BB protects Lisa AGAIN!

[KitCarson]

BB have found new ways to keep their proper villain in the house week after week, ignoring her rule breaking, nomination fixing, and aggressive behavior.

This 'vote to save' is just another way to keep her in.

How about this: give them what they deserve and let her win. This low rent program deserves an equally low rent winner. Forget your personal favorites and stick BB with a vile, chain smoking, lazy, low IQ hag as their champion. Maybe then they'll regret their blatant manipulation.

[Oooo_get_her]

Scuse me for pointing out the rather obvious... but if BB had wanted an even MORE sure fire way of keeping Lisa in another week would they not have just left the Bea and Marcus nominations stand?

I don't understand how having her up for eviction against everyone is a more sure way of keeping her in the house than NOT having her up for eviction at all.

Perhaps you can explain it to my feeble mind? :whistle:

[BB22]

If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

[Rob]

im sure this would be better in the lisa forum :whistle:

[HELLIWONTGO]

I agree with all that you have posted, alas the makers of BB only know or care about 1 thing, alas thatis money, although they will be making far less this year than they normally do
I think if Lisa (the geezer) were to win that would be the end of the show
I know some of the h/mates can be regarded as eccentric (I am being tactful here) but imagine a house full of chavs!!!

[BB22]

It is entirely unreasonable to agree with the claim that "This 'vote to save' is just another way to keep her in" since that claim is entirely inconsistent with the freely available facts.

[ihatefax]

i think that it puts lisa more at risk coz i think people will vote more for hira and david to stay rather than lisa..?

[KitCarson]

Sorry about this being in the wrong forum--I wasn't paying attention.

IMO, Siavash backed BB into a corner with his refusal to nominate. If they put him up as punishment, he wins, and that's bad for them. They had to find a way to stop him from doing that in the future, thus the 'everyone's up' punishment.

However, if they'd left it a regular vote to evict process, Lisa would be gone, gone, and gone--no doubt about it. The answer? Vote to save. Lisa may be the most hated, but that doesn't mean she has the fewest fans--that distinction belongs to the minor characters like Hira.

It was strategically brilliant!

[mazzz]

Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

[RtooDee2]

Because its vote to save then i cant see many people ringing her number.
I would be amazed if she stays, but i actually think she gona walk out before the eviction.
She knows her time is up.

[Tom]

Loads of people always ask for vote to save when the whole house is up to cull the dull so whats the problem?

[BB22]

Originally posted by mazzz
Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

Now hold on a sec... the "vote to save" is simply one aspect of a wider punishment imposed by Big Brother, a punishment which they chose to impose. If they imposed no punishment Lisa was completely safe, as Marcus and Bea would have faced the public vote. And that is why the claim makes no sense.

It is simply unreasonable to state that BB are "protecting" Lisa by forcing her to face the public vote, which is effectively what the initial argument says.

It really "doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out".

QED.

[KitCarson]

Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by mazzz
Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

Now hold on a sec... the "vote to save" is simply one aspect of a wider punishment imposed by Big Brother, a punishment which they chose to impose. If they imposed no punishment Lisa was completely safe, as Marcus and Bea would have faced the public vote. And that is why the claim makes no sense.

They had to impose a punishment that would stop Siavash from refusing to nominate week after week. Simply putting him up for eviction each time he refused would have been doing exactly what he wanted them to do, so that choice was off the table. Putting everyone up was the one punishment that would make Siavash feel the worst and get him back in line.

But it put their villain at risk, so their vote to save twist was the one thing that would protect Lisa while still punishing Siavash.

[BB22]

Originally posted by KitCarson
Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by mazzz
Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

Now hold on a sec... the "vote to save" is simply one aspect of a wider punishment imposed by Big Brother, a punishment which they chose to impose. If they imposed no punishment Lisa was completely safe, as Marcus and Bea would have faced the public vote. And that is why the claim makes no sense.

They had to impose a punishment that would stop Siavash from refusing to nominate week after week. Simply putting him up for eviction each time he refused would have been doing exactly what he wanted them to do, so that choice was off the table. Putting everyone up was the one punishment that would make Siavash feel the worst and get him back in line.

But it put their villain at risk, so their vote to save twist was the one thing that would protect Lisa while still punishing Siavash.

Yes, they had to impose a punishment.

But since the initial thesis is that BB are protecting Lisa, the fact that the actual punishment they chose to impose removes her from a situation of complete safety and puts her in one where she may be evicted quite simply outright refutes your initial thesis.

I am afraid you have got yourself in a complete tangle.

Put even more simply: removing her from a situation of complete safety and forcing her to face the vote simply cannot be interpreted as protecting her.

