Can't he be genuine and boring?

Besides, without being a mind-reader, how can you know "he never hid anything"? Surely most HMs keep something back, and Luke seemed to be holding back more than most.


What arrogance? She wasn't arrogant about her finacee or any "names" she mentioned.


I think it's easily one of the worst there's been. The "insiders" we almost all useless or worse, and some of the outsiders did little more than sit in the smoking area complaining.

He can be genuine and boring yes, but can you define what made him boring. Ive seen plenty calling him boring without actually backing it up. Seemed like a good way for Deana fans to justify having a go at their favourite not winning. (Not necessarily you, but more in general)

To me if someone mentions they have a famous fiancee but refuses to mention the name and then mentions she knows other famous people and goes to famous parties then from my point of view that is arrogant, She said she did not want people to treat her any different...then why rub it in peoples faces to begin with?

Some of the Outsiders for me made the series, Lauren, Benedict, Luke A, Adam I found quite entertaining to watch. I think if you compare it to BB 10 - BB 12...it could be easily up there.

I'm one of those people that never saw the point of ex-HMs appearing as guests on the spin offs.

I'm fine with segments maybe "what are they up to now?", but I've been generally underwhelmed by them, or outright turning off (yes Katona made me turn off). The exception being Luke Marsden, who went from being a numpty to a legend for me on BOTS.

I think ex housemates are a natural source of BOTS guests - they can have insights that other people don't have. Obviously some will be better than others. Last year I thought Tom was good on BBOTS. Did I dream it, or did Anton appear, and was good as well?

All the outsiders from BB13 would be worth seeing imo.

I agree they are obvious guests, I just don't know how much insight any have ever given.

Then again I'm generally underwhelmed by the guests most of the time, especially when they have to constantly look at cheat sheets to remb who's who. I'm easily riled into shouting at my telly "Have you even watched any of the show!?!"

I may have dreamed Anton too, but I seem to recall him doing a "playas and stayas" bit. Y'know like Vic did before the erm *cough* *wink*.

Yeah Anton was definitely on it, I remember him saying something about Emma that offended her (she was only offended in a jokey way) but I think he was only on it the once.

There does seem to be increasingly less point to watching.



What's happened to the usually popular idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid?

If enough of us have various exceptions (mine would not include Luke Marsden but would include Liam from bb8), then having ex-HMs as guests would make sense after all.

Still, I think the vast majority of them are useless or worse.


Sure, they're a natural source and can have insights that others don't, "can" being the key word. They almost never actually have an insight that others don't. I certainly don't think Tom had any insights that other people don't, so if he was good, it must have been for some other reason.

If we're going to have bb13 guests, I'd rather see the outsiders than the others (though I mean the outsiders, not just or primarily the 'soldiers'), and HMs can be better guests than the celebs they have on, but I can't get enthusiastic about seeing many of them.

I wouldn't make an exception for Luke, I just thought of all the years they've been appearing (and appearing too freaking often like Nikki and Josie), he was the only one that made me say "I've changed my mind about you".

I'm fine with a follow up if that's what people want, I just find the whole "if I was in this year/ if that person had been in my year" boring. Then again I used to cringe at Alesha on SCD for starting every judge with "When I did SCD... so I know how hard it is".

How did you change your mind about him? (Just curious.)

What made him boring is that he wasn't interesting or entertaining. Isn't that how "boring" works? Sure, those who think he wasn't interesting or entertaining are stuck with the more difficult 'proving a negative', but given that no one's ever come up with much that's interesting or entertaining that he did, they seem to be on pretty solid ground.

He was interesting only in negative ways, for instance the sly push on Lauren and Adam's relationship in a way and at a time that it helped get her evicted. (If he didn't do that, then he lacked even that bit of interest.) And I suppose it was interesting to see him backtrack like mad and go go for the sympathy vote in the DR after some of the occasional times he'd been forthright. But that's about it.


I don't think that's arrogant or that she rubbed it in their faces.


Benedict went out in week 3. Even Lauren only made it to week 7. And what was entertaining to watch about Luke A or (even more) Adam? Adam was so determined to fly under the radar that he lost if when Deana merely mentioned his name in a context that might somehow suggest nominating him.

I wasn't invalidating an opinion. But if someone is saying that they really hated the last three series it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask why they keep watching.

Apart from Luke A, I can see Benedict, Lydia and Lauren on there for some reason. Maybe Luke S.

OK, but it seems to me that if the response to someone's opinion is just to say "I can't help wondering why you watch BB at all?", then that is rather dismissive.

It's sort of hard to explain. When he was in BB9 I thought he would be the mixture of witty and cutting that he was on BOTS. He let me down, I thought him whiney and self-centered, although being squashed by Bex's baps 99% of the time probably didn't help.

See you say that no one has come up with anything interesting about him (In your opinion) that means your opinion is on solid ground. It is not more difficult to prove a negative than prove a positive. To be negative is easier within human nature.

To maintain his only interesting point was in negative ways proves my point. There is nothing substantial to back it up rather than what your opinion. (Which I know is the point of a forum) but the way you played this reply across is no less dismissive than "whats the point of you watching BB anyway" as in I disagree with you so im going to prove you wrong without proving that I am right.

I am a fan of Luke because from what I saw he appeared to be entertaining, funny (though offensive the BMI comment was fricking hillarious) and genuine. I care little about peoples journey or whether he was born a man, woman, goat or whether he was born as an edible pylon.

Thats just a case of agree to disagree, I happen to think it is arrogant. We could keep this going round and round.

Week 7 of an 11 Week series is more than a half. Adam did not fly under the radar, he was involved in several arguments aswell like standing up to people like Shievonne as fun with fellow outsiders. Sara and Scott were the only ones to fly under the radar in that series IMO.

Please do underrstand however Im not trying to be aggressive with this reply...I have been on this forum since 2006 (Lost my password to the original Username) and usually I tend to agree with you Veri and find your posts rather insightful. But Hey, what would a forum be without a difference of opinion.

It's harder to prove a HM didn't do anything interesting than to prove the HM did something interesting, because to prove the HM did, you just have to find something interesting the HM did. How do you think someone would prove a HM didn't ever do anything interesting? Rather than find an example, they'd have to somehow show there was no example ever during the entire course of the show. Maybe you don't think that's harder, but I think it pretty clearly is.


I think that's just playing games. I said wonkey's response was dismissive, for instance, so you'll say the same about mine. Anyway, what backs up my opinion is what happened in the show, such as the way Luke A behaved in the DR. What do you count as backing up? And how, if at all, do you back up your opinions? Or do you think opinions don't have or need backup?

You wrote, "Ive seen plenty calling him boring without actually backing it up." What do you think would count as backing up such a view? It seems to me that those who say he was boring have backed it up at least as well as those why say he wasn't.


So what did he to that (you think) was entertaining?


Adam was clearly wanting and trying to get to the final without being nominated, which is why he reacted so strongly to Deana mentioning his name. That's trying to fly under the radar pretty much by definition, regardless of occasional moments when he flew a bit higher. His arguments were relatively early on, when the final was further away and not seeming almost in reach.