DS Forums

 
 

SCD Week 5 Discussion Thread (Sat 6.30pm/Sun 7.20pm)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26-10-2014, 22:03
mintchocchip
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 15,555
We used to have a roll eyes smiley, they got rid of it and gave us these two odd ones instead
Bad decision by DS, i have never needed either and frequently pine for the *rolleyes*.
mintchocchip is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 26-10-2014, 22:24
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 10,833
This ^^^^^

...........<snipped>.


I haven't seen accusations of arrogance just that he doesn't like being in the bottom and it shows, it's a fun contest and he'd do better to be more gracious and generous rather than miffed.

He was clearly upset, I guess it's not nice to know that, despite you dancing to a middling standard, you're unpopular with the viewers and it's that lack of popularity that put you in the DO twice.
See below for the accusations of arrogance/cockiness etc.

As for suggesting that his tears were just for himself, I think that is pretty harsh. It was clear from what Thom said that the two of them had become good friends and I think that had just as much if not more to do with his tears. That is exactly what I mean about people ascribing unpleasant motivations to what they see because of their preconceived ideas of what a person is like.

I really want Thom to stay. Don't like Simon's personality, he's too sure of himself.
The is something so unlikeable about Simon. It looks like he has a bad smell under his nose all the time

You can tell Simon thinks he's safe
Simon was so cocky thinking he was safe.
Simon really does not like being in the bottom 2 and he shows it

I suspect that's why Craig dislikes him.
He could just put a smile on, he comes off as being really arrogant, as if he thinks "what the hell do they think they're doing putting me here"
mazzy50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 22:26
mazzy50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Slough of Despond
Posts: 10,833
Because over a period of five years there are two men that we know of with whom she has had sex - Joe Calzaghe and Vincent Simone.

Boy oh boy what a slapper.

Sighs deeply and rolls her eyes .
Ah - thanks.
mazzy50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 22:26
DeltaBlues
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: DANNYWUZROBBED
Posts: 3,464
Bad decision by DS, i have never needed either and frequently pine for the *rolleyes*.
Me too, *rolleyes* was one of my favourites. I miss him
DeltaBlues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 22:37
Dalwhat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 182
I wonder who it is spends money voting for the weakest contestants? Personally if SCD was a just popularity contest then I would have turned off years ago. It's only the striving for improvment that makes it watchable for me. If it's the same for everyone else than you can only assume the people that lift the bottom three dancers out of the dance off have got far more money than sense and do it only out of a misplaced sense of wanting to spoil the show for those who value the effort the celebrities make.
Dalwhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 23:26
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
If what Tess says and its true, that the results are in no particular order why did they leave mark until second last to tell him he was through? That was cruel.
Because no particular order means no particular order - it doesn't mean not in any order. They don't tell you who is one to ten in order every week or even 10-1. But they can put someone last to build the drama and the order may be just mixed up. All sorts of perms are possible - 135792368 10, 543216789 10 or whatever - its just none are defined as particular.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 23:32
chipsaunt
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 928
I wonder who it is spends money voting for the weakest contestants? Personally if SCD was a just popularity contest then I would have turned off years ago. It's only the striving for improvment that makes it watchable for me. If it's the same for everyone else than you can only assume the people that lift the bottom three dancers out of the dance off have got far more money than sense and do it only out of a misplaced sense of wanting to spoil the show for those who value the effort the celebrities make.
Free online voting, I suspect. I don't think people vote to spoil the show.
chipsaunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 23:39
Sherlock_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,283
Free online voting, I suspect. I don't think people vote to spoil the show.
Actually, I think that phone votes are more likely.

Probably a large group of Scott fans (from the Radio) have his number (it is the same number each week, if I recall correctly) and they only need to look up the tv guide to see when they can vote for him.

And they don't even have to watch Strictly for that!

Besides, phone votes you can do anywhere, can't see someone going on-line on their phone whilst out and about.
Sherlock_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 23:50
ForerroRocher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: McDeanville
Posts: 5,689
I don't understand the backlash over the couples "first reactions" speeches, particularly the attacking Pixie.

Those little segments are obviously just a small fraction of what are probably a couple of minutes interviewing between the couples and whoever they're talking to. I imagine they ALL get asked the same questions and pretty much all give the same answers ("How sad were you to see Thom and Iveta go?" "We're very sad obviously" "How relieved are you to be through to next week?" "We're so glad we're through and so excited for next week"), but the edits are done to show just a few seconds each, so obviously they're going to alternate the questions used.

