[the truth]

Meanwhile, Chloe admits she’s had her own brushes with the law and has been in a string of fights on boozy nights out.

The office administrator even spent a night in the cells with her best mate after they falsely accused a taxi driver of kidnapping them.

She said: “We were sick in a taxi and it was like £36 to get the sick cleaned up, but we were paralytic and we didn’t have the money, so the taxi driver stopped in the middle of nowhere.

“I rang 999 and pretended that he’d abducted us when he hadn’t.

“We were so drunk and wetting ourselves so bad – you know when you are with your friend and know you shouldn’t be laughing?”

Chloe, who is in a relationship , said police were going to give them a chance but lost patience when they couldn’t stop giggling.

The Benidorm obsessive has been hailed as one of the few “normal” people in this year’s series of BB.

CLASSY , 1 NIGHT FOR FALSE ACCUSATION OF A HARD WORKING MAN, WASTING POLICE EMERGECNY CALL OUTS TOO, TRYING A FEW YEARS YOU BITCH

[abhorson]

Sounds like she thought that was a good night out. GS would have been a more apt show for her.

[just thinkin]

If its not got to do with bb show dont post it here. Nobody cares

[sampvt]

I reported this about her weeks ago and nobody believed me. She and all her family are scum and well known in Donny for drugs, violence and shady dealings.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by just thinkin

If its not got to do with bb show dont post it here. Nobody cares

don't speak for everyone...some people DO care about a person who wastes police emergency , spews in a taxi , fails to pay the bill and falsely accuses a working man of kidnapping her ...disgusting

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by the truth

don't speak for everyone...some people DO care about a person who wastes police emergency , spews in a taxi , fails to pay the bill and falsely accuses a working man of kidnapping her ...disgusting

Aye. Now we can see why she has this nasty side coming out.

[ThriceShy]

According to some on here, you have to judge people for only what they do in the house.

It doesn't matter if they are rapists/tories/hitler outside of the house.

Chloe is vile. But to be fair, we found that out in the house with her blind support of helen.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by sampvt

I reported this about her weeks ago and nobody believed me. She and all her family are scum and well known in Donny for drugs, violence and shady dealings.

She was not being nasty then like she is now. Many can see it now.

[RodHull]

Hated her from day 1 hate her stupid face her stupid voice her stupid crying whenever shes starts an argument she cant win, and to boot shes a boring ****er

[Jack_]

I am certainly no fan of Chloe's and as a person her actions in the house these last few days have taken her down massively as far as I'm concerned, but again, what housemates do outside of the house is of no relevance to their time on the show. The point of this programme is to judge the housemates based upon their actions inside the television studio, not outside of it.

[Suze]

Originally Posted by just thinkin

If its not got to do with bb show dont post it here. Nobody cares

If that is a news article posted up and it reads like one, it mentions both Chloe and BB in it, so it can be posted up.

[ThriceShy]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I am certainly no fan of Chloe's and as a person her actions in the house these last few days have taken her down massively as far as I'm concerned, but again, what housemates do outside of the house is of no relevance to their time on the show. The point of this programme is to judge the housemates based upon their actions inside the television studio, not outside of it.

What if their actions are criminal outside the house?

And can you accept that people might want to judge on different things than you do?

I don't agree that the point of the programme is to solely judge them on what goes on inside the house. If that were true then why, for example, were cameras sent to carole's house in BB8 and the resulting video played to the house to show that she wasn't really a clean freak outside of the house?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

What if their actions are criminal outside the house?

And can you accept that people might want to judge on different things than you do?

I don't agree that the point of the programme is to solely judge them on what goes on inside the house. If that were true then why, for example, were cameras sent to carole's house in BB8 and the resulting video played to the house to show that she wasn't really a clean freak outside of the house?

If their actions were of a serious criminal offence then I don't think the producers would have casted them quite frankly. I am most certainly not about to be drawn out into a discussion of this incident because it would go against everything I'm saying but I will make one point - yes it absolutely sounds abhorrent and she should have been prosecuted for it. However, it is now irrelevant to her actions on a TV show that we're watching for 48 minutes a night. With a few exceptions, if someone has committed a crime and has served their sentence, that is it, they should be entitled to do pretty much whatever they like (again, with a few exceptions), and that includes taking part in a TV show.

Yes I can, and you're going to have to accept that I think it's irrelevant, unnecessary, obsessive and petty to do so.

Because they wanted to show Carole up and start an argument inside the house? I don't remember this incident but clearly the point of this wasn't to make the viewers go 'ew Carole what a dirty bitch at home get her out!!!!!!' because we aren't living with her, not at home nor in the Big Brother house, all that matters is her actions inside the television studio that is the house on the television show that is Big Brother. Nothing else.

[marlobrando2]

Gave Jack zero pounds in the endurance task then discouraged him from taking the phone call from his Dad. Spiteful she is.She needs to go.

[REDCROP]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

According to some on here, you have to judge people for only what they do in the house.

It doesn't matter if they are rapists/tories/hitler outside of the house.

Chloe is vile. But to be fair, we found that out in the house with her blind support of helen.

