Most of the international Big Brother community would disagree with you, and for good reason

Yeah but production interference is exactly what's stopping anything interesting from happening. Like BB13 is an example of a season were BB just put a good cast in and left them to their own devices and it was packed with drama. The original BBUK format is perfectly fine and never needed to be messed around with in the first place yeah it might need a few twists now and then to keep housemates on their toes but so does any reality to format.

Don't get me wrong I agree production interference is annoying, but from a producer's perspective I just don't get their logic - they come up with all these messy twists when there's a consistent format right there that would provide them with everything they're after?

Like I said to Jordan though casts like these are extremely rare and they're not gonna strike gold every time so BBUK's format is still a problem because the public insist on ruining every series

Yeah but your not gonna strike gold with BBUS format either :shrug:

No but you are gonna adopt a format which evicts people based on merit as opposed to moronic things like speaking in an episode or immutable things like being a woman

How is it illogical to say leave it alone for people who enjoy the UK format and stick to the Canadian and US versions if you enjoy theirs?

I personally like the UK format, I like being able to vote so why change it.

If you enjoy BBUK - watch BBUK!

If you enjoy BBUS - watch BBUS!

Here's an idea - if you enjoy both, watch both! And if you only enjoy one, only watch one!

If you're likeable you can make it very far no matter how controversial you look at Gina for example. And in BBUS sex, looks and how much you speak up also play a part. BB6 had Ashley evicted first because she was good looking and the girls didn't like the attention she gave to the guys, BB16 had someone like Victoria make it really far despite doing nothing all series and the last few seasons of BBUS have showen that merit doesn't get you far at all, no matter how good you play the game if you're not in with the "it" crew you're not staying for long.

Because:

1) I enjoy Big Brother and the premise of Big Brother itself, but happen to prefer the format that one version uses over another, and so think we should adopt it too. Why would I want two versions of a format I enjoy when I could have three?

2) This is a forum, and I'm entitled to say that I think all of the above. I am of course talking about my own personal opinion, people do not have to agree but why would I settle for a format I think is inferior just cause a load of other people (several of whom have never given BBUS or BBCan a try) don't agree?

Why do you want all of the BBUK fans to not have their preferred format to watch though?

That's just selfish.

Tbf your idea of "merit" is quite crap really, dare I say it.

I personally don't find people like Perez Hilton or Marc (two of which I'm sure you find brilliant and entertaining housemates) particularly that interesting or entertaining and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with me on that one. Yes, they got a lot of airtime and they're both the most talked about people of their series but so what? Quality > Quantity.

Your idea of merit seems to stem from how much airtime a particular person gets as opposed to their personality and likability also being thrown in the mix.

Here's an idea - if you enjoy Big Brother, watch Big Brother! And if you prefer one of the formats that an incarnation of Big Brother uses, feel free to say that you think it would be good if another one you watch adopted it!

Gina and indeed Dexter were complete anomalies and we got extremely lucky, that kind of thing doesn't happen every series - especially under vote to evict. The prerequisites for succeeding on BBUK are basically: have a penis, be attractive, befriend all of your housemates and be the 'nice guy' so you're never nominated, never utter a word all series and you're destined to make the final or win. It's counterproductive nonsense and requires no skill or merit whatsoever.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule on BBUS as you've outlined but for the most part if you are evicted it's through your own doing. You could using your examples say that Ashley's early eviction could be attributed to a poor social game with the women and that Victoria played on her 'goat' status (unlikely but there's still something to be said for making it that far regardless).

As for your last sentence, that is exactly what merit is. If you're not part of the 'in' crew that is your problem for not having a strong enough social game. If you make yourself a target, that's your fault. It's absolutely based on merit.

Err...everyone's opinions on a forum are selfish. That's kind of what subjectivity is.

Why on earth would I say we should stick with BBUK's format when I believe it to be inferior - just because a bunch of people I've never met disagree? If I believe the show would be enchanced by adopting it, of course I'm going to say so

I really have no idea why people get so outraged over this. I and everyone else knows it will never actually change because BBUK's producers are nowhere near intelligent, daring or innovative enough to trial it, so why does anyone care if someone types some text on a screen saying it should?

I really don't want to get into another discussion about this in a thread about adopting the BBUS format but I'll just say that talked about housemates are beneficial to the show. Shows like Big Brother thrive off of discussion, discussion leads to attention which in turn leads to a more successful series. It's not so much about airtime and more about contribution. Dare I say that if we followed yours and several other ideas of 'merit' ('likability' lol it's a TV show, I'm not looking for a new best friend) - as BBUK's voters often do - series after series would slowly but surely be destroyed, and they are. So I think the person whose crap idea of what 'merit' constitutes is yours.

As I keep saying, housemates on BBUK for the most part succeed through never speaking or being lucky enough to have a penis. It's counterproductive, requires no skill and the format (especially when it's VTE) only seeks to encourage it. On the other hand the BBUS format rewards success on merit - if you make it far it's through your own doing and your own good social and strategic game, if you are evicted it is largely your own fault and not something arbitrary or moronic like it is on BBUK.

I mean it's not just about likability when judging a housemate - most my favourites aren't really that likeable, but you can disregard everything else I said that's absolutely fine.

Lbr, your entertainment criteria is made up of who the loudest person is in the room = entertaining, best HM ever!, contributes the most etc. (and lol you can spring up your 500 word BS essay defending how you don't support people who shout/make the most noise etc, I don't really care). But in your earlier post, you mentioned one of the advantages of the BBUSA format being rewarding people based on merit as opposed to what the UK format does in which they reward people based on not even breathing a word - which you're against and so you clearly think the opposite - that being "the one who speaks the most/makes the most noise or w/e should win". It's just hilarious how you take it so personally when someone suggests so and deny it when the evidence is there in the majority of your favourites, but whatever. :joker:

So what?

I still don't really get this mentality that you seem to have in regards to "oh it's just a TV show idc how they are/behave inside the house because it's not real life and I don't know them in real life etc etc". But each to their own.

By that logic, we should just disregard the behaviour of some of the nastiest HM's we've ever had, just because what? We're not looking for a best friend when watching BB and they're not saying it to us in real life so it doesn't matter.

No, no it doesn't.

But either way the BBUK format isn't going to adopt the US format anytime soon, so you can stay pressed about things not going your own way and rightly so too because honestly the way you want the show to work is frankly **** :sorry:

oh hi Cody.

Both versions can be good, they just developed the UK one in the wrong way, making it purely juvenile and camp, with endless arguments. It needed to get more positive with vote to save and to have live feed, and get people who aren't z-listers or just too stupid.

When they did take an idea from the US one they did it badly, like using soppy music when someone is saying goodbye at evictions, something that would never be done in the US version.

The US version isn't perfect, the gameplay is more like sheep than people often, and the losers decide the winner. They kept a live stream but they black it out a lot and still charge people plenty too. The irony really is that live feed is much more important in the public vote version and yet that's where it was dropped.

There are many female housemates who've made it far in big brother while still being controversial Jade, Nadia, Makosi, Leah, Aisleiyen, Deana, Gina, Ashley and Jayne are just a few examples.
No matter which format if you're unthreatening and nice you're likely to get far.

I disregarded nothing and responded to everything you said, noting that I didn't want this to turn into another debate about what constitutes a good housemate on BBUK in a thread that isn't about that, but alas that seems to be what you're pining for so

No it isn't, and you must be another person who doesn't read threads properly because I've rebutted this false argument on several occasions with evidence. On the contrary, you have none. Do pray tell, if I only support loud housemates, why have several of my favourites included housemates such as Glyn, Gerry, Jonty, Brian, Stephanie, Mikey, Luke, Noirin, Marcus, Lydia, Dexter, Steven, Joel and Adjoa - most of whom never shouted or did so sparingly? What is hilarious is that people continue to make this baseless accusation despite it being rebutted on several occasions with evidence that they then go onto ignore, presumably because they know they've been proven wrong. Also I have to laugh at you attempting to criticise me for writing 'essays' when you're guilty of just the same thing and some of the lengthiest posts in this thread have come from you. Newsflash: this is a forum where discussions take place, and I will write as much as I see fit. If you are incapable of reading comprehension and don't have a very good attention span, may I suggest that a forum isn't the best place for you - or perhaps one where it's one sentence posts and gifs will be better suited.

It has nothing to do with making noise or shouting per se, it is about objective contribution. The housemate who has contributed the most to the series, i.e been its star and created the most discussions should be crowned the winner - and those kind of housemates should stay around for the success of the series. It's a very simple argument to get your head around.

Of course we shouldn't, and it is inevitable that someone always has to take it to the extreme in these scenarios but no, of course there are obvious exceptions to the rule like Dennis, Conor (who wasn't even entertaining anyway), Daley (same), Helen in BB16, Jade in CBB5, etc etc. But for the most part yes it is all irrelevant. Big Brother isn't real life, it isn't a morality competition or a charity and quite frankly if that's what you watch the show for then you may be best placed looking elsewhere considering the types of people they cast. I don't watch this show looking for people to relate to or a new best friend for precisely that reason - have you seen the housemates? I wouldn't want to be associated with most of them, I watch this show for escapism. It is baffling to me that anyone watches Big ****ing Brother through that kind of lens, but each to their own.

I don't know how many times in this thread or in the past I've said I know full well BBUK isn't going to adopt the US format because the producers aren't that intelligent or daring enough, and how many more times I'm going to have to say it before you pay attention - but that is beside the point. I am entitled to argue that it should change because I believe it would improve the show, and as I said to you in the last 'essay' of yours I replied to you'll notice that it is rarely me who starts these repetitive threads or incites these endless debates. I tend to post a flippant remark about how yes we should adopt it and then someone else will reply asking why or telling me no and that is what starts it off. But of course in typical TiBB fashion that'll be ignored when it's convenient to criticise someone you disagree with!

Everyone knows where I stand by now. If you don't agree and don't want another debate about it, don't reply. If you do, I will respond.

As for me not knowing what's best for the show, that is quite hilarious coming from you. Believe me I do, but I wouldn't expect you to realise that :joker:

It just won't happen because they need voters money.

Cody was an awful bore but he succeeded because his social game was strong, as was his strategic one (bar taking Derrick to the F2). I can stomach bores making it far and entertaining housemates being evicted early much more if it is their own fault, as opposed to because they're an attractive man that never spoke all series (as it probably would've been had Cody been in BBUK) and the viewers lap that up.

How many of those won though? If we're using the success of controversial characters and comparing like with like then BBUS has a much better ratio when it comes to winners, their calibre is far better than those who've won BBUK.

There are always exceptions to the rule, yes certain big characters have made it far in BBUK but the number of those who haven't if we were to list them would far outweigh those who did, and it's because of the backwards public vote or rather the moronic eviction patterns they produce.

That's why I would be happy to settle for a compromise where the public still get a vote (although crucially not directly over who leaves) but they play by US rules

They'd still get revenue and the public would still be involved somewhat

Yeah but BBUK has had more female winners :shrug: and most of them were quite outspoken... Also Big brother uk winners may not all be arseholes like the majority of us winners but it doesn't make them any less deserving. The good thing about BBUK is that it's not all about game plan so people who entertain the public with their personalities still win. Like Brian for example he didn't get himself invoked in a whole lot of drama but he was still an entertaining housemate and in my opinion a deserving winner.

Oop not this becoming a hit thread

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/d...xU597CYYjI.jpg

lmfao proving people wrong so much so they don't know how to muster up a response is one of my favourite things about being on this forum :hee:

There's no point in lauding more female winners as an achievement if not all of said females winners were deserving in the first place! I disagree with 'entertain the public', perhaps the case for some winners but certainly others only won either because they were 'fit innit' or because they weren't someone else. Brian deserved to win yes but the amount of actual deserving winners on BBUK is very slim, I reckon maybe 5/6/7 off the top of my head. Say what you like about BBUS' winners but by virtue of the format itself pretty much all of them (bar one or two where you could argue rigging played a part) deserved to win