Sick of Channel 5 rigging nominations. May be unpopular opinion but I preferred the nominations when they where just the top 2 faced the vote. BB13 even though it was a controversial series was perhaps one of the best and they did not rig the nominations until Caroline's week.

Just really undermines nominating on the show.

so that the robbing ***** can get more of the public's money

LOL that's obviously one of the reasons for Channel 5 rigging.

The nomination process does seem to be devoid of logic.

Have Channel 5 even gave a reason for why these are the nominations??

I think Jackie Travers has a court case against BB since they completely shafted her that week when for some strange reason they put her up?

Sick of them messing up the process. Some of the shows best villains like Caroline etc who even though they where awful would have been out in like weeks 3 which would have ruined the series.

Did anyone else get 2 votes and isn't up for nomination?

really?
I cant remember what happened exactly now, was it when charlie was up and she was swapped for her or something?

The week Jackie was evicted she only received 2 votes and still BB put her up and she got eliminated. Biggest rigging ever. They just ignored any explanation in the hopes no one would notice or be bothered cause at the time the majority of viewers wanted her out. Check it on Wikipedia if you have any spare time lol the nominations just don't add up lol

Yeah, I'm not even a fan of hers but that was a joke. There was no explanation for it. The other nominees who all received more than her were Callum, Gina, Dexter and Jack and Joe. For some reason it seems they were saving Dexter as they were afraid he would go. I actually think Callum would have gone

Because Channel 5 are greedy Barstewards and they tend to always try put more than 3 up so they make more money in phone revenue.

It should really be either Liz Vs Jim, or Liz Vs Jim Vs Luisa.

I wondered why too, they didn't even give any explanation as to why. But, this is why I'd never vote anyway, it's just a waste of money.

When the phones lines are about to close, Emma always says 'Hurry up and vote or you'll lose out', I'd rather not lose out on 50p by phoning in.

It looks like they took the top 4 instead of the top 3.

Although, if they discounted Dappy's nominations (due to his earlier cheating) it would have worked out how it did. I thought, at first, that's what they did but they haven't mentioned it.

I have just watched the repeat and to be fair to BB the way the votes work now 3 people minimum are up for eviction is how it played out. I've always thought it to be the number of votes rather than the people (sorry, can't explain it properly) but basically Jim and Liz got 5 votes each so they are the top people counted as one, then luisa got 4 votes so that is the second nominee and then evander and jasmine got 2 and they are the third set of nominees.

I think it's because of this twist they are doing .

You don't count the top people as 1. They've never done that before and there'd be no need to. If they wanted the top 3 they have the top 3 with Jim, Liz and Luisa.

The only way it goes to Evander and Jasmine is if they wanted the top 4. I suppose if they're planning a double eviction that might be reasonable but, otherwise, top 4 seems a bit excessive!

I hope its just for the twist. Otherwise it has the potential to ruin future series etc with just having half the house up each week. Just getting 2 nominations meaning you are up for eviction will mean anyone with a remote personality or is different will be up each week.

They want Evander out

It's anyone with 2 or more nominations.

They need more people up this week because of the twist - presumably the folks from the bolt hole are going to have to decide who goes from the two lowest in the vote

Surprised they didn't just seize upon dippy's blabbing and put everyone up as a punishment. Ultimately they do what they want and there are no hard and fast rules are there?

They need two people left for whatever twist - if there were only three then only one would be safe and it would all be a bit pointless. therefore they needed five so I presume went to the next level of noms.

Makes perfect sense to me and I have no idea why people are getting ar@ey about it?

Because they are taking people's money and not being transparent with the people whose money they are taking in deviations from the standard format.

It would take ten seconds to explain the new rules, but they haven't done so. And didn't do so in the summer either.

I miss the days when Dermot or Davina would actually explain what is going on.

I don't think there's an issue from the money point of view. The rules are clear on that front. We're voting to save our favourite from eviction. As long as that is still the case, I don't see that we can complain on that basis.

I think the problem is the implication that they may be changing the rules after the fact, in order to manipulate the situation. That smacks of unfair interference in the results of the game which would be out of order. If the standard mechanism that they have been using for several series would not have resulted in Evander and Jasmine being up and yet they suddenly change it, without explanation or pre-warning, so that they are now up then I think it's reasonable to cry 'foul'.

Personally, I don't think they were deliberately trying to manipulate things, I suspect they had always planned it this way, but the lack of pre-warning for a change in the mechanism means that they have opened themselves up for accusations of manipulation which I think was a mistake.

Maybe because of the twist they wanted more people up.