I think it's a nice mixture of sadness for the departing couples and happiness for the saved couples (which is actually a nice touch for those voting for the likes of Pixie. I imagine the voters quite like to know the couples are happy to go through after their votes!)
ForerroRocher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-10-2014, 23:57
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Heading for a Mark v Simon dance off next week?

I'm still amazed that for the first time the young male fitties are proving unpopular - very interesting voting and seems the public are wanting a very different 'champion' to support.
Its got nothing much to do with support or personality or dancing. The SCD vote did the same to Ray and Spooney as its done to Simon. Small biases mean a lot when there's a lot of people competing for small votes - because the large numbers are going elsewhere. Its all about getting a fair small share related to your ability, and it doesn't take much to turn a small fair share to a tiny unfair share that puts you in the bottom two. He's also probably being hit by the votes going elsewhere for all sorts of other reasons.

This series has plenty of people to suck up votes. The people who vote on the dancing, have lots of other, better, choices, to vote for. There's 4 good dancers - thats more than usual.. One of those is from Eastenders, and the only really good male. The representative of Casualty is quite good too - channel and time slot may matter. . There's one fun candidate who may be attracting that vote, with little opposition, and being large may help too given some past BBC reality votes. Ola may have a personal vote, Judy may have a tennis fan. Scotish regional, Anton fan, and oldest contestant, vote working for her. Scott may have a radio 1 vote. Add those all up and the rest may indeed be fighting over voting scraps

You also have the negative voters, These seem to vote for whoever gets the worst marks. Some are just anarchists, others are anti-judge, others see low marks as an attack on them. Scott moaning about how he has worked hard and been undermarked, resonates with others. Some seem not to get the whole point - that someone is going , and just try and save whoever is most in danger.

If the people at the bottom pull in a vote on lack of merit, and the people at the top do on merit, its inevitable that its going to be people in the middle going home. The less of a support base they have , the quicker they will go.

There's not much they can do about it. Telling people their votes for the weakest are wrongheaded, just results in more votes for the weakest. Telling people to vote for the people in the middle is silly - as most people will never vote for everyone they think ought to stay till next week. People will vote for one of the best if they vote on dancing , or who they like most - not to stop the middleground going unfairly early. They can't even ask people to vote for who should go - as its open to tactical voting and the negative vote would target the best performers. .
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 00:07
cwickham
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,314
I found Simon's gestures whilst under the spotlights waiting for the results very odd. Was he trying to communicate that he was/wasn't sure he was in the dance-off?
cwickham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 06:14
Walter Neff
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Faversham, Kent
Posts: 6,700
If what Tess says and its true, that the results are in no particular order why did they leave mark until second last to tell him he was through? That was cruel.
Because they wanted to squeeze as much drama as they could out of the situation, which was unnecessarily cruel to Mark.

As for those calling Mark a cry baby, he was emotional but he didn't cry, but I can quite understand why he was upset.
Walter Neff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 09:37
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,132
Someone's got to be announced as the last one to stay in, and it's cruel to whoever it is. Either they choose a different person each week or put the names in a hat for the order. Whatever they do, it will always be cruel to one person.

Omniconsumer93 said Yeah to Scott being kept in. I wonder if he/she and all the others who vote for him also stand on street corners in the hope there'll be a car crash they can cheer at.
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 10:58
fatskia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,563
If I was the producer, I would choose the first two to be called out and randomly draw which one was first, then I would arrange all of the other celebs to be announced as safe or not in a specific order.

That fulfils the criteria 'in no particular order'.

I think they do something very similar to what I described.
fatskia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 11:10
Cherrybomber
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the ground
Posts: 3,686
I don't understand the backlash over the couples "first reactions" speeches, particularly the attacking Pixie.

)
Yeah, its a bit of an odd thing to latch on to, and inaccurate given editing.

personal prejudice I guess.
Cherrybomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 11:24
Cherrybomber
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the ground
Posts: 3,686
See below for the accusations of arrogance/cockiness etc.

As for suggesting that his tears were just for himself, I think that is pretty harsh. It was clear from what Thom said that the two of them had become good friends and I think that had just as much if not more to do with his tears. That is exactly what I mean about people ascribing unpleasant motivations to what they see because of their preconceived ideas of what a person is like.
So maybe 1 then.
Why did you include all the other quotes that don't back up your claim?

I suppose in the face of no actual evidence you're going for something you think you light be avke to contive to fit your claim

OK, but if it were me I'd just say I was mistaken.

