Vote to SAVE or EVICT - what makes a better show?

[Robodog]

Personally i think vote to EVICT ruins the show. It means all the bigger characters get voted out. Which is why BB has to keep doing all these twists just to keep the big characters in.

For example - If you look at Housemate popularity polls then Jade has been in the top 3 all week.

So last night if it was Vote to SAVE then Jade would have stayed and probably Harry would have gone as she is not especially loved or hated.

If Marc was up for eviction - he would go, as he is disliked by half the viewers. But if it was vote to SAVE - he would stay, as he liked by the other half.

It's the LOVE/HATE characters that make the show. They need to stay!

Vote to SAVE works in the celeb BB - why not do it for civilian?

What do you think?

[VanessaFeltz.]

Personally i think vote to EVICT ruins the show. It means all the bigger characters get voted out. Which is why BB has to keep doing all these twists just to keep the big characters in.

For example - If you look at Housemate popularity polls then Jade has been in the top 3 all week.

So last night if it was Vote to SAVE then Jade would have stayed and probably Harry would have gone as she is not especially loved or hated.

If Marc was up for eviction - he would go, as he is disliked by half the viewers. But if it was vote to SAVE - he would stay, as he liked by the other half.

It's the LOVE/HATE characters that make the show. They need to stay!

Vote to SAVE works in the celeb BB - why not do it for civilian?

What do you think?

Perez got less votes than michelle pricey calum and keith soo it doesnt

[Robodog]

Perez got less votes than michelle pricey calum and keith soo it doesnt

Yeah but that was for the winner. No one wanted Perez to win but most people agreed he should stay for entertainment up to that point.

[joeysteele]

I have always preferred vote to save,simply because, usually we come to support housemates that become our favourites.
In vote to evict for a whole series, we can do little in evictions involving 3 or more,to do anything for those we like.
With vote to save, their supporters can then really get behind them and vote for them and thereby bring about a better result, in my view.

Vote to evict just brings negativity for me,with organised voting to get someone out.

[JoshBB]

Vote to save keeps bigger characters in, but it's harder to get out bullies (eg. helen), and also it makes more sense that if we are voting people out to be voting to evict.

[Jack_]

Vote to save, but it only works when many housemates are up, two or even three and it's just a reverse vote to evict. To be quite honest noms barely happen anymore so I think they should just put all housemates up every week and have a rolling vote to save, it'd increase competition between fans, keep the best characters in and probably generate a lot of revenue.

If you do anything under a vote to evict, you're as good as gone. There's no way Jade would have gone anywhere a few days ago since she'd faded into the background, but she gets a storyline with Brian and the argument with Cristian and off she goes. It's so counter productive.

[abhorson]

Evict. Has was proven with Jade.

[Jack_]

Also vote to evict make the show even nastier than it already is and just festers negativity, it's bad enough every series without it being amplified tbh

[Liam-]

Vote to save, I much prefer voting to keep my favourite in rather than voting to get someone I dislike out

[MB.]

Vote to save for a better show, but both usually have their issues when it comes to keeping my favourites in (i.e. I tend to support people who are either generally disliked or completely under the radar)

[mrflibble]

I hate vote to save, I only like it for the winner. I like vote to evict, but it hasn't worked well the last few series because of crappy housemates and ridiculous manipulation (editing and who ends up actually up for eviction)

[Robodog]

Vote to save keeps bigger characters in, but it's harder to get out bullies (eg. helen), and also it makes more sense that if we are voting people out to be voting to evict.

If there was genuine 'bullying' then BB would remove that person.

I don't like how the word 'bullying' is overused as it detracts from genuine cases of bullying. But in Helen's case it seems there is far more nastiness TOWARDS her (from angry Brian, BOTS audience members, so-called psych experts like the speakmans etc) than i have seen coming FROM Helen towards others.

But yeah i can see how the negative vote to EVICT appeals to the sort of BB viewer that enjoys the whole negative side of the experience. Some people enjoy the whole shouting 'OFF OFF OFF' at evicted HMs during their interview.

VTE encourages that type of mob anger.

Personally i think it's better to get behind your fave in a positive way rather than find HMs to hate and then put energy into hating them back (which just seems hypocritical to me)

[Lostie!]

I don't think it's as simple as "one is good, one is bad". They've both had satisfactory and unsatisfying results.

[erinp5]

When Mark is up for the public vote...BB will have a vote to save ...

[Macie Lightfoot]

neither system is perfect and there have been some awful evictions under both systems. I prefer VTE because that at least gives a chance for cretins to get the boot. Like, there could have at least been a chance for Aaron to not win BB12 with VTE. VTS just kept him around and made him the most predictable winner ever.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Perez got less votes than michelle pricey calum and keith soo it doesnt

Perez might be the worst ever so I think it worked fine.

[Robertocarlo]

Personally i think vote to EVICT ruins the show. It means all the bigger characters get voted out. Which is why BB has to keep doing all these twists just to keep the big characters in.

For example - If you look at Housemate popularity polls then Jade has been in the top 3 all week.

So last night if it was Vote to SAVE then Jade would have stayed and probably Harry would have gone as she is not especially loved or hated.

If Marc was up for eviction - he would go, as he is disliked by half the viewers. But if it was vote to SAVE - he would stay, as he liked by the other half.

It's the LOVE/HATE characters that make the show. They need to stay!

Vote to SAVE works in the celeb BB - why not do it for civilian?

What do you think?

No she wasn't. It's one thing to come out of your shell but to do so in such a violent and aggressive way, singling out Marc and Helen, is appalling. Sorry but Emma is wrong and clearly condoning bullying.

[Shaun]

Both have their faults. I think genuine voter apathy is more of a concern.

[abhorson]

VTE is the only right way. That way, the majority always gets it right.

[Jack_]

VTE is the only right way. That way, the majority always gets it right.

The majority almost always gets it wrong

[Withano]

VTE make for better Friday night shows but VTS make for better Saturday-Thursday night shows.

Think I prefer VTE just to make it more of a game. All you'd have to do to win with VTS is take the most airtime.

[Jason.]

VTE for Big Brother.
VTS for Celebrity Big Brother.

In other words, how it is now is perfect.

I prefer the sound of Who goes, you decide rather than Who stays, you decide.

[Jack_]

VTE make for better Friday night shows but VTS make for better Saturday-Thursday night shows.

Think I prefer VTE just to make it more of a game. All you'd have to do to win with VTS is take the most airtime.

VTE is actually the worse game of the two and the one that's the most detrimental to the show

It's also incredibly easy. All you do is be nice to everyone and don't say anything, you therefore avoid nomination cause you're not pissing anyone off and even if you do end up you've done nothing for anyone to want to evict you so you survive anyway. Then you make the final and there's a good chance you end up winning as the 'nice' person. Just another reason why it's an awfully destructive system

[Jason.]

I don't get the VTE hate.

VTE worked perfectly fine during the eleven year run on Channel 4. And those series are held in much higher regard than BB12-BB13, both of which featured VTS.

[abhorson]

The majority almost always gets it wrong

But that is what the majority want. So that is all that counts. I wanted Scottish Independence, but except i was in the minority of voters.

[Lostie!]

I don't get the VTE hate.

VTE worked perfectly fine during the eleven year run on Channel 4. And those series are held in much higher regard than BB12-BB13, both of which featured VTS.

Exactly my thoughts. It's a bit of a contradiction to prefer C4 BB, but view VTE as a show-ruining format.

[Jason.]

Exactly my thoughts. It's a bit of a contradiction to prefer C4 BB, but view VTE as a show-ruining format.

Exactly.

Not to mention when Channel 4 did use VTS, I think in CBB3.

It didn't exactly stop the two biggest characters of the series (John and Jackie) being the first two to be evicted.

Plus any voting system which kept in Conor till Week 8, should be condemned.

[LukeB]

Both VTE and VTS have cons and pros tbh

Lauren being evicted over Luke A on a VTS.
Ricci staying over lesley in CBB14..

VTS seems to be overrated imo

[Withano]

VTE is actually the worse game of the two and the one that's the most detrimental to the show

It's also incredibly easy. All you do is be nice to everyone and don't say anything, you therefore avoid nomination cause you're not pissing anyone off and even if you do end up you've done nothing for anyone to want to evict you so you survive anyway. Then you make the final and there's a good chance you end up winning as the 'nice' person. Just another reason why it's an awfully destructive system

I think its harder to gain support as the 'quiet nice guy' than the 'loud obnoxious guy' So, nah I don't think it's an easier game. Look at the support Marc has over Chloe, if it was VTS all the way through, nobody else would stand a chance. Marc won and it isn't close.

[Visage]

I prefer Vote to Save, I find the VTE creates negativity, whereas VTS can reward good behaviour.

If I'm spending money on housemates by voting I would rather it went towards the people I like in there.

[Jack_]

But that is what the majority want. So that is all that counts. I wanted Scottish Independence, but except i was in the minority of voters.

Not if the majority don't have a clue what they're doing though

And besides, if it were a vote to save, the majority would still get what they wanted. In fact, say four people were up, the fans of three housemates (an overwhelming majority) would all get what they want when their housemate was saved

[Jason.]

VTS can reward good behaviour.


Conor?
Jim Davidson?
James Jordan?
Perez Hilton?
Katie Hopkins?

[Lostie!]

I prefer Vote to Save, I find the VTE creates negativity, whereas VTS can reward good behaviour.

If I'm spending money on housemates by voting I would rather it went towards the people I like in there.

And bad behaviour.

This is why I like VTE, people have the chance to vote to evict people who've acted like knobs, rather than keeping them for the sake of "entertainment" and essentially validating their nastiness.

[EspeonBB]

VTE is better because it means that twats like Aaron, Katie Hopkins, Perez Hilton and Conor wouldn't have stayed as long.

[Jack_]

I think its harder to gain support as the 'quiet nice guy' than the 'loud obnoxious guy' So, nah I don't think it's an easier game. Look at the support Marc has over Chloe, if it was VTS all the way through, nobody else would stand a chance. Marc won and it isn't close.

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

[Jason.]

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

Chloe would be safe in a VTS as well.
Cause she has a big fanbase and many people like her.

[Visage]

Conor?
Jim Davidson?
James Jordan?
Perez Hilton?
Katie Hopkins?

And bad behaviour.

This is why I like VTE, people have the chance to vote to evict people who've acted like knobs, rather than keeping them for the sake of "entertainment" and essentially validating their nastiness.

Yes, great points

I was too busy thinking about myself and what I would prefer to vote for.

[Jack_]

Chloe would be safe in a VTS as well.
Cause she has a big fanbase and many people like her.

True, although it would depend on the number of people up and who was up with her I think

For the most part though VTE makes it a piss easy game. Say nothing, do nothing, be nice, no nominations, you make the final. Even if you do go up, no one knows you so you aren't going anywhere. This is why we get people like Danny and Cristian, and it's so detrimental to the show.

It:

- festers hatred, anger and negativity and there's already enough of that as it is
- encourages people to radar dive
- means as soon as you start doing something, you risk leaving (case in point: Jade)

Those three are reasons enough to warrant its permanent removal.

[Withano]

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

I disagree, next time Marc gets voted up for nomination, the producers will probably put him up against one other person and he'll probably survive a VTS and a VTE but he'd be in trouble if there's a third person up too, hence, it is more of an open game.

VTS all series long is just a game of 'who can take the most airtime' and I'm not interested in that.
VTE, you'd have to befriend people and make common enemies with people to avoid nomination, all without the public hating you. Its more interesting for me to watch because its more of a game.

Also Friday nights are always the highlight of the week for me in Big Brother, but they're a bit dull with VTS.

[Macie Lightfoot]

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

that sounds perfect tbh

and EspeonBB explained my point well, VTE at least gives us a chance to get rid of the series-ruiners. Get Hopkins and Perez out under VTE and just maybe another storyline would develop, ya know?

[Jack_]

I disagree, next time Marc gets voted up for nomination, the producers will probably put him up against one other person and he'll probably survive a VTS and a VTE but he'd be in trouble if there's a third person up too, hence, it is more of an open game.

VTS all series long is just a game of 'who can take the most airtime' and I'm not interested in that.
VTE, you'd have to befriend people and make common enemies with people to avoid nomination, all without the public hating you. Its more interesting for me to watch because its more of a game.

Also Friday nights are always the highlight of the week for me in Big Brother, but they're a bit dull with VTS.

Well putting producer manipulation which is inevitable aside, if it played out normally, Marc would go and would probably have gone already. I mean the biggest evidence for my argument is Jade, three days ago there's no way she'd have stood a chance of leaving since she's been invisible the last couple of weeks, but since the thing with Brian started up and her argument with Cristian, she was evicted because of it. If you do nothing, you don't go anywhere. If that's not counter productive I don't know what is.

As for the bit in bold that's probably the easiest game ever so much that it's barely even a game. Befriending people and being nice to others is easy, it comes naturally to well, 99% of people. You don't even have to try. So you don't get put up, and even if you do you've not pissed the public off to want to evict you. Under these rules the people whom are annoying the housemates go up and most of the time get evicted, and while that may be great for the housemates, it's not great for the viewers.

On a side note - I've had a discussion with you before where you've said you don't like BBUK being about a 'game'. And to be honest, a 'game' in BBUK doesn't really exist as I've just explained because it's just making friends with each other. Let's adopt the US format and see a real game of social interaction play out, because that's where you have to be clever in getting people on your side but shafting them at the same time.

[Jack_]

that sounds perfect tbh

and EspeonBB explained my point well, VTE at least gives us a chance to get rid of the series-ruiners. Get Hopkins and Perez out under VTE and just maybe another storyline would develop, ya know?

Perfect if Chloe wasn't a nothing character maybe, but for the most part she is

And I never buy into this argument that we should take a punt on letting some other people have a go at developing new storylines. Why evict someone who is consistent at the expense of someone who ~may~ just be coming into their own but may just fade into the background again (e.g. the Cristian vs Jade debates this week)? That's not worth the risk to be quite honest

[Macie Lightfoot]

Gameplay within the house definitely exists, or at least it did at one point when there was actually a consistent nomination process. Lisa Wallace slithering her way to the final week was a thing of beauty <3

[Moviefan]

Which series was it that the save , was it last year when it wens back to evict?

If it's save , there was no why jade would have gone, I think chole would have gone

But now she (chole) will win the show

[Macie Lightfoot]

Perfect if Chloe wasn't a nothing character maybe, but for the most part she is

And I never buy into this argument that we should take a punt on letting some other people have a go at developing new storylines. Why evict someone who is consistent at the expense of someone who ~may~ just be coming into their own but may just fade into the background again (e.g. the Cristian vs Jade debates this week)? That's not worth the risk to be quite honest

Quality over quantity, I've probably enjoyed Chloe the most out of anyone this series but that really doesn't say much.

And I definitely buy into that argument when we've been watching the same repetitive **** on loop with Marc for what feels like months now. It's no coincidence at all that the show went to **** as soon as the intruders came in.

[EspeonBB]

VTS keeps 'big characters' in which take over the show and stifle development in the house most of the time (Perez and Katie Hopkins in CBB is the perfect example of this). The only time I was in favour of VTS was during BB13 because Deana wouldn't have lasted as long (and finding out Ashleigh somehow had more fans than Scott lol).

And 'big characters' can still survive with VTE, see Gina and Dexter in BB14

[Jason.]

Which series was it that the save , was it last year when it wens back to evict?

If it's save , there was no why jade would have gone, I think chole would have gone

But now she (chole) will win the show

You're wrong.

If last night was a VTS, Harry would've went.

Chloe - She's well liked, and has a lot of support. You say she will win. That's because she has the support. Therefore, if people will vote for her to win, they will also vote her to stay.
Jade - Entertaining.
Cristian - Good looking male. Eye candy vote.

[Withano]

Well putting producer manipulation which is inevitable aside, if it played out normally, Marc would go and would probably have gone already. I mean the biggest evidence for my argument is Jade, three days ago there's no way she'd have stood a chance of leaving since she's been invisible the last couple of weeks, but since the thing with Brian started up and her argument with Cristian, she was evicted because of it. If you do nothing, you don't go anywhere. If that's not counter productive I don't know what is.

As for the bit in bold that's probably the easiest game ever so much that it's barely even a game. Befriending people and being nice to others is easy, it comes naturally to well, 99% of people. You don't even have to try. So you don't get put up, and even if you do you've not pissed the public off to want to evict you. Under these rules the people whom are annoying the housemates go up and most of the time get evicted, and while that may be great for the housemates, it's not great for the viewers.

On a side note - I've had a discussion with you before where you've said you don't like BBUK being about a 'game'. And to be honest, a 'game' in BBUK doesn't really exist as I've just explained because it's just making friends with each other. Let's adopt the US format and see a real game of social interaction play out, because that's where you have to be clever in getting people on your side but shafting them at the same time.

I know it sounds like I'm arguing but i do understand what you're saying..

I think our difference of opinion is because we watch the show differently.. You watch it as an entertainment show and I agree that vts would keep the 'entertaining' ones in longer.. I watch it as a reality show, and to me, vts gets rid of any 'real' element because it's just a show of people being as loud as possible and that's no fun for me to watch

Take sallie axl for example (is that her name, the **** who lost to Gina) she basically said in her interview that she was purposely being loud and brassy because she thought it was vts.. She deliberately wasn't acting 'real'.. It wouldn't be fun for me to watch if people acted like her more often because of vts