[Veri]

Originally Posted by AlexBB3

Great to see a thread about Josie with an element of 2-way discussion for a change. Hope Josie supporters will continue to post in here because, although I have a low opinion of her, she's clearly done well out of the BB experience and I'd like to hear the positive stuff about her too (as long as it's not PR whitewash!)

The main problem I see is the almost complete segregation of pro and anti Josie camps on DS, with little cross-dialogue nearly 2 years on to help narrow the gap and temper the certainty of opinion each side has. I guess the combination of two antagonisms (first the pro and anti Josie, then the Josie v John) makes it particularly difficult to have a really honest discussion. So just wanted to say great that you, Circle and few others are engaging rationally in here to inject a bit of balance.

But would it temper the certainty of opinion each side has? I don't think that's happened in other cases. Was the certainty of opinion about Aisleyne, for example, tempered by the discussion taking place almost entirely in the main forum? I don't think it was. (Though I suppose fans sites may have been a factor.)

Two replies to Alex's post:

Originally Posted by aggs

While I appreciate why Appreciation threads and can also see why they have been segregated in to the attic region, that is one of the big negatives of them, to me.

They were segregated because a (small) number of people were trying to get them abolished, one of their arguments was that there were times when most of the forum's front page was taken up by appreciation threads, making other threads hard to find, and putting the ATs in a sub-forum seemed a reasonable compromise.

Posting in an area which is so resolutely positive and appreciative (to me) leads to one way thinking.

Posting on the main forum, taking part in the more cut and thrust while more challenging is actually more rounded (to me). It stops the bulking up of one side and the withering of another, and stops the appreciation-with-a-limp scenario.

I don't think it does stop the bulking up of one side. The forum has often become very one-sided despite people on both sides taking part in the main forum.

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

I agree with this, but only to a certain extent. Posters like Deefs, Muggins, Augusta, Wee Tinkers, Efty and a few more who were fans of both or either at one stage and with whom those of us always in the 'fake' camp argued quite vociferously for months are now people I find myself agreeing with most of the time. The cross dialogue has been going on for some time. Given it's confrontational origins, it's remarkable that the court thread has kept going for so long. The gap has been narrowing consistently for a long time.
...

Has the gap been narrowing by both sides moving to more moderate views? Or has the change mostly been movement on the pro-Josie side, becoming less pro-Josie? I haven't followed such things closely, so could well be wrong, but whenever I have dipped into the court thread or other Josie-related threads, the anti-Josie side seems as anti as ever.

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by Veri

But would it temper the certainty of opinion each side has? I don't think that's happened in other cases. Was the certainty of opinion about Aisleyne, for example, tempered by the discussion taking place almost entirely in the main forum? I don't think it was. (Though I suppose fans sites may have been a factor.)

Two replies to Alex's post:


They were segregated because a (small) number of people were trying to get them abolished, one of their arguments was that there were times when most of the forum's front page was taken up by appreciation threads, making other threads hard to find, and putting the ATs in a sub-forum seemed a reasonable compromise.


I don't think it does stop the bulking up of one side. The forum has often become very one-sided despite people on both sides taking part in the main forum.


Has the gap been narrowing by both sides moving to more moderate views? Or has the change mostly been movement on the pro-Josie side, becoming less pro-Josie? I haven't followed such things closely, so could well be wrong, but whenever I have dipped into the court thread or other Josie-related threads, the anti-Josie side seems as anti as ever.

The court thread is about discussing the fake aspects of Josie's character - beginning with the JJJ relationship but continuing well beyond it.

I would say that it has been many on the pro-Josie side becoming less pro-Josie; yes. We've had many former AT posters come in and say that they had completely changed their mind about her because of her post-BB antics. On the flip side, many (including myself to some extent) have gained more respect for John James; and indeed sympathy for him for ever having got entangled in the whole thing. So on the John James side of the equation, it's been more a case of the anti's warming to him.

