IMHO - BB Voting fixed?

3 of 3

Veri

12-09-2016

Originally Posted by Xuri:
“Isn't the point more that he was less likely to have won if they had shown the others more?

I think you're looking at it bass ackwards. There was enough for people to decide whether they liked him or not but not enough for people to decide on any of the other HMs. They then ensured the anti-Bear vote was always split.

The complaint about the edit, for many I think, isn't that it showed him favourably. It's that it meant we didn't get a feel for any of the others.”

I don't agree. I barely watched any of it, but I still knew enough to decide about other HMs; and when it was down to two at the end, it was completely obvious who to vote for to "stop Bear".

Originally Posted by Menk:
“Oh yes it's possible - I said I entirely get that argument and that I'm not decided.

I didn't watch the BB you're referring to so thanks for that. It reminds me of a previous BB when a girl got injured during a task and was on crutches for the rest of her time in the house. It helps the narrative to show such events as it explains any absence / signs of injury.

I just don't think you always have to jump to the sinister / conspiracy explanation when there are other options - for example I have already put forward the time constraint explanation. I suppose I think that if they had shown it, all the Bear detractors would have been up in arms, and the Bear fans would just have shrugged it off - it would hardly have changed anyone's view.

I don't think this was the worst thing that Bear did in the house - although it did have the most unfortunate conclusion. They did not shy away from showing some of his other awful behaviour and winding the other HMs up to the point of distraction. I totally agree that he was favoured in the share of the airtime he got, but I think we got a pretty good idea of what he was all about - the content of the HL show was never flattering.”

Vanessa bb6? (Though I don't think she was on crutches for quite that long.)

In any case, if a HM was on crutches for the rest of their time in the house, that's obviously much more significant than something that affects the HM for only a few hours.

Salv*

13-09-2016

Originally Posted by Veri:
“Oh? Lots of people thought it was to save Lisa. Otherwise, it would have been vote to evict (they said).

I can see an argument that it was to save Bea, since she and Marcus had the most nominations that week -- but why would BB want to save Bea in particular? BB didn't indulge in mechanism gymnastics the week after, when Freddie went; or the next week, when it was Bea; or the week after that, when Marcus went. Why would BB go do such lengths to save Bea in week 9, but not (it seems) care at all about keeping Freddie, Bea, or Marcus after that?

I think a more likely explanation is that BB thought of trying an "everyone up" punishment, but then thought (perhaps having learned from bb7), "what if a big character goes?" and so decided to make it vote-to-save. Then it wouldn't be to save any big character in particular.”

First of all..A few people say Lisa, but I don't see why they'd want to keep her at that point. She wasn't at that point providing any storylines apart from the odd run-ins with Marcus. That week, she had calmed down quite a bit. It would make sense saving Lisa during the first 5 weeks because she was one of the public "enemies" for being against Freddie, but then calmed down (then it erupted again with that task when they were all dressed up, which IMO lead to Freddie's demise), but that didn't happen until a week later (or was it two?).

I think they were saving Bea because during that week she was at her most unpopular. They saw an opportunity on getting rid of an invisible character. And that week there were numerous calls for BB to make it a VTS (there was on TiBB anyway) and surprisingly, they actually did it. Sure, I don't think it was because they saw the campaign on TiBB. She was marmite, she was extremely unpopular, but the people who liked her, really wanted her to survive hence why they wanted them to make it a VTS. The reason they didn't do it later on is IMO because after Hira's eviction, there was no real "invisible" HM and everyone had some sort of storyline to play, so felt they could afford to lose any HM at that point? But with Hira being there, they thought "hey, lets sacrifice her" because "what has she really contributed?"

It was a mix of that and learning from their "all up" mistake from BB7 when Nikki went in my opinion.

They wanted to milk the situation between Bea and Freddie.

3 of 3