Originally Posted by hihopes:
“Don't understand the fuss. They said what they had to say to convince him to stay, same as they would have done with every other housemate in the past who has threatened to walk.”
I think the fuss is caused by something else. As I said in one of the numerous other threads, I think it would be mostly different people who were complaining if Perez had won and only
then talked about how BB had persuaded him to stay. Then it would be mostly people who disliked Perez who were up in arms about the manipulation and so on.
But now it seems to be mostly people who don't like him being evicted, or think he was treated badly by the show (as in used and then discarded), don't like how much he was booed, or the way he was interviewed, and so on. I think that dissatisfaction may be what makes what he said about being persuaded seem more significant and more like it discredits the show. (Some even seem to see revealing it as some sort of triumph for Perez.)
I think this is one of the times when things make more sense "backwards". Rather than the reasons people give being that caused the reaction, the reaction came first, and the reasons are more like post hoc rationalisations. (That doesn't mean they're not genuinely efforts to explain.)