[AlexBB3]

Originally Posted by Veri

But there's a difference between a warts n all discussion and a discussion that's treated as a "debate" (with a lot of point-scoring and debating tactics etc) and where many of the "warts" that are repeatedly mentioned are greatly exaggerated or outright false. That sort of thing can become tiresome rather quickly.

Appreciation threads aren't all the same, and there have certainly times when it was possible to have a better discussion in an AT than in the main forum.

I agree with your AT view. Heck, more than half my posts on DS have probably been in ATs (or a quasi-AT like the court thread ), as I like the social aspects of foruming as much as the debate! And I sometimes find the main forum particularly tiresome during BB itself where rationally objective discussion can become nigh impossible at times, as the polemics wage war for hearts and minds. You're right the warts do sometimes get exaggerated, but no more so than the tinted glasses imo - I don't see a moral distinction between the positive and the negative, they both help me find my 'objective' reality!

Originally Posted by Veri

But would it temper the certainty of opinion each side has? I don't think that's happened in other cases. Was the certainty of opinion about Aisleyne, for example, tempered by the discussion taking place almost entirely in the main forum? I don't think it was. (Though I suppose fans sites may have been a factor.)

Not sure I agree about this. I know the Nikki/Ais stuff still rages on, but most of what I see is good-natured jousting, where JohnD appears and posts his obligatory attack, and Barracute or BlueG retaliate (sorry if I've got any of those allegiances the wrong way round!). But I don't see that with pro and anti-Josie supporters - there is as yet little sense of mutual respect and DS comradeship in the limited discussions which I do see take place eg, if you look back over this thread even.

[circle game]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

The court thread is about discussing the fake aspects of Josie's character - beginning with the JJJ relationship but continuing well beyond it.

I would say that it has been many on the pro-Josie side becoming less pro-Josie; yes. We've had many former AT posters come in and say that they had completely changed their mind about her because of her post-BB antics. On the flip side, many (including myself to some extent) have gained more respect for John James; and indeed sympathy for him for ever having got entangled in the whole thing. So on the John James side of the equation, it's been more a case of the anti's warming to him.

Well I could have sworn that the court thread was called 'Could you prove JJJ fake in a court of law', and not 'let's discuss the fake aspects of Josie's character'. There are two people in the relationship, real or fake, and to be on topic i guess the thread has to be about both of them, about 'JJJ'. If you want to change the topic I think you have to start a new thread.

I've kinda given up on the court thread cos I don't really have anything more to say about the JJJ relationship, I think it was real, although it clearly fell apart fairly quickly after the House. Nuff said, from my point of view.

I'm not an expert on Josie's current activities, but I am a bit interested and still like her, in a BB housemate sort of way. I have other HMs I like, and those that I don't like I quickly forget. I like John James too.

[HappyTree]

I think it's to do with the sheer extent of personal emotional investment in Josie. Whereas to look askance only requires casual interest. I would suggest why the more vociferous remonstrators identify with and defend her so strongly but last time I did that it melted mouses the length and breadth of England in a flurry of alerting.

[Vesna]

Originally Posted by aggs

My friend refused to accept that Paul Weller split up The Jam and actually thought that The Style Council was better.

I still need a sit down at the thought of it.

The Style Council is better.

Originally Posted by Veri

I have dipped into the court thread or other Josie-related threads, the anti-Josie side seems as anti as ever.

How ridiculous! Anti-Josie side?? Finding fault in things she does is not being ANTI JOSIE it's being anti horrible things that no one should do including Josie.

Originally Posted by circle game

Well I could have sworn that the court thread was called 'Could you prove JJJ fake in a court of law', and not 'let's discuss the fake aspects of Josie's character'. There are two people in the relationship, real or fake, and to be on topic i guess the thread has to be about both of them, about 'JJJ'. If you want to change the topic I think you have to start a new thread.

