DS Forums

 
 

"I wouldn't do it"


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-07-2015, 14:09
qwerty_1234
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 930
I don't see how that's relevant. Nick said he wouldn't do it. That's the point.
As far as I'm aware Jack made no such claim.

I don't think either of them are 'wrong' to take the opportunity, that's not what I'm saying. The point is about Nick claiming that he wouldn't do it yet Jack getting a hard time over it.
Nick said he wouldn't have taken the prize fund for personal, material items. Not for the chance to be in the final.

That's like chastising someone for saying "I don't like fruit" and then going on to eat a carrot. It's not the same thing.
qwerty_1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 07-07-2015, 14:11
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
Nick said he wouldn't have taken the prize fund for personal, material items. Not for the chance to be in the final.

That's like chastising someone for saying "I don't like fruit" and then going on to eat a carrot. It's not the same thing.
But Nick isn't being chastised. Jack is.
Alrightmate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 14:15
sutie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 25,455
Joel received similar favour and justification from house and forum members for his selfishness also, it seems only certain housemates are permitted personal flaws and there doesn't appear to be a hard and fast list to consult in whose or what transgressions are permitted.


I like Nick, Joel and Jack. You are quite right though that there is a 'one rule for one, one rule for another' when so called transgressions occur.

Jack is the weakest of the three in terms of being able to provide a coherent argument in his own favour, and I feel that the others are starting to look like a team of jackals, pouncing on and exploiting this weakness.
sutie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 14:15
Davidoff_Sickto
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 192
Nick said he wouldn't have taken the prize fund for personal, material items. Not for the chance to be in the final.

That's like chastising someone for saying "I don't like fruit" and then going on to eat a carrot. It's not the same thing.
No he didn't.
Davidoff_Sickto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 14:17
Eve Elle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: The House of Elle
Posts: 5,396
The difference is that Jack made BB an offer for a laugh (his words). Nick however, was taking part in a task as required by BB. That's what differentiates the two actions in my mind, one was voluntary, the other mandatory.

Neither action bothered me really though.
Eve Elle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 14:23
Panda Eyes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,188
Right from the start Nick told us that he has no friends in real life. Since he seemed to have a fairly friendly manner and a certain foppish charm, we were left to wonder what else it is about him that explains his lack of friends. Maybe we are beginning to find out.

Something that has also crossed my mind, that is if he was indeed honest about not having many friends.

Joel received similar favour and justification from house and forum members for his selfishness also, it seems only certain housemates are permitted personal flaws and there doesn't appear to be a hard and fast list to consult in whose or what transgressions are permitted.
Completely agree. Great OP too.

Oh absolutely.

It's for the above reason that I'm firmly in Jack's corner.
I find myself being backed in to that corner also
Panda Eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 14:46
qwerty_1234
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 930
Well, in that same token then, he also didn't that that he wouldn't use money from the prize fund to get into the final.

Some people here are using very broad brush strokes. Jack weaseled out of his dipping into the prize fund because nobody thought it was funny. It was also for menial items that were of no use to him - this is why he is being chastised.

Nick has made it quite clear he wants to get to the final and used his opportunity to do so. He also stuck to his guns when questioned about it, giving, what I consider to be a valid response.
qwerty_1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 15:15
Davidoff_Sickto
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 192
Well, in that same token then, he also didn't that that he wouldn't use money from the prize fund to get into the final.

Some people here are using very broad brush strokes. Jack weaseled out of his dipping into the prize fund because nobody thought it was funny. It was also for menial items that were of no use to him - this is why he is being chastised.

Nick has made it quite clear he wants to get to the final and used his opportunity to do so. He also stuck to his guns when questioned about it, giving, what I consider to be a valid response.
The discussion taking place was focused on Jack's selfishness in using prize money for his own personal gain and the remark made in that context and no other watch the video it is plain to see. There were no qualifications put upon which such actions would be acceptable only that it was unacceptable.
Davidoff_Sickto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 15:35
Barracute
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nikki Grahame ♥ Fan Club
Posts: 60,862
I am not sure why thre is any issue here? Jack used some of the prize fund for personal items, items that wouldn't affect his place and would be available outside afterwards, it is clear that Nick was saying he wouldn't use the funds for that, he made no qualification but it is clear that, that was what he referred to. So when he found himself with opportunity to buy immunity, he took it. As that directly affects his time in the house and is not something that can wait til outside. There was no contradiction at all !

