Now that we can agree on.

James was robbed!

But in a sense, I feel that he was discarded for the same reasons Lucinda was - for being a bit different, for being softly spoken, for being a gent (Lucinda is a true lady), for being a bit posh and for being well-off.

Her performance throughout the series, her inability to prioritise tasks, her inability to see the team's priorities over her own, her non-existent skill set, her self-indulgent behaviour, her self-absorption, her inability to reply sensibly to questions, her deluded conversation in general, her inability to be concise or identify issues.

What about a pair of fishnets instead?

I agree completely about James Max, he was an all round great guy and true gent. Lucinda is not a true lady, otherwise she wouldn't have been a saboteur on a number of occasions or have such a self-absorbed view of the world.

Now you're talking

You don't seem to be able to spell "intelligent, self possesed and with a first class business brain".

You've used waaaay too many letters.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one!

This much, at least, we can agree upon.

Naah, Vivid is just plain wrong.

I don't know why you have such a blind spot about Lucinda, there must be something that is causing you to ignore her childish tantrums, immature behaviour and general ineptness.

I think Vivid's a female Alex fan.

We get the message - you don't like her so can you please give it a rest now?

But don't you even understand that very often good management appears to be no management? Particularly if you have a team of good people and you are clever enough to let each play to their strengths?

Don't you think it's more than coincidence that her PM tasks were both examples of this? Well, I don't suppose you do, but then you are probably in that archaic mindset that says that "good" managers tell people what to do and tear them off a strip if they don't . Quite a lot of the world has come a long way since then, you know!

That's the beauty of Reality TV. Viewers perceive contestants very differently. It would be boring if we all championed the same people. And this forum wouldn't last two minutes if that was the case!

I saw the childish tantrums you cite as the result of pure frustration on Lucinda's behalf when her pig-headed team-mates simply would not listen to her ideas or took credit for them when they were blatantly hers.

She was not faultless, but she was by far my favourite.

Well, if you want to include a former industrial research scientist with an IQ of 163 then go ahead, but since you are the only person I've seen who holds that view and you are the opposite of me and I'm the one whose IQ stands at 163 (yeah yeah, I know, for whatever that's worth! Not a lot I think) - which end of that spectrum would you say you were on? If you can work that one out, there's hope for you yet...

Vivid should apply next year.

Female?

Does that come under the heading of personal attack on the poster - like suggesting that "Psychotic" should change their monicker to "Psycopath"? (as I did once, and was attacked for the suggestion- although it was a pretty good one.

Hmmmm...... on one IQ test I scored a 170 but I am prepared to admit that was unusual and not representative.............. usually I score much higher

I suspect Vivid has a passion for grey rivalled only by his/her passion for George Bush and the status quo (and I don't mean the aging pop group!)

And you still think you are right and everyone else is wrong? I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Truly intelligent people are able to see more than one side of an argument, whereas you have not demostrated this ability. I would even go so far as to say that you've probably rounded up your IQ score not just to the nearest 10 but to the nearest 170 (I hope that's not too subtle for you ).

Just for clarification, I am male, 6' with black hair and large athletic build ( I must tone this stomach some more) and I intensely dislike George cowboy Bush and I like to listen to song birds and walk across mountains and press wild flowers....... ok not all of that is true.

He wouldn't make it past an initial reading of his application.

No one could hide the serious issues he has and they would be a major liability to the production company.

Plus, of course, it's difficult to read an application written in crayon. (No sharp objects d'ys'see?)

Chavvy slag.

I have to agree with a lot of this.

actually, I think Lucinda has been treated quite shamefully throughout the series, made an outcast because she's a true individual and doesn't fit into the mainstream business culture represented by her fellow candidates. Last weeks episode, when she was doing the car task with Alex and Lee, was a fine example of this - they basically hung Lucinda out to dry, so that should they have lost the task they would have been able to blame it on her in the boardroom.

Many of her suggestions were ignored (although the homosexual tissues idea was indeed silly - but she has been treated unfairly over this, as by no means is she the only candidate ever to put forward a ridiculous suggestion), or even usurped - the raffle thing in the car task for example.

And I quite agree that it reflects badly on Sir Alan that he found her unemployable because of her difference

She doesn't earn £100,000 a year because she's useless, as some people have tried to say she is, and I found the fact that she's not motivated by money to be an absolute breath of fresh air, when contrasted with the grasping backstabbers' who form the indenti-kit Apprentice candidate.

I hope Lucinda goes on to better things, and enjoys her life after the Apprentice - she certainly added a new dimension to this years' series, and I wish her every success for the future