What a surprised that Alex and Chloe should be up again! Who'd have guessed

Totally rigged, thanks producers. As seems to be all nominees these days

They know Michelle will be fine, though it kind of suggests they prefer Katie H

buy chloe you cheap nobody

Without free nomination by all the housemates the system is open to manipulation by the producers (who also have the advantage of knowing how the voting was going for two of the nominees) I won't be voting because of it.

The show is a shell of its former glory. Doesn't mean you have to stop watching and can't enjoy it, it just means don't be fooled at thinking what you're watching isn't being manipulated to the hilt at every moment.

I agree and I am happy to watch it as an entertainment show. However, when asking the public to pay to vote the process needs to be transparent.

Had it not "been rigged" and normal nominations had been allowed to follow the natural course of events who do you think would have been up?

I think Katie would have been up

Perez and Katie would have been up, and I think some of the young ones would have picked Keith.

I think they want Chloe there...

Nominated by who? Perez I would think and Nadia. Who else?

Alicia

Though none can say for sure that BB or CBB is/has been 'rigged' to ensure certain characters remain in the house, after the summer of 2014 BB, I prefer to keep my cash firmly clasped in hand. No more voting for me - however much I may want to support a housemate.

Isn't it in the natural of normal nominations that aren't "rigged" (or influence by BB) that they're often unpredictable?

I think it is a bit strange (= suspicious?) that Chloe and Alexander are up again, since (1) a lot has changed in the house since the first time they were up, and (2) they weren't put up by proper nominations the first time either (they were Katie's choice as least entertaining).


I have also stopped voting. As I mentioned in another thread, I decided I'd no longer vote after bb15 and the following CBB, because of app voting and seeing some questionable results that were very convenient for people who'd placed bets at long odds. I felt I could no longer have enough confidence that results were down to the votes of ordinary BB viewers.

I also think that one reason why BB has so many twists that affect the nomination and eviction process is that the results are so often convenient from a producer's POV.

Do you remember the days when housemates just went to the diary room and did their nominations?

Ken was clearly thrashing these two in the vote, so they know they can be up again and barely trouble the scorers

Not sure how they managed to get Cami and Perez to save Katie over Chloe, but they managed it somehow!

How the hell can it be rigged? I appreciate the forum are very cynic, but I'm not. No-one could have predict the twist on Friday nor that Cami would pick Perez as King.

Seen a few black and white clips

Except half the housemates you mean.

Cami Li and Perez did the nomming as their final duty as Queen and King of the Faries

They nommed Chloe, Alexander, Michelle and Alicia

http://bigbrother.channel5.com/day-8...ir-nominations

Once upon a time, long long ago

The psych on bots last night said bb had picked Perez as king and quickly corrected herself

I do remember, and I think things have become much worse in recent years, but things weren't all that straightforward even in some of the older BBs that are widely thought to be among the best.

In BB5, the HMs nominated only 5 times in total, and one of those was for a fake eviction. (I'm not counting week 1, in which nominations were about suitcases.) One of the remaining 4 weeks also featured the "Judas kiss", and in one of the others, 2 HMs (Jason and Victor) were banned from nominating as a punishment for discussing nominations.

(I don't mind that punishment as such, but there were other nomination discussions at various times that weren't punished at all, so it was inconsistent.)

And bb7 had only "One standard week of everyone having 2 nominations each, one housemate evicted", as explained here

Oh, here we are again