And I could have sworn the JJJAT was to appreciate John and Josie and not about what one had for tea, but there you have it. One can read 100 pages of the AT and only find a handful of references to John if that. It's padded on and on with nothing to do with Josie OR John. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

AND to those that think Josie got a hard time on the MF during the show obviously never read a thread about Shabby. It was merciless, I had over 100 people on ignore because I couldn't stand the bile that spewed forth constantly. There was even 1 poster who posted legal documents , seems she spent a lot of time "investigating" the young girl and thought it appropriate to post on a forum. Claimed to be a mother as well.

So I did watch the clip and it was the best I've seen her do. She was dressed well, listened to the questions and answered appropriately. Kept the accent in check as well. Shame she had to lie about her previous work, not a chance that what she said is true. Doesn't work like that, in any way shape or form, but hey if there wasn't at least 1 outrageous lie it wouldn't be an interview with Josie.

[Pilotofthestorm]

Originally Posted by circle game

Well I could have sworn that the court thread was called 'Could you prove JJJ fake in a court of law', and not 'let's discuss the fake aspects of Josie's character'. There are two people in the relationship, real or fake, and to be on topic i guess the thread has to be about both of them, about 'JJJ'. If you want to change the topic I think you have to start a new thread.

I've kinda given up on the court thread cos I don't really have anything more to say about the JJJ relationship, I think it was real, although it clearly fell apart fairly quickly after the House. Nuff said, from my point of view.

I'm not an expert on Josie's current activities, but I am a bit interested and still like her, in a BB housemate sort of way. I have other HMs I like, and those that I don't like I quickly forget. I like John James too.

Well I would agree that the discussions on the CT thread have evolved somewhat from the original SP, by that I mean they encompass the broader topic of what celebs are prepared to fake in order to maintain their popularity. Obviously given the title of the thread the main topic of discussion is Josie, John has more or less disappeared into the ether so does not feature that much

Is it relevant to the original question posed? My answer would be yes. If as it appears Josie has or continues to fake certain situations to maintain her Zeleb profile then it's further evidence IMO that's it's entirely possible the JJJ relationship was faked to achieve exactly the same result. So it is broadly on topic which is not something you could say about certain threads

Anyways you should pop in sometime even if it's to keep us on our toes.

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by circle game

Well I could have sworn that the court thread was called 'Could you prove JJJ fake in a court of law', and not 'let's discuss the fake aspects of Josie's character'. There are two people in the relationship, real or fake, and to be on topic i guess the thread has to be about both of them, about 'JJJ'. If you want to change the topic I think you have to start a new thread.

I've kinda given up on the court thread cos I don't really have anything more to say about the JJJ relationship, I think it was real, although it clearly fell apart fairly quickly after the House. Nuff said, from my point of view.

I'm not an expert on Josie's current activities, but I am a bit interested and still like her, in a BB housemate sort of way. I have other HMs I like, and those that I don't like I quickly forget. I like John James too.

OK, I have a question. Why is it OK for Josie's fans to take a superior air with everyone else but a veritable crime when it happens the other way around?

Considering the tone of the post, I normally wouldn't respond..................but as we had all been posting along so nicely.....................

If you were discussing the musicality of Simon and Garfunkel in a thread about the musicality of Simon and Garfunkel and someone dared to discuss Paul Simon's upper ranges without referencing Garfunkel at all would that merit the closure of the discussion? No. I thought not.

John James has, to all extents and purposes, disappeared into the outback. Josie continues to contradict and lie, quite publicly, on a regular basis. Her falseness/fakeness/lying now feed routinely into questioning the veracity of her declarations while she was in Big Brother.

[Veri]

Originally Posted by AlexBB3

I agree with your AT view. Heck, more than half my posts on DS have probably been in ATs (or a quasi-AT like the court thread ), as I like the social aspects of foruming as much as the debate! And I sometimes find the main forum particularly tiresome during BB itself where rationally objective discussion can become nigh impossible at times, as the polemics wage war for hearts and minds. You're right the warts do sometimes get exaggerated, but no more so than the tinted glasses imo - I don't see a moral distinction between the positive and the negative, they both help me find my 'objective' reality!