Im so glad someone else agrees about the Helen and Chloe thing....the very fact that she regarded Helen as her best female friend in the house and ignorantly could find no fault in her because she always treated her ok ....i'm sure the friends of the London Tube bombers said the same thing...
It is so totally selfish to accept the abuse of others in front of your very own eyes yet have no care because it's not aimed at yourself...AMAZING ...Simon also said the exact same thing....and HE TRULY was an abomination...just a vile awful little weasel with eyes like a **** house rat.
SHE'S A HORROR...A TRUE HORROR

[REDCROP]

Originally Posted by ThriceShy

Another question springs to mind....

If we are meant to judge them on their actions in the house, then why were we invited to vote for them on the opening night, before we saw them do anything?

And jack was initially voted the winner before we had seen anything of him in the house.

You seem to have made up this rule and demand that 1 million viewers adhere to it.

Reality check.......they don't.

I AGREE...if I'm giving my money over to someone, i appreciate being warned beforehand if they are a racist or a gay basher or violent ....those people do not deserve anyones help in winning such an amazing prize, no matter how convincingly decent they perform in the BB house

Ask yourselves which you found the more shocking...the bad taste joke that Marc, very naively, said to Chloe in the first few minutes he was in the house ...

or Chloes knee jerk reaction to a total stranger she had just met...when she screamed threatening abuse at him before hurling a glass across the room in his the direction....for me, i knew what she was in that very moment and i never changed my opinion again...and of course she would relate to Helen Wood, no question

[bitontheslide]

Her character outside the show is very relevant when she is pretending to be something she is not on the show. Its very simple. Same with Danny, they are a right pair.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Her character outside the show is very relevant when she is pretending to be something she is not on the show. Its very simple. Same with Danny, they are a right pair.

Housemates are perfectly entitled to put on a persona. It is a gameshow. All that's important is whether or not that persona actually contributes anything to the show. It's very simple.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Housemates are perfectly entitled to put on a persona. It is a gameshow. All that's important is whether or not that persona actually contributes anything to the show. It's very simple.

thats your opinion, not mine. In a similar way to that girl last year pretending to be a religious virgin, when she was a cam girl. Its very relevant

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

thats your opinion, not mine. In a similar way to that girl last year pretending to be a religious virgin, when she was a cam girl. Its very relevant

But it's not an opinion...because housemates can, do and have put on personas, because it is a gameshow.

That was hilarious an example of a persona done well, when it's messy and pathetic <3

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Her character outside the show is very relevant when she is pretending to be something she is not on the show. Its very simple. Same with Danny, they are a right pair.

..but it's not as if they can 'pretend' though, isn't that the thing..like Danielle last year as well as you mentioned, they're all completely savvy to the workings of BB/reality TV and know exactly that the public will know these things about them so in a way are not pretending anything...

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Jack_

But it's not an opinion...because housemates can, do and have put on personas, because it is a gameshow.

That was hilarious an example of a persona done well, when it's messy and pathetic <3

Of course its an opinion. How I choose to view the show and evaluate characters is up to me, not anyone else. If I think she is trying to scam the public, and there is evidence available to support it. I want to know it, and it will be relevant to ME when I decide if someone is being fake or not

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Jack_

It isn't an opinion. I said that housemates are perfectly entitled to create a persona in the gameshow that is Big Brother, you said that is my opinion, but the fact is that housemates can, do and have created personas inside the house, so it's not an opinion that 'they're entitled to', they are. They aren't ejected by Big Brother for doing so, so therefore it's not against the rules and they're entitled to do it. And they do. Which is a fact.



You have got to be kidding, right? I'm probably the person on this forum the most who spends my days criticising the dullards, arguing they contribute nothing to the show and need to be gotten rid of, and supporting the big characters despite how much hate they get for being 'arseholes'.

I'd suggest taking a look at my profile favourites to see exactly what I mean.

We can go round in circles all day if you like

You cannot dictate to me how I choose to view the show and evaluate the house mates. How I chose to evaluate them is based on my own principles, not yours or anyone elses


So please do not state as fact something that clearly isn't

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

We can go round in circles all day if you like

You cannot dictate to me how I choose to view the show and evaluate the house mates. How I chose to evaluate them is based on my own principles, not yours or anyone elses


So please do not state as fact something that clearly isn't

We aren't talking about how you choose to evaluate them, we're talking about whether the housemates are entitled to put on a persona inside the house, which as I have already explained, they are. Whether or not you agree with them doing so is up to you (although quite frankly it's a bit silly to take issue with it, it's a gameshow and the main issue is whether the persona is entertaining and contributes anything to the show or not), but on the issue of whether they are entitled and allowed to create a persona inside the house, it is factual that they are. Because they can, do and have. And Big Brother hasn't ejected them, because it isn't against the rules.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Jack_

We aren't talking about how you choose to evaluate them, we're talking about whether the housemates are entitled to put on a persona inside the house, which as I have already explained, they are. Whether or not you agree with them doing so is up to you (although quite frankly it's a bit silly to take issue with it, it's a gameshow and the main issue is whether the persona is entertaining and contributes anything to the show or not), but on the issue of whether they are entitled and allowed to create a persona inside the house, it is factual that they are. Because they can, do and have. And Big Brother hasn't ejected them, because it isn't against the rules.

I don't know how many times I can say it. The views you have expressed are your opinion on how the show should be watched. Its not fact or anything even approaching it. Its fine for you to adopt that stance, but its applicable to you, not me, and therefore its not a universal fact.