Why? [SPOILER]

[Beastie]

Please BB! :( Put 3 or more housemates with the most votes up!! Only 2 people up is a crock of ****!!

[DrunkerThanMoses]

Because they got the most nominations Madam X

[Beastie]

Because they got the most nominations Madam X

3 or more housemates with the most votes... GIVES US MORE CHOICE.

[Kate!]

It would be good though if they always put a minimum of 3 up, more interesting.

[Beastie]

It would be good though if they always put a minimum of 3 up, more interesting.

True. Deana had to choose 3 housemates to be up for the first eviction so why not 3 or more housemates for the 2nd eviction? :( A vote to SAVE is just pointless with only 2 people up!

[thesheriff443]

threesome anyone.lol

[Marc]

This thread title is a spoiler, it tells people that there are only 2 people up for eviction.

[iRyan]

What if Lydia or someone else good received the 3rd most votes tho?

[Roy Mars III]

should be three

[Jordan.]

Annoys me when they reveal who got the most votes so no.

[Jords]

3+ is better, more exciting!

[Josy]

3+ works better with the vote to save.

[Jack_]

I've always thought it should be three minimum, I hate head-to-heads, there's more scope for the series-wreckers to hijack everything.

[Mystic Mock]

I would like more up aswell as it means Chris would definitely go through this week as he'd beat Arron in a three or four way.

But taking away bias for a moment here I thought the whole point of a vote to save was to save the entertainers? sticking them up in one on ones against dullards is not going to save them.

[armand.kay]

I prefer head to head evictions they are always more dramatic.

[Jordan.]

I prefer head to head evictions they are always more dramatic.

[2]

It makes it harder to call, especially when it's two big characters like this week.