I'm not quite sure what you mean by saying the court thread is a "quasi-AT", but certainly some main forum threads end up being populated mostly by like-minded people and also have a social aspect that's much like that in an AT.

I don't know whether there's a moral distinction between positive and negative. I wouldn't have said there was, but I haven't given it much thought. However, discussion in an AT can be more free of exaggerations than in the main forum. Not always, of course, and I haven't tried to work out which case happens more often, but I would say it's often true.

Not sure I agree about this. I know the Nikki/Ais stuff still rages on, but most of it is good-natured jousting, where JohnD appears and posts his obligatory attack, and Barracute or BlueG appears and retaliates (sorry if I've got any of those allegiances the wrong way round!). But I don't see that with Josie supporters - there is as yet no sense of mutual respect and DS comradeship in the limited discussions which I do see take place eg, if you look back over this thread even.

I don't think there was much mutual respect and DS comradeship between the pro and anti sides in the discussion of Aisleyne. "Nikki/Ais stuff" was just part of it. Sure, it can seem good natured now, years later, when a lot of people have stopped posting on the subject, but that can be misleading, and back when debates raged, they did not seem at all tempered by taking place in the main forum.

And that's just one example. Opinion has been very polarised about quite a few HMs when ATs didn't play a large role. Indeed, I find it hard to think of any case where discussion has led to both sides adopting more moderate views.

Unfortunately, I cannot remember the author or title, but there was a fairly recent book about discussion making views more polarised. Of course, views can also become more extreme after discussion among people who already have similar views (that's what the Wikipedia article about Group polarization seems to be about), but I'm pretty sure the book was about what happens in groups that start with a greater variety of opinions.

[circle game]

Originally Posted by HappyTree

I think it's to do with the sheer extent of personal emotional investment in Josie. Whereas to look askance only requires casual interest. I would suggest why the more vociferous remonstrators identify with and defend her so strongly but last time I did that it melted mouses the length and breadth of England in a flurry of alerting.

Lol!

At the risk of provoking a similar reaction (unlikely, but you never know) I'd suggest that trying to fit Josie's supporters into a stereotypical cast is doomed to failure. I've met quite a few and they come from all walks of life. And they are not all overweight, and they do not all have a huge personal emotional investment in her. I'm just talking about the ones I've met, don't know about the ones I haven't, obviously.

I do however think there is a bit of a seige mentality amongst some, simply because they have collectively been subjected to quite a bashing out here on the MF. Yes that is to be expected in open forum, but it is difficult to deal with and many have decided to retreat to facebook groups or twitter, and I can completely understand why. It's not nice being bombarded with the sort of stuff that gets posted on the MF, why put yourself through it. If you read it, it makes you want to react. Ts and Cs go out of the window, it's hard to keep your cool. That's human nature.

I know many of you would like to see more posting from Josie supporters, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

[Veri]

Originally Posted by Vesna

...
How ridiculous! Anti-Josie side?? Finding fault in things she does is not being ANTI JOSIE it's being anti horrible things that no one should do including Josie.

That's fine with me. "anti-Josie side" was just a convenient shorthand. But certainly a lot of the discussion is, or was, about Josie doing those "horrible things".

(I agree with you about the way Shabby was discussed, btw. It's one reason why I preferred to talk about her in the appreciation thread. Having supported unpopular HMs before, I knew nothing I said would make much difference.)

[circle game]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

OK, I have a question. Why is it OK for Josie's fans to take a superior air with everyone else but a veritable crime when it happens the other way around?

Considering the tone of the post, I normally wouldn't respond..................but as we had all been posting along so nicely.....................

