The argument for and against is long but it kind of reminded me of Big Brother 4.

That was the one that had a lot of nice, grown up mature people, some may say more middle class line up. I think the change was in response to criticism from some viewers that found the previous too brash and lowbrow. Funny enough it ended in it being labeled the most boring BB.

Thing is, sometimes people ask for nice and respectable housemates & winners but will that make for a interesting show? will you continue to be hooked series after series if there is no "pantomine" baddie(s) leading the way?

I guess balance is what some people are looking for.

All HM,s on BB4 were boring.....let's get an even scoring here

A lot of bores that year but there was a few that would have been interesting had they been on BB3 or BB5.

It doesn't help that BB4 is sandwiched in between two series that are considered to be big hits. BB3 was different to the first two series and had been promoted as such. Also, right on Day 1, we were introduced to Jade Goody. We see this type of HM time and time again nowadays, but back then, we had never ever seen anyone like her before. We could see how different she was straight away. I remember on Day 1, all we could hear was her voice. I remember my dad coming in whilst it was on, took one look at her on TV, and couldn't believe what he was seeing.

BB4 was promoted as going back to basics, so that it would be more like the first two series. Because of everything we'd seen on BB3, people immediately started comparing it to that. Had BB4 followed BB2, I honestly don't think it would be as frowned upon as it is now.

If a back to basics series happened nowadays, (like BB1, BB2 and BB4, but updated), I think people here would absolutely love it. It's back to basics all the way for me. I actually rewatched BB4 a few years ago. I enjoyed it when it was originally on and I decided to rewatch it just to see if my opinion on it would change. Well, after seeing all the contrived negativity and controversy on the C5 series, I can't tell you just how refreshing I found it.

Going back on topic, in regards to the answer to the question, it's easily nice guy winners, or winners who we don't see a lot of. That's why I'd rather have someone like BB14's Sam win, (probably the civilian winner we saw the least of), over a nastier, controversial HM like Bear.

Every show IMO needs the "Baddies" and friction sells. BUT we need vote to evict back, don't get me wrong the producers can change things to keep them in for a little longer but ultimately when their time has run its coarse it has to be put to the public on vote to evict. Also less outside information, I want to see them without any influence from the outside otherwise go full scripted and change the name to the only way is BB

It is a POPULARITY contest. Whoever is the most popular wins the show.

Depends. I flip flop between the two. Here we go, I'm going to post a list of all C5 winners and everyone say if you wanted to win and who didn't deserve it, so...

Aaron BB12
Luke A BB13
Sam BB14
Helen BB15
Chloe BB16
Jason BB17 not my fave, but 2nd fave.

Paddy CBB8
Denise CBB9
Julian CBB10
Rylan CBB11
Charlotte CBB12
Jim CBB13
Gary CBB14
Katie Price CBB15
James Hill CBB16
Scotty T CBB17
Bear CBB18

In bold were the people i was championing. I did like Paddy, Rylan, Charlotte at times and KP at times too.

I'm way off the mark with civilian.

If this series had been a VTE, there's no way that Bear would have won. There's no question about it. Same with BB13's Conor. He would have gone in the ABCD week if it was a VTE. Those two reasons are enough for me to want VTS to be abolished from the CBB series.

Was that the Welsh woman who could kill you with her finger

These shouldn't be our only options, neither should warrant a win really.

Bb4 wasn't as bad as the collective now peddle.

It was surrounded by the best series BB have ever produced hardly an even scoring either.

James Hill was a great winner imo. He was nice but certainly not boring, I really wanted him to win.

The problem I had with BB4 was that, like this CBB, the entire series revolved round one HM (Cameron) and seemed to be manipulated for him to win.
As I couldn't stand him and his sidekick - Steph - C4 really was THAT bad for me.

Though there were other HMs who would have worked in another series - Ray, Fed, Jon to name 3

Good ole Jon Tickle, the kind of contestant i miss. And he did get a decent little show of the back of it too. For every Jade Goody type of BB fame there is the Jon Tickle types that i really appreciated.

I was in and out of that series, also i disliked him in The Apprentice so i was not willing to give him a chance in BB which i now know was silly

I heard he came across better on BB than the The Apprentice so kudos to him as he sure is a guy with the right ingredents for TV shows like these.

It varies from series to series.

I'm glad nice guy (but dull) Sam won BB14 because he stopped Dexter or Gina from winning.

But I'm glad Bear won last night over the nice but dull Ricky.

That series was maybe my favourite of the Ch5 years, the housemates and the goings on in that house was so good that i did not care who won by the end but yes Sam may have been the perfect winner as a pin point for the characters that was in the house.

I suppose it's what is perceived as a baddie. Sam was a nice guy winner and the anti Ginxter vote but I wouldn't put Gina or Dexter in the baddies category compared to the likes of Bear, Helen, etc.

If the choice is as stark as boring nice guy vs complete a***hole then nice guy every time. CBB15 was a little like that - KP was hardly a deserving winner, but she'd been nice enough - in the house at least - and I was delighted she prevented the Hopkins taking the prize. (Actually it's probably the only winning announcement which has made me laugh out loud.)

Niceness is not the only factor by any means though. I'd have preferred Ricky winning to Bear, but that doesn't change the fact that he was a rubbish HM who didn't even have a proper go at the tasks. If a generally decent HM happens to have a bit of a temper or is a bit devious that's doesn't really matter if they're worth watching. In CBB17 I'd have preferred Tiffany to win over Darren (but either over Scotty T - I'm not convinced he scores brilliantly on either count).

In this case Bear was too unpleasant for me to want him to win, but he was also really tiresome. He only made me laugh twice in the whole series and only one of those was deliberate (impersonating Lewis waving the shampoo bottle at Marnie), which is not great considering he was scarcely off camera for four weeks.

I really liked Tania from BB4, she had a nice mix of wit, cynicism and complete shallowness

I would like to see nice guy winners unfortunately nowadays being nice doesn't get you anywhere.

Those are two stark contrasts. Real people are usually somewhere in between. Can't we have some of those, please?

Naïve in the extreme

Indeed, its whoever is able to convince people to vote multiple times. The reasons may be many and varied but the voters will be as gullible as hell.

I agree, both are everything that's wrong with BB in different ways. We can have winners who are nice people but aren't boring - see Sophie Reade, James Hill, Rylan. I'd rather someone who was entertaining, but not someone horrible like Bear or Helen because I don't find that entertaining. My favourites tend to end up 3rd or 4th, the sort of housemates I usually love are Tiffany, Renee, Gina, Ashleigh for example.