Over the past few years BB bas either been to lenient with warnings and let HM's get out of hand and get away with anything

However this year they seem to have gone the other way and appear to be to strict with warnings with 2 HM's getting them in the first few days for what many say did not deserve warnings

So what is the best approach if they have to be one extreme or the other as obviously the halfway mark would be best

I did add a poll

TBH, I think warnings regarding behaviour should be ditched we are supposed to witness the HM's warts and all and unless their behaviour is causing serious distress to another HM then they should just be left alone.

Its not like BB anymore its so watered down its become like a pre watershed soap opera,

I was watching BB7 a few nights ago and HM had much more freedom of speech and I think it makes the show more interesting

There is no sense of continuity with BB's decision making when it comes to warnings.

Can't see the point at all in the poll as it stands. Every warning has to be judged on its own merits. I think the warnings we have seen this year have been about right. Where is that option?

But look how that turned out last year with Conor you just can't let HM get away with saying and doing anything they want

Too strict, but poll would have more credibility if it had an option to say they got it right.

But why?, it is supposed to be a fly on the wall look at how people are if there are warnings issued every 5 minutes the HMs become guarded and we never get to know the real people.

I am one that is not easily offended so maybe that's why I have this POV

But I didn't just mean this year I meant like last year and the year before where they were far to easy on them letting them get away with anything

But there still has to be rules they can't just threaten other HM's ect

And if they let them get away with everything how far is to fat what of one beats another HM up

That's why they needs rules to be set so they know where they stand before it gets out of hand

It's just silly. It is so obviously an invitation for people to whine away about BB warning people, with no option offered to say it is ok. 'Too lenient' is a non-choice: there have been no other incidents that needed a warning, so it means nothing.

Yes it's becoming far too sanitised. I don't necessarily disagree with warnings but ultimately they should leave it to the public to decide if a HM gets booted out, like they did with Conor last year.

I'm in two minds because I absolutely hated how lenient they were with conor. It was disgusting how they let him get away with it, protected him with favourable edits and then disgustingly rewarded him with 50,000 but they have been to strict with gina and Jemima this year.

Unfortunately they can't just seem to use a bit of common sense

Yep I get were you are coming from but that's physical aggression, something that would be a crime anyways so obviously they should be ejected for that. What I am trying to say is normal rules should apply I.E the rules we live by in our communities. To me the warnings issued so far have been far too strict

I think BB are constantly aware that the public can overreact, that some people have their fingers constantly on the redial button to Ofsted, and they make perhaps a sometimes heavy-handed attempt to cut that off at the pass; these warnings are really for the public's benefit, to let them know that they are going to be vigilant, but also for their own benefit as they don't want to face any future backlashes or tellings-off from the powers that be.

It must be a fine line to be walking along, and I guess they can't always get it right.

Yes it is a fine line, as the depth of feeling/anger of the public and the degree of severity of the crime seems to be judged primarily on the differing degrees of popularity of the perpetrator and victim

Not really though as last night Gina fans went off her because of what happened and people who like Gina more than Jemima and don't like Jemima at all said Gina was in the wrong and Jemima did nothing wrong

The demands for HMs to be warned or ejected are always louder when that HM is already unpopular. Popular HMs get a lot more leeway. It was ever thus.

But Jemima was and is unpopular she was one of the bottom 4 in there so it's not like she had fans Gina in fact had more fans but even they thought Gina was in the wrong

I've noticed it everytime there's a kinda big incident (e.g. Conor from last year, Jade/Shilpa) they then tend to get a bit over the top with the warnings