:bawling: Why will no one look at post #272?!? It explains my feelings towards this very "unxepected" and EXTREMELY Distracting situation.

She was actually the hated house bitch in the lead up to her eviction and most of the action was revolving around her and whether or not she was playing Tom and/or Peter, the houseguests were discussing it, Peter and Tom were and as viewers that was the main storyline at the time.

Once again there you go making patronising and baiting comments, and you're telling me you don't troll? Like why is it that you are incapable of actually having a civilised debate without resorting to 'hahahaha you're an idiot' (or your equivalent which is 'holylol' or something similar)? I actually hate to admit this but you do sometimes have some valid points when I'm debating with you, but why is it that you insist on being so rude to people? That's exactly why you're so irritating because you just never stop referencing members in threads, criticising their opinions and resorting to laughing at them even when sometimes they haven't even yet posted in the thread? Why is it that I can have debates with plenty of other people on here who I disagree with and they disagree with me but it can remain civil, mature and respectful instead of insult throwing and laughing smilies? I'm not saying I don't partake in that because I do but as a form of retaliation, I'd much rather just have a debate without the need for all of that, you just don't seem to be capable of it? I just don't get it

Anyway on the subject of Talla and talking points well yes she was hilarious but nothing she did constitutes developing a discussion point, they were just funny moments. A talking point arises out of a storyline or a house relationship/feud/friendship where you can discuss in depth about what happened in such an event or about the legitimacy of a duo or some sort, you can't discuss Talla passing out in the toilet drunk, that's just funny. So no it doesn't come under the talking points argument

Actually I lie, the argument with Gary was one potential talking point...but that's it really? I loved her don't get me wrong but she hardly had many storyline that could be discussed in depth? She was just the cute drunk

I didn't even want any of this, if you remember on the first few pages I spent like a day trying not to rise to the bait from a certain member but I just wasn't having it in the end. I don't even get it it's just a bloody forum game who actually cares, these arguments aren't necessary :shrug:

soz

But all of his contributions were awful, that's the point you don't get and the flaw in your logic. You preach about talking points and contributions, but you look at quantity as opposed to quality. Peter was shoved down our throats and did get a lot of airtime but it was all nauseating and his contributions were the low points of the show. The Sheyld's entire existence, a character development scene on the struggles of eating a mother****ing salad, constant self-congratulatory DRs to lead casuals to thinking he's actually playing a good game. I literally cannot think of a positive contribution Peter made to the show.

It's like saying that Tom was great for his contributions when they consisted of casual sexism and homophobia (and apparently racism from what I remember hearing about?). Like, you're a gross human with no redeeming qualities and I couldn't wait to get you off of my television. Having high visibility does not automatically make you a positive contribution to the show. Just look at like, almost everyone heavily featured in BB12 and CBB11.

AAH! Stop or I'm bringing in the mods to end this argument NOW.

The peak of Liza's relevance was being called a scheming ****ing ***** in an argument between two other people. Homegirl didn't matter.

Referencing a time in which you were patronizing me is not patronizing. Like, you literally told me multiple times that I watch BB wrong and I'm the reason it got cancelled on C4. Me referencing these words does not make you the victim, not at all. And then about me not being able to have a civilized debate or whatever, your bud Lucas (oops I just referenced another forum member How Dare I) is just as guilty if not more of everything you described than I am.

Talla's moments were memorable and some were season-defining. Liza's moments consisted of trying to see the good in Tom and Peter. She's stupid, that's the only possible discussion that could've risen from that.

And Josiah, sorry but in a thread about the HGs of BBCanada, the HGs of BBCanada are going to get discussed. That's what happens in forums, discussions are had.

I don't really like the word 'bud' to describe our relationship.

See I give you an opportunity to go 'okay alright, we'll both agree to stop the patronising comments, insults and joker smilies and have civilised debates in future' and you just return with the same kind of thing? I love discussing these things, it's fun and I find it interesting and enjoyable hearing other peoples opinions, but it's spoiled when it has to descend into petty, immature digs at one another. I don't want to have to do that, why can't we just debate without you trying to mock my opinions?

Okay let me make a distinction between what I consider patronising in this instance, because I see the point you've just raised

If you felt patronised by that point I once made then I apologise, but that is somewhat my opinion. I didn't however (at least I don't think) laugh, insult you and make comments like 'LOL you're so stupid hahahaha joker smiley oh look Troy being a moron again hahaha', that kind of thing. And if I did it was in retaliation for you doing it to me. I simply want to have a debate free of this kind of petty playground behaviour, I'm above that. Like, there are plenty of members that share similar opinions to you but I manage to have enjoyable, mature debates with them without having to mock each other's opinions and throw immature digs at each other? And the same goes for other debates I have non-BB related with other members, it doesn't need to descend into a childish argument.

Also actually Lucas is more than capable of having a civilised debate because I've been in one with him before and have read posts of his having one before, he does what he does when he's being insulted and patronised too. But he can address this criticism you've made of him himself

Sorry Josiah, I'll keep voting too

AJ - 10
Alec - 10
Andrew - 6 (-)
Emmett - 7
Gary - 35
Peter - 17 (+)
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

AJ - 10
Alec - 10
Andrew - 5 -
Emmett - 7
Gary - 35
Peter - 18 +
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

AJ - 10
Alec - 10
Andrew - 4 -
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36 +
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

AJ - 10
Alec - 11 +
Andrew - 3 -
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

AJ - 10
Alec - 12 +
Andrew - 2 -
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

~clocks went back

AJ - 10
Alec - 13 +
Andrew - 1 -
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17

Where did Topaz go? :joker:

I just assumed you and Jack took her out because she was a "supporting character" or whatever the ****

Here we go again :rolleyes: same old sh*t

Seems I accidentally cut her out like someone did to AJ the other day when copying someone's post (I'm on my phone), she's on 20

I ****ing loved Topaz. So yeah, cya later x

AJ - 10
Alec - 14 +
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 17
Topaz - 20

AJ - 9 -
Alec - 14
Emmett - 7
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 18 +
Topaz - 20

AJ - 8 -
Alec - 14
Emmett - 8 +
Gary - 36
Peter - 18
Suzette - 27
Talla - 18
Topaz - 20

AJ - 8
Alec - 14
Emmett - 8
Gary - 36
Peter - 17 (-)
Suzette - 27
Talla - 19 (+)
Topaz - 20

AJ - 7 (-)
Alec - 14
Emmett - 9 (+)
Gary - 36
Peter - 17
Suzette - 27
Talla - 19
Topaz - 20

AJ - 7
Alec - 14
Emmett - 8 (-)
Gary - 36
Peter - 17
Suzette - 27
Talla - 19
Topaz - 21 (+)

what happened to Andrew??? Also this game is clearly being manipulated by 2 members instead of 'TiBB'