If you were discussing the musicality of Simon and Garfunkel in a thread about the musicality of Simon and Garfunkel and someone dared to discuss Paul Simon's upper ranges without referencing Garfunkel at all would that merit the closure of the discussion? No. I thought not.

John James has, to all extents and purposes, disappeared into the outback. Josie continues to contradict and lie, quite publicly, on a regular basis. Her falseness/fakeness/lying now feed routinely into questioning the veracity of her declarations while she was in Big Brother.

You have misread my tone, it was not intended to be 'superior', just conversational and a bit jokey. We are clearly poles apart when it comes to humour.

I'm not making the rules up, it's my interpretation of what is meant by 'on-topic' and 'off-topic'.

As I understand it, it would be relevant if you were discussing Josie's alleged 'fakeness' in relation to JJJ.

Don't think the Simon and Garfunkel analogy is that apt tbh, but never mind, it's not important.

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by circle game

Lol!

At the risk of provoking a similar reaction (unlikely, but you never know) I'd suggest that trying to fit Josie's supporters into a stereotypical cast is doomed to failure. I've met quite a few and they come from all walks of life. And they are not all overweight, and they do not all have a huge personal emotional investment in her. I'm just talking about the ones I've met, don't know about the ones I haven't, obviously.

I do however think there is a bit of a seige mentality amongst some, simply because they have collectively been subjected to quite a bashing out here on the MF. Yes that is to be expected in open forum, but it is difficult to deal with and many have decided to retreat to facebook groups or twitter, and I can completely understand why. It's not nice being bombarded with the sort of stuff that gets posted on the MF, why put yourself through it. If you read it, it makes you want to react. Ts and Cs go out of the window, it's hard to keep your cool. That's human nature.

I know many of you would like to see more posting from Josie supporters, but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

Bit in bold 1, 2, and 3..............

It's about JOSIE not about her fans. Why do they (you) take it personally? It's very odd to take it that personally that you see it as the fans being bashed when it's Josie that's criticised; that you see criticism of Josie as 'difficult to deal with' for her fans; that the fans are being bombarded or 'putting themselves through it' because JOSIE is critiqued.

That just makes no sense to me at all.

[AlexBB3]

Originally Posted by Veri

I don't think there was much mutual respect and DS comradeship between the pro and anti sides in the discussion of Aisleyne. "Nikki/Ais stuff" was just part of it. Sure, it can seem good natured now, years later, when a lot of people have stopped posting on the subject, but that can be misleading, and back when debates raged, they did not seem at all tempered by taking place in the main forum.

And that's just one example. Opinion has been very polarised about quite a few HMs when ATs didn't play a large role. Indeed, I find it hard to think of any case where discussion has led to both sides adopting more moderate views.

At the time I'm sure it wasn't good natured, but it became more so. We can ofc debate how much of that is due to passage of time (losing interest) and how much to mutual respect building. But we're talking about Josie now almost 2 years after BB11 finished where the parties appear to be as far apart as ever, with little or no understanding of the other's position. I disagree with your last proposition about parties adopting more moderate views. Even in recent months, I've seen the Aaron discussions starting to take a more reasoned/balanced direction. My own belief (not provable) is that is at least in part due to dialogue on MF.

Your general proposition about groups becoming more polarized I think leaves out the social element which is so important to much of the JJJ community. The cross-fertilisation isn't just of ideas, but also of social boundaries. So I do think it could (can't say would) make a meaningful difference if there were more discussion between pro- and anti- Josie folks. Sure if both 'sides' maintain their existing entrenched positions with no desire for greater understanding of the other, then I guess you'd be right that it would simply be a dialogue of the deaf. But personally I'd prefer not to start from a defeatist stance that the status quo is the best that can be achieved, and just rely on the passing of time.

