Dick said a load of horrible stuff in private last year 'just for laughs'. He was just as bad as these two (I would actually say worse) and IMHO the 'gameplaying' excuse just doesn't wash for him.

Yeah true, but a lot of the time Dick's was for strategy which can clearly be seen, for example the week he tried to make everyone hate him so that Danielle would stay.

What would happen would be that they be called to the DR and be given a ticking off. Then they'd go off on one at the target of their riducule saying they had grassed to BB

I'm not watching the live feeds, so maybe I am missing something, but I'm not sure where the difference is?

Dick says he is going to make Jen crack and force her to leave, and that's strategy and perfectly ok, but when Josh and Chelsea say it, it's not?

Dick deliberately says some pretty nasty stuff to Amber before the competitions to put her off her stride, and that's strategy, where as when J & C say they are going to put Amanda off, it's not?

What am I missing?

Dick is every bit as bad as Josh and Chelsia, if not worse.

And maybe Dick is a factor in why Josh and Chelsia are behaving like this at all, they saw how he behaved last year and how it worked out for him in the end, I think it's plausible that they're just following by his example since it helped Dick win the game and develop a strong fanbase. And whether bullying and intimidation is for strategy or not, it doesn't make it better either way.

Theres a world of difference between attacking someones personality and using a close relatives death to taunt and crack a hm up.
Especially with Amandas father commiting suicide just 2 years ago,IMO this situation is nothing like dicks reign of agressive play.

Not very plausable.
Do you see Chelsia and Josh attacking anyone else in the house?
Bullying tactics of one sort or another has constantly been a theme of the show...look at howie towards april,eric towards michael etc.

Threatening to rape someone anally until they bleed is a bit more than attacking someone's personality though isn't it?

Totally different, Josh and Chelsia haven't done any of this for strategy. Making nasty little comments about Amanda just to each other, that isn't part of the game, that's just making sick comments to have a laugh about.

When Dick attacked Amber for having a drug problem in the past he did it because he knew it would effect her and take her head out of the game. He also wanted to be hated because he wanted to go home so that his daughter would stay.

When Dick attacked Jen that was the only time when it wasn't for strategy and he went too far, but never as far as Chelsia and James bringing a relatives death into it.

let me ask did you believe dick would have carried that threat out?
do you believe jen believed he would carry it out?
Is that any worse than some of the things said on bbuk?

Sorry but if your asking me whats worse then Id say what chelsia and josh said and did with the mimic hanging actions is a world away from some things other hms have said including dick.

Really? I thought the whole initial confrontation around the hot tub where Josh first let rip at Amanda and said the initial noose comment was all done for strategy. He even said so in the DR (that he did it in order to get the rest of the house to go against her).


I can understand that, but again, I would say that this is no different to what Dick did. He often would make sick comments about other HMs when in one on one situations with Daniel, or other HMs he was aligned with at the time.


No, I'm not asking which is worse because I totally agree that what they are saying is dispicable. I'm asking why, when Dick said and did the things he did, it is excused as being ok because it was just 'strategy', where as when C & J say stuff, it's not.

Like I said, I haven't been watching the live feeds, so do not know all that has gone on, or the context, but from what has been written in this thread, I don't see much difference between them making the comments they have and the kind of things Dick would say about people in private, and to their faces. Hence why I'm asking.

Josh & Chelsia are employing the EXACT same strategy as Dick last year, its just that Dick was better than them at it.

Dick could really get under peoples skin and really exterminate their personalities, whereas the only really way Josh & Chelsia know how to do this with Amanda is by pushing the buttons with her Dad's suicide.

Dick wasn't actually all that different, because the only HG he couldnt intimidate (Jen), was that he singled-out and bullied in a much more brutal and relentless way than J & C have shown so far with Amanda. He didnt go as far as to mock a fathers death, but she never gave him the ammunition, and overall I think he was much more of a bully than either Josh or Chelsia have been.

Absolutely. I find it bizarre that any one is saying otherwise. It's OK if you wound up being a fan of Dick and respected how he played the game or whatever, but for whatever reason you don't feel the same about Chelsia & Josh - but to try paint one as 'better' or more acceptable than the other is just daft.

I was never a huge Evel Dick fan, I supported Jen in Season 8 but I can see the differences in what Dick was doing and what Chelsia and Josh are doing.

People were saying what Josh and Chelsia are doing is game, but it's really not, making sick comments to each other and laughing about it, that's not game because they are saying it behind Amanda's back so how is that going to effect her? It's just to make Josh and Chelsia feel better and have a laugh at the expense of the girl's dead father.

There is no game in this years house full stop!

But that's exactly the same as with Dick. They have said things right to her face as much as behind her back. Dick said things behind peoples backs as much as Chelsia and Josh are doing. Both have said things equally as vile.

There is no difference in their actions, if people are perceiving it and judging it differently that is their prerogative - but there's no actual difference.