much solo skating and how difficult it really is).

I think people could argue that none of these things are Hayley's fault. She doesn't exactly hold a gun to the judges head and say "give me a high mark!" Her facial expressions....she smiles, so what... and how much solo skating/difficulty goes down to the choreographers.

Who said the judges marks and comments were Hayley's fault?

The point -- which you're missing -- is that it's the judges being criticised there, yet people reply and comment later as if Hayley had been criticised instead. You're doing that here: replying as if I'd said those things were Hayley's fault.

Every time you say "she smiles", as if people had criticised the mere presence of a smile, rather than her exaggerated-looking smiles, you're also distorting what people have said.

However, the exaggerated, "stage school" or "dance face" smiles are something that can be considered her fault. And if she can get credit for how she performs the routines -- and she is getting it, from the judges and from many viewers -- then she can be criticised for it as well.


If she can't get blame, she can't get credit either.

I think you are being a little disingenous by separating criticism of the judges for marking Hayley too highly from criticism of Hayley herself. To suggest that the judges over mark her in comparison to others is to suggest by implication that there is more to criticise in her performance than has been voiced.

As to the reasons why Hayley seems to be receiving a lot of criticism on DS this year (and my impression as someone who is enjoying most of the contestants this year is that Hayley is currently receiving more flack than the rest), I really don't know. I think I agree with whoever suggested Tall Poppy syndrome. As a nation we do seem to dislike anyone who is thought of as too good or too popular at what they do. We build them up and then seem to enjoy slapping them back down again.
Not a particularly attractive national characteristic, but there we are.
Noone is obliged to like Hayley or to think she is "the best", but I do believe that everyone is entitled to be treated fairly, even if they are celebrities on a TV show and as such I think that personal insults (including attributing personality traits such as smugness or arrogance to celebs without evidence) are inappropriate on a public forum.

I don't care what the T&Cs say, surely the celebrities we discuss should be allowed the same respect as other forum members.

Then you're wrong, and in an unacceptable way, because "disingenous" implies I'm not being honest about my views.

Though I have to say your idea that we can't actually criticise the judges without criticising the skaters is a new one. Here's hoping it doesn't catch on and plague discussions for the rest of time.


It's a criticism of the judges for not voicing it.

Look, even noting a flaw in someone's routine is not criticising them for it. We must be allowed to mention the facts without it being treated as criticism because it happens to mention a flaw.

Will we next have someone claiming that saying a skater got the mark they deserved (which can be a high one) is criticising them for not doing what was needed for a higher mark?

Even saying they deserved a higher mark could be spun as criticising them for not doing what was needed for an even higher one.


Let's not confuse a bunch of different things. As a nation, we are happy to celebrate people who do well -- if we think it's deserved. We don't think they are "too good". We aren't tearing down Amy Wilson for winning the skeleton gold, for example.

Disliking it when someone is too popular is a very different matter. The "too" means it's thought to be greater than it ought to be, and (unlike with "too good") we do believe some people are too popular, famed, or celebrated -- compared to what their talent, abilities or accomplishments merit. (Some people think that about Cheryl Cole, for example.)

And disliking the person is a different matter yet again.

There is a tendency for disliking the popularity to bleed over into disliking the person (and for disliking the person to make people think the popularity is not deserved), but they are still different things.

Most of the supposedly anti-Hayley people don't actually dislike her. They may dislike some things about her, or some things about how she's treated by the show, but that's as far as it goes.


The "evidence" problem should cut both ways and so also apply to attributing positive qualities. If people can form positive opinions based on what they see on the show, then it's equally legitimate to form negative opinions.


Then in effect you want the whole forum to be for appreciation, with negative comments barred. It isn't. That's what appreciation threads are for.

But it's not totally as far is it goes though, is it? Then people log on to Digital Spy and blast Hayley for doing whatever she's did, and then blast the judges for giving her X amount of marks. As a fan, it's not really nice to read - especially considering I think she's trying her best, and really enjoying herself.

I'm not disagreeing with you in the slightest, or trying to contradict you in any way - it's just a little addition of opinion

For the vast majority of people, yes, it really is.

Not from what I've read....but whatev's

Goodness me, you do love to dissect a post don't you?

Sorry, but I don't have time to do the same in reply, however just one little point relating to the use of the word disingenuous.....if you check out the latest information about about the development of the usage of the word, it is now accepted by a large majority that in addition to its original meanings it is also now used in the following context

"playfully insincere, faux-naïf," as in the example "I don't have a clue about late Beethoven!" he said. The remark seemed disingenuous, coming from one of the world's foremost concert pianists"

Do take note of the word in bold and understand that the word was not used as an insult.