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

It's about JOSIE not about her fans. Why do they (you) take it personally? It's very odd to take it that personally that you see it as the fans being bashed when it's Josie that's criticised; that you see criticism of Josie as 'difficult to deal with' for her fans; that the fans are being bombarded or 'putting themselves through it' because JOSIE is critiqued.

That's what I was getting at with an earlier post. I do struggle with the idea that peeps are actually getting so upset just because of negative discussion about their cherished HM. I love Rachel Rice, she cops it on here sometimes (nowhere near as much as Josie, but she gets it nonetheless) but it doesn't hurt me. We're just peeps discussing a bunch of BB HMs. The pro-Josies focus on her strengths and zone out the weaknesses, the antis focus on her weaknesses and zone out the strengths. She gives everyone tons of ammunition, so there'll be no shortage of opinions - which ofc is what she wants and needs to keep herself relevant and earning.

And it's not just peeps leaving MF, it's peeps leaving ATs as well for facebook etc. That tells me more about the fragility of some of the supporters that have been attracted by Josie. She succeeded in touching parts other BBs couldn't reach!

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by circle game

You have misread my tone, it was not intended to be 'superior', just conversational and a bit jokey. We are clearly poles apart when it comes to humour.

I'm not making the rules up, it's my interpretation of what is meant by 'on-topic' and 'off-topic'.

As I understand it, it would be relevant if you were discussing Josie's alleged 'fakeness' in relation to JJJ.

Don't think the Simon and Garfunkel analogy is that apt tbh, but never mind, it's not important.

It was sarcasm - not my kind of humour, no.

I think the analogy is perfect. This has been ably responded to by more than just me. It's leagues ahead in terms of being on-topic when viewed against 'good morning, what did you have for breakfast?'. Josie's fakeness is inherently relevant to the fakeness of the relationship.

[seansnotmyname@]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

I think the analogy is perfect. This has been ably responded to by more than just me. It's leagues ahead in terms of being on-topic when viewed against 'good morning, what did you have for breakfast?'. Josie's fakeness is inherently relevant to the fakeness of the relationship.

I wasn't going to answer that, because the last time I did, my post and about 7 similar answers were all wiped.

Wonder if it'll happen again? The point is if they wipe the answers, for whatever reason, then the Qs will always be asked

[circle game]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

Bit in bold 1, 2, and 3..............

It's about JOSIE not about her fans. Why do they (you) take it personally? It's very odd to take it that personally that you see it as the fans being bashed when it's Josie that's criticised; that you see criticism of Josie as 'difficult to deal with' for her fans; that the fans are being bombarded or 'putting themselves through it' because JOSIE is critiqued.

That just makes no sense to me at all.

Hi Patsylimerick, the post you are criticising here was made in response to Happy Tree's post, when s/he was talking about fans /supporters who are prone to 'remonstrating vociferously' or words to that effect. The post was about fans! And I don't consider myself as one of the vociferious remonstrators anyway, so in my mind there was nothing personal about it!

Alot is said on the MF about fans/supporters. I think the post Happy Tree was referring to might have been one suggesting that all Josie supporters were of the same physique.

[PICKLES60]

Originally Posted by AlexBB3

At the time I'm sure it wasn't good natured, but it became more so. We can ofc debate how much of that is due to passage of time (losing interest) and how much to mutual respect building. But we're talking about Josie now almost 2 years after BB11 finished where the parties appear to be as far apart as ever, with little or no understanding of the other's position. I disagree with your last proposition about parties adopting more moderate views. Even in recent months, I've seen the Aaron discussions starting to take a more reasoned/balanced direction. My own belief (not provable) is that is at least in part due to dialogue on MF.

Your general proposition about groups becoming more polarized I think leaves out the social element which is so important to much of the JJJ community. The cross-fertilisation isn't just of ideas, but also of social boundaries. So I do think it could (can't say would) make a meaningful difference if there were more discussion between pro- and anti- Josie folks. Sure if both 'sides' maintain their existing entrenched positions with no desire for greater understanding of the other, then I guess you'd be right that it would simply be a dialogue of the deaf. But personally I'd prefer not to start from a defeatist stance that the status quo is the best that can be achieved, and just rely on the passing of time.



That's what I was getting at with an earlier post. I do struggle with the idea that peeps are actually getting so upset just because of negative discussion about their cherished HM. I love Rachel Rice, she cops it on here sometimes (nowhere near as much as Josie, but she gets it nonetheless) but it doesn't hurt me. We're just peeps discussing a bunch of BB HMs. The pro-Josies focus on her strengths and zone out the weaknesses, the antis focus on her weaknesses and zone out the strengths. She gives everyone tons of ammunition, so there'll be no shortage of opinions - which ofc is what she wants and needs to keep herself relevant and earning.

And it's not just peeps leaving MF, it's peeps leaving ATs as well for facebook etc. That tells me more about the fragility of some of the supporters that have been attracted by Josie. She succeeded in touching parts other BBs couldn't reach!

I like Rachel too x

[patsylimerick]

Originally Posted by circle game

Hi Patsylimerick, the post you are criticising here was made in response to Happy Tree's post, when s/he was talking about fans /supporters who are prone to 'remonstrating vociferously' or words to that effect. The post was about fans! And I don't consider myself as one of the vociferious remonstrators anyway, so in my mind there was nothing personal about it!

Alot is said on the MF about fans/supporters. I think the post Happy Tree was referring to might have been one suggesting that all Josie supporters were of the same physique.

ONE post that was quickly removed because it contravened t & cs hardly amounts to bashing and bombarding, is it? I'm sad and bitter - according to roughly every 5th page of the JJJAT. But I simply find that amusing.

[circle game]

AlexBB3

And it's not just peeps leaving MF, it's peeps leaving ATs as well for facebook etc. That tells me more about the fragility of some of the supporters that have been attracted by Josie. She succeeded in touching parts other BBs couldn't reach!

You see, this is a comment about fans/supporters, it's not about Josie, or not just about Josie. I almost agree with it, but I would change the word 'fragility' to 'common sense'. Why bother to stick around in a forum where you find that the extent of disapproval of your preferred housemate is bothersome to you?

[Ultra Violet]

Originally Posted by circle game

I don't see this at all, Ultra.....BIBs in particular, I just don't get. If you're being ironic, then I do get it, but I suspect you're not. But I'm also looking beyond DS, I wonder if you're just looking at DS.

I don't see clear cut 'sides', I don't see straight dividing lines, I see lots of individuals with slightly differing views, swarming around a few queens, just like bees. Lots of rough edges, indistinct lines. And in between: a waste ground with a few 'lost soul' bees, like myself!

I am not being ironic ... I teach English ... to English people and to foreigners ...I also teach various European languages to English people ... so I know how they are structured ... and people pay good money to learn correct usage ... which does exist ... in other countries as well as here ... language is incredibly interesting and revealing ... and when used precisely can be extremely powerful too ... sorry, but no one can stop me from noticing these differences ... they are fabulously interesting ... if we are now to be persuaded that 'anything goes' I am not going to agree with that ... just as there is 'a right way and a wrong way' in Maths or Science so there is also 'a right way and a wrong way' in Language ... and no amount of wishing it away will change that ...people are welcome to express themselves in whatever form they choose ... of course they are ... but Language has a gold standard - and the same applies in France, Italy, Spain, Germany ... different and non-standard usages are going to be of interest ... 'end of' as they say ...

[missbeenie]

Originally Posted by patsylimerick

Bit in bold 1, 2, and 3..............

It's about JOSIE not about her fans. Why do they (you) take it personally? It's very odd to take it that personally that you see it as the fans being bashed when it's Josie that's criticised; that you see criticism of Josie as 'difficult to deal with' for her fans; that the fans are being bombarded or 'putting themselves through it' because JOSIE is critiqued.