Jack definitely deserves criticism for a very selfish decision one completely different to that made by Nick. The key difference is that Nick's decison was part of the game whereas Jacks was not.
Barracute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:19
qwerty_1234
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 930
I am not sure why thre is any issue here? Jack used some of the prize fund for personal items, items that wouldn't affect his place and would be available outside afterwards, it is clear that Nick was saying he wouldn't use the funds for that, he made no qualification but it is clear that, that was what he referred to. So when he found himself with opportunity to buy immunity, he took it. As that directly affects his time in the house and is not something that can wait til outside. There was no contradiction at all !

Jack definitely deserves criticism for a very selfish decision one completely different to that made by Nick. The key difference is that Nick's decison was part of the game whereas Jacks was not.
This.
Also, Jack did a complete U turn when it backfired on him! He deserves the stick he's getting because he's a weasel. Granted, not everybody will agree with Nick's choice but I think that he was presented with an opportunity for him to affect his time in the house and he took it and used it as it should have been.

Jack was using the prize fund for a cheap joke.
qwerty_1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:41
viva.espana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,012
I find myself being backed in to that corner also
That made me laugh. I feel a bit that way too.

It says so much about that bunch of scheming, hypocritical, petty dullards that Jack has become a shining albeit manky dressing-gowned beacon of light!
viva.espana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:50
Davidoff_Sickto
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 192
Everybody focused on Jack's perceived greed/mischief {you choose which} whilst excusing the same from both Joel and not so thick Nick.
We are all watching the same thing the battle of the vicious vs the viscous.
Davidoff_Sickto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:53
viva.espana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,012
This.
Also, Jack did a complete U turn when it backfired on him! He deserves the stick he's getting because he's a weasel. Granted, not everybody will agree with Nick's choice but I think that he was presented with an opportunity for him to affect his time in the house and he took it and used it as it should have been.

Jack was using the prize fund for a cheap joke.
It was a funny joke and I'm disappointed he withdrew his bid. I really wanted to see the 'cheap blazer and trousers' BB found for him. A missed opportunity for mirth if ever there was one.

To suggest that Nick buying himself a place in the final is more dignifed than Jack wanting a football score, juice and some new duds for a laugh is truly comical.

What possible dignity is there in buying a place in the final? Surely anyone who really loves BB and whose dream it was to be in the final would want to be there by default, rather than design? But then, it's typical of spineless Nick who comes across as someone who has never put real, genuine effort into anything meaningful in his spoiled, pampered life.
viva.espana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:55
qwerty_1234
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 930
Everybody focused on Jack's perceived greed/mischief {you choose which} whilst excusing the same from both Joel and not so thick Nick.
We are all watching the same thing the battle of the vicious vs the viscous.
The difference is, Joel didn't truly believe that it was going to happen. He was the first one to do it and the way he dealt with it was funny. Jack backtracked and was copying Joel to try and get a laugh. When he didn't, he backtracked. He's a weasel.

Nick is a different circumstance.
qwerty_1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 16:56
Panda Eyes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,188
That made me laugh. I feel a bit that way too.

It says so much about that bunch of scheming, hypocritical, petty dullards that Jack has become a shining albeit manky dressing-gowned beacon of light!

It's hilarious isn't it. That resting sad face he has () has me almost powerless in supporting him. Then when his cheeks burn bright red () I'm like putty in his hands
Panda Eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 17:02
Davidoff_Sickto
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 192
The difference is, Joel didn't truly believe that it was going to happen. He was the first one to do it and the way he dealt with it was funny. Jack backtracked and was copying Joel to try and get a laugh. When he didn't, he backtracked. He's a weasel.

Nick is a different circumstance.
Thanks for reinforcing my point.
Everybody has an excuse except JACK! Feel the irony.

If Joel didn't believe he was making a deal why did he feel the need to go back to the housemates and lie about it?
He knew exactly what he was doing both in and out of the diary room yet remains un-chastised for his behaviour.
Davidoff_Sickto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 17:09
emma555
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,214
It's hilarious isn't it. That resting sad face he has () has me almost powerless in supporting him. Then when his cheeks burn bright red () I'm like putty in his hands
Haha, really funny.
emma555 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2015, 17:23
viva.espana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,012
It's hilarious isn't it. That resting sad face he has () has me almost powerless in supporting him. Then when his cheeks burn bright red () I'm like putty in his hands
What can we do? We're helpless in the grip of Jackness.

Thanks for reinforcing my point.
Everybody has an excuse except JACK! Feel the irony.
Feeling it big time. It would almost be funny were it not so self-servingly hypocritical and so transparently anti-Jack.

The real irony is that if we're throwing 'weasely' about, then what could be more weasely than Joel's 'economical with the actualité" explanation of how he ended up sepnding £2.5k on a pizza.
viva.espana is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:23.