As for your final paragraph, I think you may have taken an inference that was not there.
Cherrybomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 11:29
Cherrybomber
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: On the ground
Posts: 3,686
We used to have a roll eyes smiley, they got rid of it and gave us these two odd ones instead
Bad decision by DS, i have never needed either and frequently pine for the *rolleyes*.
Me too, *rolleyes* was one of my favourites. I miss him
Rolling eyes at another FM had to go as it contravenes the rules of posting ( which I think in some areas are ridiculously namby pamby but I don't get to make them). Having said that, rolling eyes at a situation would be fine.
BUT it was far more frequently used to be rude and patronising to another FM so it had to go

That's a shame because I used to pop the rolling eyes FM's into my ignore box, it was efficient for removing those with whom I was unlikely to wish to correspond.
Cherrybomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 13:05
RFS
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Londinium
Posts: 6,919
Rolling eyes at another FM had to go as it contravenes the rules of posting ( which I think in some areas are ridiculously namby pamby but I don't get to make them). Having said that, rolling eyes at a situation would be fine.
BUT it was far more frequently used to be rude and patronising to another FM so it had to go

That's a shame because I used to pop the rolling eyes FM's into my ignore box, it was efficient for removing those with whom I was unlikely to wish to correspond.
I remember on another forum someone who used to rolleyes all the time at anyone who dared disagree with her, but oh my word if you dared to use it back it was like fire and brimstone the world over. Honest you would think you'd have shot her puppy! And heaven help the one person who dared point out they used it all the time.
I learned some very colourful words that day!!!
RFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 15:09
Omniconsumer93
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 718
Someone's got to be announced as the last one to stay in, and it's cruel to whoever it is. Either they choose a different person each week or put the names in a hat for the order. Whatever they do, it will always be cruel to one person.

Omniconsumer93 said Yeah to Scott being kept in. I wonder if he/she and all the others who vote for him also stand on street corners in the hope there'll be a car crash they can cheer at.
Wow.

I voted for Scott because he showed a lot of improvement this week, I haven't voted for him in previous weeks. I also voted for Thom and Alison this week, so it's not like I'm using all my votes on one person.
Omniconsumer93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 15:22
Cal Christopher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 253
I voted for Frankie thrice this week as I have done bar last week. I really hope she pulls out all the stops this Saturday. As much as she's brilliant already, she will need to really wow everyone in order to solidify her place in the final I reckon.
Cal Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-10-2014, 23:00
katmobile
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,943
I wasn't exactly expecting to say this, but I think Judy was better than Alison and Scott. Both of them were so bad this week...
I agree and I generally like Alison - Judy is having fun and she is getting better - Scott really isn't. Haven't seen result show yet.
katmobile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2014, 14:21
kwynne42
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Gloating of Irlam
Posts: 39,226
Evening all and thanks for the thread.

The judges entrance becomes more cringeworthy every week.
Still only takes 15 seconds of a 2 hour show so I have no problem with it at all.
kwynne42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2014, 17:01
LazySusan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,059
I don't understand the backlash over the couples "first reactions" speeches, particularly the attacking Pixie.

Those little segments are obviously just a small fraction of what are probably a couple of minutes interviewing between the couples and whoever they're talking to. I imagine they ALL get asked the same questions and pretty much all give the same answers ("How sad were you to see Thom and Iveta go?" "We're very sad obviously" "How relieved are you to be through to next week?" "We're so glad we're through and so excited for next week"), but the edits are done to show just a few seconds each, so obviously they're going to alternate the questions used.

I think it's a nice mixture of sadness for the departing couples and happiness for the saved couples (which is actually a nice touch for those voting for the likes of Pixie. I imagine the voters quite like to know the couples are happy to go through after their votes!)
Ah glad someone else thinks the same as me. I have said similar on a couple of other threads, you just said it much more eloquently than me.
LazySusan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2014, 22:02
katmobile
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,943
Len's right. People think mid-level couples are safe.


You gotta vote, peeps.
I must admit I'm starting to warm to the idea of limiting the voting to the bottom half of the table - it might mean that people vote for those in the middle who are in danger because you can't possibly vote for every couple that you think are less worthy than the duffers you think should go it isn't possible.
katmobile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-10-2014, 22:04
katmobile
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,943
No, Scott got more votes than Thom, probably a lot more.
Doesn't mean he's better - people vote for all kinds of reasons some of them possibly not good ones. Who is voting for Scott and could they please stop?
katmobile is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:15.