That just makes no sense to me at all.

I'm sorry but on several occasions on this thread Josies fans have been talked about, We've been told we have low esteem and other such nonsense, I don't understand why you cannot accept that when those kind of things are said people are going to get upset.

[Veri]

Originally Posted by AlexBB3

At the time I'm sure it wasn't good natured, but it became more so. We can ofc debate how much of that is due to passage of time (losing interest) and how much to mutual respect building. But we're talking about Josie now almost 2 years after BB11 finished where the parties appear to be as far apart as ever, with little or no understanding of the other's position.

But we're, what, 6 years after bb7? Two years after was during bb9, and I don't think there'd been any building of mutual respect. (That a few people talking about Nikki (not Aisleyne) can seem "good-natured jousting" now, 6 years later, doesn't even seem very relevant.)

(Of course, that's not to say there was never respect between any individuals on opposing sides. We have to talk in general terms if we're to avoid endlessly qualifying; there are always exceptions.)

I disagree with your last proposition about parties adopting more moderate views. Even in recent months, I've seen some Aaron supporters starting to take a more reasoned/balanced line in discussion. My own belief (not provable) is that is at least in part due to dialogue on MF.

If dialogue has that effect, why didn't it have the effect earlier? If dialogue is the key, it ought to be most effective when there's the most discussion, not later when people have drifted away or become interested in other things and there's much less discussion of whichever housemate is in question.

I haven't noticed a change in the Aaron support, but then they've always seemed a pretty reasonable bunch to me, as such things go.

Your general proposition about groups becoming more polarized I think leaves out the social element which is so important to much of the JJJ community. The cross-fertilisation isn't just of ideas, but also of social boundaries. So I do think it could (can't say would) make a meaningful difference if there were more discussion between pro- and anti- Josie folks. Sure if both 'sides' maintain their existing entrenched positions with no desire for greater understanding of the other, then I guess you'd be right that it would simply be a dialogue of the deaf.

The social aspect tends to make things worse, because you clash with the same people again and again, lots of sly (and not so sly) digs are made (at least by one side), and it starts to seem that there are personal grudges (at least on one side).

As years pass, however, people who'd been opposed over one HM may find themself on the same side re another. That can make a big difference and let someone see another in a new light. But it's not a change because of any social mixing during their earlier disagreement.

But personally I'd prefer not to start from a defeatist stance that the status quo is the best that can be achieved, and just rely on the passing of time.

I didn't start from such a stance, and I would call it realistic rather than defeatist. I came to my views after years of watching discussions in forums and other places on the internet.

[PICKLES60]

Originally Posted by Ultra Violet

I am not being ironic ... I teach English ... to English people and to foreigners ...I also teach various European languages to English people ... so I know how they are structured ... and people pay good money to learn correct usage ... which does exist ... in other countries as well as here ... language is incredibly interesting and revealing ... and when used precisely can be extremely powerful too ... sorry, but no one can stop me from noticing these differences ... they are fabulously interesting ... if we are now to be persuaded that 'anything goes' I am not going to agree with that ... just as there is 'a right way and a wrong way' in Maths or Science so there is also 'a right way and a wrong way' in Language ... and no amount of wishing it away will change that ...people are welcome to express themselves in whatever form they choose ... of course they are ... but Language has a gold standard - and the same applies in France, Italy, Spain, Germany ... different and non-standard usages are going to be of interest ... 'end of' as they say ...

The most important thing about any kind of writing is having something to say .The most impressive piece of prose or poetry can still be the biggest load of tripe despite adhering to all the rules of grammar, syntax and spelling. Content will always win the day, everything else is window dressing .

[jackyo55]

Originally Posted by missbeenie

I'm sorry but on several occasions on this thread Josies fans have been talked about, We've been told we have low esteem and other such nonsense, I don't understand why you cannot accept that when those kind of things are said people are going to get upset.

yeap this happens regularly