[rquote=2546691&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]If you consider the simple fact that Rodrigo came out with 11% of the vote and Sophie won with 75% against Siavash, then it should be clear that she complete demolished everyone but also places 2, 3, 4 and 5 were very very very close.[/rquote]
Of course, it was obvious anyway that Sophie won by a landslide and 2nd to 5th were tight. The forums are very very poor indicators.

[rquote=2546704&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546691&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]If you consider the simple fact that Rodrigo came out with 11% of the vote and Sophie won with 75% against Siavash, then it should be clear that she complete demolished everyone but also places 2, 3, 4 and 5 were very very very close.[/rquote]
Of course, it was obvious anyway that Sophie won by a landslide and 2nd to 5th were tight. The forums are very very poor indicators.[/rquote]

I'm going to give this some thought.

I guess in some ways, votes for the underdog is an example. Underdogs get obsessive support, well perceived underdogs and they get a skewed perspective on their behaviour to counter the observations people make over their immorality.

Also there is the anti-vote as well, I am sure some give people pity too.

Overall though, I think there is a clear indicator as to why there is this form of activity on the forums.

[rquote=2546741&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck][rquote=2546704&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546691&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]If you consider the simple fact that Rodrigo came out with 11% of the vote and Sophie won with 75% against Siavash, then it should be clear that she complete demolished everyone but also places 2, 3, 4 and 5 were very very very close.[/rquote]
Of course, it was obvious anyway that Sophie won by a landslide and 2nd to 5th were tight. The forums are very very poor indicators.[/rquote]

I'm going to give this some thought.

I guess in some ways, votes for the underdog is an example. Underdogs get obsessive support, well perceived underdogs and they get a skewed perspective on their behaviour to counter the observations people make over their immorality.

Also there is the anti-vote as well, I am sure some give people pity too.

Overall though, I think there is a clear indicator as to why there is this form of activity on the forums.[/rquote]
I mainly think it's because the types who use forums tend to be out of touch with society in general. This forum isn't so bad, but on DS there's loads of nerds living in their own little world.

DS is the most 'off' with regards to their polls, etc. They seem to go for alternative/weird/eccentric types, as it aligns with their own personalities.

The average person in the street obviously relates to a Sophie/Charlie/David over a weirdo like Siavash. That's the bottom line.

[rquote=2542923&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2542917&tid=146645&author=BigBrotherFan01][rquote=2542907&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004]
Siavash and David were only 1.3% apart.[/rquote]

LOL[/rquote]
Gotta laugh. :joker:[/rquote]

Sure do, a miss is as good as a mile:hugesmile::hugesmile:
SIAVASH RUNNER UP, DAVID THIRD. It is what it is.

[rquote=2546771&tid=146645&author=angus58][rquote=2542923&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2542917&tid=146645&author=BigBrotherFan01][rquote=2542907&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004]
Siavash and David were only 1.3% apart.[/rquote]

LOL[/rquote]
Gotta laugh. :joker:[/rquote]

Sure do, a miss is as good as a mile:hugesmile::hugesmile:
SIAVASH RUNNER UP, DAVID THIRD. It is what it is.[/rquote]
Nobody has disputed the positions. The %'s are also the %'s.

Wish the OP stopped banging on about how forums are bad indicators, obvisously not as we said the order would be:
Sophie
Siavash
Rodrigo
Charlie
David

But in fact it was David and Rodrigo swapped around.
The OP is just a David fan and a Siavash hater trying to bang on about how close it was. Take Sophie out of the game, and Siavash would have won, the majority who supported Sophie has Siavash for second place. It is what it is.

Also you keep saying Siavash isnt as popular as the forums make out?
Um yes he is, he came second.

[rquote=2546765&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546741&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck][rquote=2546704&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546691&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]If you consider the simple fact that Rodrigo came out with 11% of the vote and Sophie won with 75% against Siavash, then it should be clear that she complete demolished everyone but also places 2, 3, 4 and 5 were very very very close.[/rquote]
Of course, it was obvious anyway that Sophie won by a landslide and 2nd to 5th were tight. The forums are very very poor indicators.[/rquote]

I'm going to give this some thought.

I guess in some ways, votes for the underdog is an example. Underdogs get obsessive support, well perceived underdogs and they get a skewed perspective on their behaviour to counter the observations people make over their immorality.

Also there is the anti-vote as well, I am sure some give people pity too.

Overall though, I think there is a clear indicator as to why there is this form of activity on the forums.[/rquote]
I mainly think it's because the types who use forums tend to be out of touch with society in general. This forum isn't so bad, but on DS there's loads of nerds living in their own little world.

DS is the most 'off' with regards to their polls, etc. They seem to go for alternative/weird/eccentric types, as it aligns with their own personalities.

The average person in the street obviously relates to a Sophie/Charlie/David over a weirdo like Siavash. That's the bottom line.[/rquote]

I've been saying this for a while. I made a post about it once too that people are inclined to follow housemates who are on the edge of society out of pity and political correctness - so they don't look "wrong".

[rquote=2546817&tid=146645&author=-BB~Jordan-]Wish the OP stopped banging on about how forums are bad indicators, obvisously not as we said the order would be:
Sophie
Siavash
Rodrigo
Charlie
David

But in fact it was David and Rodrigo swapped around.
The OP is just a David fan and a Siavash hater trying to bang on about how close it was. Take Sophie out of the game, and Siavash would have won, the majority who supported Sophie has Siavash for second place. It is what it is.

Also you keep saying Siavash isnt as popular as the forums make out?
Um yes he is, he came second. [/rquote]
LOL, %'s are %'s, the forums were way out. The order is just how it panned out. The forums were way out; on order AND %'s.

So much for David's 5th place, Rodrigo's top 3 finish and a 'close call' between Vash and Sophie.

The reality is, the geeks scraped him 2nd, ahead of newbie David.

[rquote=2546821&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]

I've been saying this for a while. I made a post about it once too that people are inclined to follow housemates who are on the edge of society out of pity and political correctness - so they don't look "wrong".[/rquote]
Yes, in general, normal people don't use forums. Bluntly speaking.

[rquote=2546864&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546821&tid=146645&author=MassiveTruck]

I've been saying this for a while. I made a post about it once too that people are inclined to follow housemates who are on the edge of society out of pity and political correctness - so they don't look "wrong".[/rquote]
Yes, in general, normal people don't use forums. Bluntly speaking.[/rquote]

Which is why I use them.

I've noticed some people are too flash to use forums or on drugs or married to their couch.

[rquote=2546858&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546817&tid=146645&author=-BB~Jordan-]Wish the OP stopped banging on about how forums are bad indicators, obvisously not as we said the order would be:
Sophie
Siavash
Rodrigo
Charlie
David

But in fact it was David and Rodrigo swapped around.
The OP is just a David fan and a Siavash hater trying to bang on about how close it was. Take Sophie out of the game, and Siavash would have won, the majority who supported Sophie has Siavash for second place. It is what it is.

Also you keep saying Siavash isnt as popular as the forums make out?
Um yes he is, he came second. [/rquote]
LOL, %'s are %'s, the forums were way out. The order is just how it panned out. The forums were way out; on order AND %'s.

So much for David's 5th place, Rodrigo's top 3 finish and a 'close call' between Vash and Sophie.

The reality is, the geeks scraped him 2nd, ahead of newbie David.[/rquote]

There is not a million people which use the forums to those which vote. We did infact do very well in a predictions. Your a David fan trying to make him looking better than he is, yes hes a decent guy but did not deserve to win.

[rquote=2546889&tid=146645&author=-BB~Jordan-]
There is not a million people which use the forums to those which vote. We did infact do very well in a predictions. Your a David fan trying to make him looking better than he is, yes hes a decent guy but did not deserve to win.[/rquote]
I don't think the forums did well. Sophie got triple the amount of votes Siavash got, waaaay different to the forums.

David was 1.3% behind Siavash, yet was miiiillllleeesss behind Vash on forums.

The order of the top two just happened to be correct in the end. But that's a matter of chance really, since the order of 3rd to 5th and all the %s were way off.

David did well and yes he did deserve to win IMO.

[rquote=2546919&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2546889&tid=146645&author=-BB~Jordan-]
There is not a million people which use the forums to those which vote. We did infact do very well in a predictions. Your a David fan trying to make him looking better than he is, yes hes a decent guy but did not deserve to win.[/rquote]
I don't think the forums did well. Sophie got triple the amount of votes Siavash got, waaaay different to the forums.

David was 1.3% behind Siavash, yet was miiiillllleeesss behind Vash on forums.

The order of the top two just happened to be correct in the end. But that's a matter of chance really, since the order of 3rd to 5th and all the %s were way off.

David did well and yes he did deserve to win IMO.

[/rquote]

Its not chance at all! People have to vote to win, not toss a coin and do heads or tails! And that clearly means Siavash is more popular than David, but David is more popular that the forums rated, but our predictions were not that bad considering our low numbers compared to all those who actually vote.

Also take in cosideration, not everybody votes, not everybody votes just once. A david fan could have voted 1000s and a siavash fan didnt vote. But on forums people dont need to pay to vote.

There was a thread made stating they had placed a big bet on David and would continuosly vote for him and hopefully he would win and he would still make a lot of money, if that was true, that would have affected it.
Chances are the person made up BS, but other people might have tried this (David had the best payout so people would want to try this with David more).

[rquote=2546943&tid=146645&author=-BB~Jordan-]
Its not chance at all! People have to vote to win, not toss a coin and do heads or tails! And that clearly means Siavash is more popular than David, but David is more popular that the forums rated, but our predictions were not that bad considering our low numbers compared to all those who actually vote.

Also take in cosideration, not everybody votes, not everybody votes just once. A david fan could have voted 1000s and a siavash fan didnt vote. But on forums people dont need to pay to vote.

There was a thread made stating they had placed a big bet on David and would continuosly vote for him and hopefully he would win and he would still make a lot of money, if that was true, that would have affected it.
Chances are the person made up BS, but other people might have tried this (David had the best payout so people would want to try this with David more).[/rquote]
My point was, if the %'s are so far out, then anything can happen; the forum doesn't know what's gonna happen, that's my point. Take Sophie out and anything can happen.

You made some good points, but I'd like to point out, there were fans of all other HMs also voting hard. There were Vash fans on DS voting plenty, naturally. And clearly Sophie fans voted hard.

I only reckon Rodrigo fans didn't try hard enough. Or split the vote with Charlie (I think that's why these two finished bottom - SPLIT VOTE).

[rquote=2546765&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004]
I mainly think it's because the types who use forums tend to be out of touch with society in general. This forum isn't so bad, but on DS there's loads of nerds living in their own little world.

[/rquote]

That include yourself ahmedfan?

Freddie would have won this thing if it was a vote to win.

[rquote=2542948&tid=146645&author=setanta]Hilarious stuff really. I'm telling you, if David had been in from the start, you never know what may have happened.[/rquote]

Yeah ...but remember...he wouldn't have watched the show for six weeks & therefore wouldn't have known about the bullying of Freddie...so if he would have become a part of Team Nasty..would have probably gone the way of Karly & Kris....out the door!!

It's easy with hindsight!! :laugh3:

[rquote=2543020&tid=146645&author=Shasown][rquote=2542994&tid=146645&author=AhmedFan2004][rquote=2542986&tid=146645&author=Shasown]Then if its only a "rough guide" you cant make the assumption that Dave was close to second, for percentages to work effectively and accurately you need actual percentages per round.

You would also need to know roughly how many voted up to the first closing of the phonelines in order to make accurate assessments, in fact the more information you have the more accurate the percentage margins will be. 0.8% doesnt sound a lot 8 in a thousand, how many thousand voted though?

Simply talking the official party guideline "Sophie had 74.4%" of the vote and working backwards is again ineffective, supposing only a couple of hundred votes were actually recorded(thats not 100 people voted, votes can and do get set aside, if the count from a particular phone number exceeds more than an average of 4 per minute as an example, based on time to get a line, dial and record the vote)

[/rquote]
Of course he was close to 2nd, Sophie won by a landslide. Hell, 2nd to 5th was all close. The forums have been poor indicators all series. It's attracting fans of certain HMs more than others. It's a niche segment of the BB demographic; not representative.[/rquote]

Am not arguing the point that the forums have been poor indicators just pointing out the maths is flawed in the figures you quote.

Nor does the figures released by CH4 show where or when the landslide you refer to occur, was it throughout all the voting or simply in the last portion of voting, without accurate figures it could be sophie lost.

She may have been within the top 3 and then as other fell by the wayside she picked up some but the lines have been open days, in that time a lot of votes could have been cast.

Manipulating % is a cheap way of bringing who you want to win forward to appear to win.

I hope ch4 release total votes cast per housemate over the whole voting period.[/rquote]

You've missed the whole point of why the %'s are weighted.

Did you study maths at school?

Well said Luanda ... I guess some people are angry with the %'s. :conf:

I think Sophie had it in the bag all week.
Good too see Ahmed on :)

[rquote=2548534&tid=146645&author=Luanda][

Am not arguing the point that the forums have been poor indicators just pointing out the maths is flawed in the figures you quote.

Nor does the figures released by CH4 show where or when the landslide you refer to occur, was it throughout all the voting or simply in the last portion of voting, without accurate figures it could be sophie lost.

She may have been within the top 3 and then as other fell by the wayside she picked up some but the lines have been open days, in that time a lot of votes could have been cast.

Manipulating % is a cheap way of bringing who you want to win forward to appear to win.

I hope ch4 release total votes cast per housemate over the whole voting period.[/rquote]

You've missed the whole point of why the %'s are weighted.

Did you study maths at school?[/rquote]


Funny old thing yes I did, I dont know if you went to school but it was and is a compulsory subject on the curriculum of all UK schools.

Weighing the % is only accurate if all figures are available. And I think its is you who has missed the whole point of my posts on this thread.

If you read the thread properly you will also see the initial realeased figures were corrected after it had been pointed out that the figures for Charlie were totally inaccurate.

[rquote=2548796&tid=146645&author=Shasown][rquote=2548534&tid=146645&author=Luanda][

Am not arguing the point that the forums have been poor indicators just pointing out the maths is flawed in the figures you quote.

Nor does the figures released by CH4 show where or when the landslide you refer to occur, was it throughout all the voting or simply in the last portion of voting, without accurate figures it could be sophie lost.

She may have been within the top 3 and then as other fell by the wayside she picked up some but the lines have been open days, in that time a lot of votes could have been cast.

Manipulating % is a cheap way of bringing who you want to win forward to appear to win.

I hope ch4 release total votes cast per housemate over the whole voting period.[/rquote]

You've missed the whole point of why the %'s are weighted.

Did you study maths at school?[/rquote]


Funny old thing yes I did, I dont know if you went to school but it was and is a compulsory subject on the curriculum of all UK schools.

Weighing the % is only accurate if all figures are available. And I think its is you who has missed the whole point of my posts on this thread.

If you read the thread properly you will also see the initial realeased figures were corrected after it had been pointed out that the figures for Charlie were totally inaccurate.[/rquote]

You may well have had maths on your curriculum but you obviously didn't go to many lessons. For a start it is weighting and not "weighing" and the whole point of weighting is to balance figures when not all the information can be condensed into a simple conclusion.

Before you embarrass yourself any further I suggest you read up on this form of mathematics before replying.

[rquote=2548976&tid=146645&author=Luanda]
You may well have had maths on your curriculum but you obviously didn't go to many lessons. For a start it is weighting and not "weighing" and the whole point of weighting is to balance figures when not all the information can be condensed into a simple conclusion.

Before you embarrass yourself any further I suggest you read up on this form of mathematics before replying. [/rquote]

Well i went to enough obviously to obtain one or two qualifications in various forms of mathematics.

Oh sorry for mispelling it by the way, It's not the first time people have omitted a "t" is it?

Without officially released figures to work upon the weighted figures over on OBB are simply one persons opinions of probable percentage figures.

And as I stated earlier they are worthless as an indicator of true votes, simply because you have no idea of each housemates votes received during each stage of the voting process.

[rquote=2547313&tid=146645&author=Blink_Me]Freddie would have won this thing if it was a vote to win.[/rquote]

He really would have.

Why didnt BB do a vote to save twist again when was Freddie vs Marcus. They know exactly what the outcomes would be, they are cheats, and I wouldnt be surprised if they got people to vote out Freddie because he was blantly gonna win. Then the title of winner was thrown between Siavash, Charlie, Sophie & Roddy, making it more interesting, but at the same time, upset 50%+ of the viewers, risk worth taking? Nope.
Unfortunely, Siavash lost a few fans due to not nominating, Charlie showed his true colours on a lot of occasions, and Roddy fans didnt try hard enough (most Roddy fans like Sophie as well, split vote). So Sophie would blantly win after Freddie.

Lisa and David had no chance of winning, nor did Marcus to be fair. Did find it a bet of a set up tbh. But hey, its over, just hope Soph dotn waste the dosh.

Shasown
" then I apologise."
Good, thankyou.
I support you in your argument with Luanda. His missing "t" point was silly and the rest was not just mathematically nonsense but actually seemed to be written in something other than English.
The answer to this whole discussion is quite simple: none of us have sufficient information to calculate the real %s. There also remain some problems over definitions of such quantities as "the % vote achieved by X".