No, there was nothing unusual about any "Ashleigh campaign".

Since this post has been misunderstood, I'll point out that that includes not setting any standard for spite.

And lo and behold - Gary's voting line is broken.

Not with regard to it's spite, no.

So they'd rather have the far more spiteful Helen win?

That makes little sense.

If people didn't want Ashleigh to win, the logical vote was for Christopher. He seemed considerably more popular than Helen, and far less spiteful if that's what they cared about.

There was no spiteful "Ashleigh campaign" either.

Perhaps if you followed the thread, you would see that I was responding to someone who declared the vote for Helen was a 'spiteful vote' -by spiteful Helen and Jale supporters, the poster tells us. In short if the vote for Helen to win was to spite Ashleigh, the campaign to evict Jale and keep in Ashleigh so that she could stand up against 'evil' Helen, should most certainly also be considered a vote of spite - misdirected though it was ( and some of the shrewder campaigners realized this) There are many other issues I would have with such insidious campaigns and alliances, which I will discuss another time as I would prefer to enjoy the show that is on now, if you don't mind.

Many posters admitted voting for Helen to spite Ashleigh and her fans.

The campaign to evict jale was a joint campaign of Ashleigh,Christopher and Chris supporters and was not a spiteful vote, just one to ensure their favourite stayed.

Ow well why did she finish 2nd.

Don't you mean Super Slapper ?