[vladicus]

get lisa out and her gang will follow

[KitCarson]

Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by KitCarson
Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by mazzz
Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

Now hold on a sec... the "vote to save" is simply one aspect of a wider punishment imposed by Big Brother, a punishment which they chose to impose. If they imposed no punishment Lisa was completely safe, as Marcus and Bea would have faced the public vote. And that is why the claim makes no sense.

They had to impose a punishment that would stop Siavash from refusing to nominate week after week. Simply putting him up for eviction each time he refused would have been doing exactly what he wanted them to do, so that choice was off the table. Putting everyone up was the one punishment that would make Siavash feel the worst and get him back in line.

But it put their villain at risk, so their vote to save twist was the one thing that would protect Lisa while still punishing Siavash.

Yes, they had to impose a punishment.javascript:italicize()

But since the initial thesis is that BB are protecting Lisa, the fact that the actual punishment they chose to impose removes her from a situation of complete safety and puts her in one where she may be evicted quite simply outright refutes your initial thesis.

I am afraid you have got yourself in a complete tangle.

Put even more simply: removing her from a situation of complete safety and forcing her to face the vote simply cannot be interpreted as protecting her.

Agreed, but you're leaving out an important part of the initial argument. They did not simply "remove her from a situation of safety and force her to face the vote." They were left with no choice but to put her (and everyone else) at risk, but then successfully devised a way to negate that risk.

[BB22]

Originally posted by KitCarson
Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by KitCarson
Originally posted by BB22
Originally posted by mazzz
Originally posted by BB22
If BB had not imposed the punishment, Lisa would not even be up for eviction, so I cannot see how their action has "saved" her.

As Lisa is the most hated hm on the outside, the vote to save will give her a chance to stay. If it had been a straight forward vote to evict, they know that she is a certainty. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Also she was up a couple of weeks ago and because of a rule break , she was not up. Don't hear her complaining bout that!

Now hold on a sec... the "vote to save" is simply one aspect of a wider punishment imposed by Big Brother, a punishment which they chose to impose. If they imposed no punishment Lisa was completely safe, as Marcus and Bea would have faced the public vote. And that is why the claim makes no sense.

They had to impose a punishment that would stop Siavash from refusing to nominate week after week. Simply putting him up for eviction each time he refused would have been doing exactly what he wanted them to do, so that choice was off the table. Putting everyone up was the one punishment that would make Siavash feel the worst and get him back in line.

But it put their villain at risk, so their vote to save twist was the one thing that would protect Lisa while still punishing Siavash.

Yes, they had to impose a punishment.javascript:italicize()

But since the initial thesis is that BB are protecting Lisa, the fact that the actual punishment they chose to impose removes her from a situation of complete safety and puts her in one where she may be evicted quite simply outright refutes your initial thesis.

I am afraid you have got yourself in a complete tangle.

Put even more simply: removing her from a situation of complete safety and forcing her to face the vote simply cannot be interpreted as protecting her.

Agreed, but you're leaving out an important part of the initial argument. They did not simply "remove her from a situation of safety and force her to face the vote." They were left with no choice but to put her (and everyone else) at risk, but then successfully devised a way to negate that risk.

No, that is simply not correct. They were not "left with no choice but to put her (and everyone else) at risk". There were innumerable other punishments they could have devised, targeting Marcus and Siavash specifically. We can only speculate as to why they chose this particular move but the fact remains this punishment does not "protect Lisa", it places her in danger of being evicted.

[TrafficoneMan]

i dont think the ""Vote To Save"" has anything to do with Lisa i just think around this stage of the show BB like to do this so they know were everyone stands with the public .

[KitCarson]

Alas, I feel we will continue to disagree, but I honestly enjoy the exchange of ideas.

It's early in the day here, and I appreciate your making me stretch my sluggish brain cells a bit. Cheers!

[Shasown]

And all the extra money generated by a vote to save would never have entered the BB teams head.

I would say if anyone has engineered Lisa staying in the house (if she does stay in the house) it was Freddie with his"the public Love me" rant.

[Smugington]

I actually think it's likely that Rodrigo could go this week, I can't see many people picking up the phone and voting for that freak.

[nickc25]

I agree in part but only slightly. I can see what you are saying though.

If it was a vote to evict Lisa would be a massive clear winner but vote to save always throws things up

[Patrick]

Thats bullshit, why would they put the whole house up!

They would of just let Bea and Marcus go head to head!

And they know by vote to save Lisa will go anyway!

[AhmedFan2004]

Lisa staying on Friday, Halfwit's cocky smug deluded grin dissapearing, and watching Team Smug having their faces laughed at in response ... gold. :spin2: