Radical new idea for next year's bb

[ruination]

I really miss lots of the housemates who have been evicted, such as Stephanie, Luke, Sylvia and Bex. I know lots of people hated them, but I think the show would be a lot more interesting in the later stages if the big characters were still in.

How about a new format, where they still all nominate, we still all vote, they still all get informed who lost, but no-one leaves.

And on the last day, the public votes, and there is a massive three-hour eviction show, where they leave in order.

[jonsep]

channel4 would love you.
rubs hands.£££££££

[Matt]

Alternatively, we could try a vote to save instead of a vote to evict, which sounds a lot less complicated (and stupid).

(Also, if the public paid to vote but no-one left, that would cause quite a bit of outrage...)

[Conor]

I can see where your coming from, but I just don't like the idea of them staying after being evicted. Completely defeats the purpose of the show.

[Matt]

Originally posted by jonsep
channel4 would love you.
rubs hands.£££££££

Channel 4 don't make any profit from voting.

In fact, if I remember correctly, Ofcom made it a rule that broadcasters could not make profit from premium rate telephone lines after all the scandals (but I'm not sure on that).

[ruination]

yeah ... it might need to be a ten-hour eviction show, actually, if Davina had to have interviews with all of them.

[bd96]

good idea, but to be honest i am stuck in my ways and love it how it is. also, hms are not allowed to know what has happened in the outside world, so if they knew the eviction results they would change how they act and they wouldn't be themselves.

[andybigbro]

That idea is a bit silly. If we voted because we wanted them out. and they didnt go out till the last week, people would get anoyed and not vote.

[ruination]

It could become like a national event. 'Today they finally learn their order of public popularity, don't go to work!' lol

[Blink_Me]

Originally posted by andybigbro
That idea is a bit silly. If we voted because we wanted them out. and they didnt go out till the last week, people would get anoyed and not vote.

About to type that. :thumbs:

[bd96]

Originally posted by Matt
Alternatively, we could try a vote to save instead of a vote to evict, which sounds a lot less complicated.

(Also, if the public paid to vote but no-one left, that would cause quite a bit of outrage...)
that would be excellent. the big characters would stay (sylvia, bex, alexandra, luke) and the boring ones would go (mo, rachel, nicole, belinda, dale).

[ruination]

No, we wouldn't be voting to evict, we'd be voting to let them have a clue who is hated. Of course they would change ... that would be the point. It would be interesting to see if they got it right as to HOW to change, and if they could.

But I do see Matt's point ... what would be in it for the public to spend money to vote?

I suppose it could become a big deal in the house who lost. Maybe the main motivation for the public to vote is to let certain housemates know they are doing a lot wrong.

I really think it could work, and then we wouldn't lose all the interesting people early on.

[Conor]

Originally posted by bd96
Originally posted by Matt
Alternatively, we could try a vote to save instead of a vote to evict, which sounds a lot less complicated.

(Also, if the public paid to vote but no-one left, that would cause quite a bit of outrage...)
that would be excellent. the big characters would stay (sylvia, bex, alexandra, luke) and the boring ones would go (mo, rachel, nicole, belinda, dale).

What are you talking about? Every evictee stays. Including Mo ect. until the end in that case and also Alex would still have been ejected.

[marctierman]

hmm but not everyone wants to stay til the end
and what would be the motivation for the viewers to vote? they get nothing out of it

[jonsep]

Originally posted by Matt
Originally posted by jonsep
channel4 would love you.
rubs hands.£££££££

Channel 4 don't make any profit from voting.

In fact, if I remember correctly, Ofcom made it a rule that broadcasters could not make profit from premium rate telephone lines after all the scandals (but I'm not sure on that). yes they do ten be goes to charity the rest goes to channel4 and bt etc

[Indierock&roll]

i think they a vote to save tbh it would be waaaaaaaay much better

[ruination]

of course people who threaten people with revenge from their gangster friends would still be sent packing

It's only a game show.

[Matt]

Originally posted by jonsep

yes they do ten be goes to charity the rest goes to channel4 and bt etc

No they don't.

Yes, 10p goes to charity, but the other 25p goes to the telephone companies.

Here's a C4 press release:

http://www.channel4.com/about4/pdf/ofcom_prts_sanctions.pdf

"The channel will continue using phone voting in Big Brother but is only charging viewers sufficient to cover the cost of the call and any charitable donation."

Also, on occasions where they've offered refunds, for instance when Maysoon walked and her vote line was cancelled, they have publically stated that they do not make profit from phone voting.

[ruination]

oh, blah de blah about phone charges ..

We all know this is money-based.

I still think the public would be just as motivated to vote if it meant someone (such as Nicole, for instance) discovered the public hated them.

They could even include the percentages.

[jonsep]

Originally posted by Matt
Originally posted by jonsep

yes they do ten be goes to charity the rest goes to channel4 and bt etc

No they don't.

Yes, 10p goes to charity, but the other 25p goes to the telephone companies.

Here's a C4 press release:

http://www.phonepayplus.org.uk/pdfs_news/channel4prts_pressrelease.pdf

"The channel will continue using phone voting in Big Brother but is only charging viewers sufficient to cover the cost of the call and any charitable donation."

Also, on occasions where they've offered refunds, for instance when Maysoon walked and her vote line was cancelled, they have publically stated that they do not make profit from phone voting. wasnt that just for the chj show because of the shylpa effort the previous cbb?if not hands held up:bigsmile:

[ruination]

Imagine a Nicole, still in the house, knowing that 94% of the public voted against her.

She would seriously re-think her attitude.

[Matt]

Originally posted by jonsep

wasnt that just for the chj show because of the shylpa effort the previous cbb?if not hands held up:bigsmile:

Nope, it's been like that since BB8. :thumbs:

Back on topic - Ruination, I can see where you're coming from - something needs to be done to keep entertaining housemates in. But I don't think that your idea of weekly popularity votes and then a ten hour eviction show at the end of the series is that great, sorry :laugh:

[ruination]

why not?

I think it's a smashing idea! lol

[ruination]

I think it should be like Lord of the Flies ... they all stay in to the end, and fight it out to grim death ... it would be much more interesting ... viewing figures would go up times a hundred

[Tom]

Originally posted by Matt
Alternatively, we could try a vote to save instead of a vote to evict, which sounds a lot less complicated (and stupid).

(Also, if the public paid to vote but no-one left, that would cause quite a bit of outrage...)

Vote to save wouldn't do anything. They tried it during CBB3 and it didn't make a difference. Also, when 2 housemates face eviction it would make no difference whatsoever. Take Bex v Mario. The people who voted to evict Mario would vote to save Bex instead.

[Dan_]

What would be the point in voting if nobody leaves? Oh great we get to put up with idiots for the whole ten weeks and hope they might change in the knowledge they are hated, no thanks.

[ruination]

I agree, voting to save makes no difference

[ruination]

Yeah, Dan, the point would be, it would be their one contact with the outside world, and they would learn that, e.g. 94% of the public don't like them (in the case of Nicole) and it would be fascinating to see how they changed their game.

We've done the current format.

Maybe some of them would walk .... that's fine.

[fingers]

Originally posted by Matt
Originally posted by jonsep
channel4 would love you.
rubs hands.£££££££

Channel 4 don't make any profit from voting.

In fact, if I remember correctly, Ofcom made it a rule that broadcasters could not make profit from premium rate telephone lines after all the scandals (but I'm not sure on that).

Your memory is faulty, they are not allowed to profit from dodgy competitions but out of the 35p call charge they keep 25p:whistle:

[dupin]

A vote to save probably would have meant the evictions went like this:

Week One: Lisa
Week Two: N/A
Week Three: Sylvia
Week Four: Jennifer
Week Five: Rebecca
Week Six: Belinda
Week Seven: Mohamed
Week Eight: Mohamed (or Maysoon if she didn't walk)
Week Nine: Stuart
Wek Ten:Stuart
Week Eleven: Nicole

[rayheartbliss]

Originally posted by andybigbro
That idea is a bit silly. If we voted because we wanted them out. and they didnt go out till the last week, people would get anoyed and not vote.

yes.....if those people stayed...people would just have been depressed..and would find it hard to watch......

those kind of poeple will always get evicted! ;)
and evicted they are!

[Dan_]

Originally posted by ruination
Yeah, Dan, the point would be, it would be their one contact with the outside world, and they would learn that, e.g. 94% of the public don't like them (in the case of Nicole) and it would be fascinating to see how they changed their game.

We've done the current format.

Maybe some of them would walk .... that's fine.

They would be screwed whatever they do.If they carried on acting the same way that lead to the public hating them, they would just be hated still.If they changed then the majority would just say that they're being fake.

I think most would just walk out knowing they are hated.What would be the point in staying?

[ruination]

True.

Ok, I agree, Dan.

Stupid idea

[bigbr0ther]

This was my idea. I suggested it on another thread. :mad: