What difference does it make? Either way would have the same effect :shrug:

NO VICKY!

Because by not nominating it makes it look like he's purposefully trying to put himself up. Especially with that explanation at the start.

If he just went in, nommed Charlie and Sophie, it wouldn't appear like that at all - No heroic portrayal, no 'I don't want free ride' ethos in action, etc.

He had to do it this way, to look cool, and get a desired 3-way eviction.

I wish there was a banging head against wall emoticon on here.

I know.

Tell me about it.

Ask and you shall... http://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gif

Ahmed is right on all of this though darlings.... the guy is so intent on playing the honourable soul here.... cue projectile vomit at the screen for me.

In that case....

http://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gifhttp://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gifhttp://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gifhttp://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gifhttp://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gifhttp://i29.tinypic.com/2nsubzq_th.gif

Thank you! :laugh:

.....or maybe, he just wanted to go up! :thumbs2:

:laugh3:

Oh God no, don't start us off on the bloody merry go round of an argument again! :laugh2:

They can't defeat me on logic and they know I'll always correct them. So they give up.

Vicky missed the point entirely again. She couldn't even figure out why Vash DIDN'T just nom Charlie and Sophie. :whistle:

Obvious as to why! But thanks setanta. :thumbs:

Yes, but not in a 2-way eviction, conveniently David needed to be in the mix. See thread title!

LOL, I best leave this thread, don't want to argue the same stuff over and over ...

Only thing I'm agreeing with on though.... Charlie is a muppet. Don't want people to think I support him.

But yeah, everything you said about Siavash is right; they just don't want to see it.

exactly!! so why didn't he just nominate them?? to show that he doesn't back down?? to prove some sort of point??

I think it's more a case of you not actually being willing to admit you MIGHT actually be wrong about any aspect of the situation. It's not giving up, it's realising that you actually can't get your point across to some people.

Literally like banging your head against a brick wall.

None of us are mind readers, so none of us actually KNOW what Siavash is thinking or what his motives are, apart from him. We can only give our opinions, but you act as if your word is gospel or something.

And I really don't know why you seem to have a problem with Vicky. Why the need for the smug sarcasm?

Because by not nominating it makes it look like he's purposefully trying to put himself up. Especially with that explanation at the start.

If he just went in, nommed Charlie and Sophie, it wouldn't appear like that at all - No heroic portrayal, no 'I don't want a free ride' ethos in action, etc.

He had to do it this way, to look cool, and get a desired 3-way eviction.

But David did NOT need to be in the mix.

Like I keep saying, Siavash just wanted to be up himself, he was prepared for it to be a 2 way between himself or Marcus, OR a 3 way between himself, Marcus and David.

Why do you keep banging on about him wanting or needing David in the mix? Obviously it would be preferable to him not to be in a head to head but he didn't specifically plan for it to be a 3 way, if he did then he would have nominated David!

I'm so tired of this now but it's frustrating me. :laugh:

Because if she can't figure out why he didn't just nominate Charlie and Sophie rather than 'not nominating', then she's missed the entire point.

How he wants to look like a hero by purposefully 'ensuring' that he gets put up. If he just nommed, he wouldn't look like a hero, or actively trying to put himself up. He'd be willing to potentially opt for the free ride - Going against all of his philosophy from the previous weeks.

That's why. And I'm sorry if you find me a brick wall. But that's because I've covered all the bases regarding Siavash and the conclusion is clear.

He's plotting, one way or another, most likely to make himself look heroic, AND, be safe.

i must say this thread has been quiet entertaining.

The Vash vs Marcus thing was unlikely though, by his calculations. Even Vicky admitted this. She explained in her thread - 3 noms each.

He wanted to be up himself but didn't want a guaranteed 1 vs 1 eviction. He did this in such a way as to look good and LIKELY for David to be up.

He can't nominate David because then it's obvious he did it tactically, doesn't want to be up, does want a free ride, etc - CONTRADICTING everything he's been building up for weeks on end. Would look BAD.

All bases covered. This may be the brick wall you detest so much. :rolleyes:

*quite

vote the minger out - see 'evict minger' post

I gave up trying to explain last night,i think deep down they know the truth but their views are clouded by the "love" of Siavash.

I agree with you, I have been trying to work it out. I definatly think Siavash wanted to be up this week and against marcus. He knows Marcus is popular having survived evictions, just like freddie was and he lost to Marcus. Siavash knows if Marcus goes and he stays he has a chance of winning. If not he would rather go this week and get his interviews etc than go in the last week when the focus is more on the winner and then come 2nd/3rd or wherever

My theory anyway, I hope he stays :thumbs:

EXACTLY ! Because he was lying when he said he didnt nominate because he wanted to go ,he wanted David up ,thinking he would go before him and Mucus ,if this is not the case why asked Mucus who he had voted for ?Charlie and Rod saw through this lie and spoke their mind