^ this

they're literally doing it to get rid of a few housemates at once, they're not planning on changing the entire format of the show IMO

I mean, if almost all the BBUS winners "deserved" their win by virtue of the format and getting the Jury to vote for them at the end of the game, then doesn't every BBUK winner "deserve" their win by virtue of the format and having the public vote for them to win at the end of the show?

On a completely unrelated note, how boring has Annihilation week been so far? What a snoozefest

No, because the public are the entire problem! As I keep saying, to succeed on BBUK you basically need to: be fortunate enough to have a penis, have the added bonus of being attractive, befriend all of your housemates and be the 'nice guy' so you're never nominated, say and do nothing the entire summer so you float your way to the final - and then you're almost destined to win.

It's counterproductive nonsense that requires no skill and no merit whatsoever, and thus you can barely say that half of the winners 'deserved' it

Winning over a jury of your peers however - now that takes some doing, and is a far fairer method of determining a winner.

Jack :clap1:

Don't really have much to add as he's pretty much covered it, but I will say that with the viewing figures being as low as they are and Love Island establishing itself as a clear competitor to Big Brother's ratings, it's got to be worth at least a trial.

As a side note, I honestly don't think that C5 is making that much money from the televote (well, during both the summer series at least). Like, they always leave it really late when opening the phone lines and they've literally dropped it for the entire week this week - if it were that important then surely they wouldn't do both of those things.

tbf I didn't even read your post. Been there seen that

So you're claiming you incited a discussion by responding to a post of mine and then just so happened not to bother reading my reply? Remind me again why you're on a forum?

Or rather what actually happened is that you read the response, realised you'd been proven wrong and there was no way you could continue to justify your baseless accusations and so resorted to a gif and pretending you hadn't read it. Bless :pat:

But people can and have made the same arguments about the wrong people winning BBUS because of bitter juries and whatnot. Danielle Reyes was robbed, Maggie and Ivette are both awful, Jordan did nothing, Dan Gheesling was screwed because the jury agreed to never vote for him, blah blah blah. Half of the winners are considered garbage because they didn't play The Best Game so it's not like the end result is automatically going to improve just because there's no public vote.

I'm just as entitled to say what I think without you saying my view is stupid. Nobody was rude to you and tbh you're not selling it to anyone calling them stupid are you.

For the most part I'm not one of them though! People hate Maggie (and Ivette, idk if you meant someone else) because they were tragic to watch and part of a hated alliance, same for Jordan because she was pretty boring. Lots of BBUS winners are hated because people didn't like to watch them or didn't like them as people, that doesn't take away the fact that all of them - perhaps you could argue with the exception of one or two - objectively deserved their win. They earned it through a good social and strategic game that takes skill.

None of that is applicable on BBUK though, it's one of the easiest gameshows on television - and if you possess certain immutable attributes it's a walk in the park.

Would my favourites last longer under the US format? Not necessarily, but that isn't my argument. My argument is that I can take losses of my favourites much more because it is largely through their own doing rather than for arbitrary or moronic reasons like they're a woman or they spoke in an episode. When a favourite of mine is evicted on BBUK I'm annoyed, when it happens on BBUS I'm disappointed. It's a massive difference.

Quite frankly I think five members telling me to 'just watch BBUS then' all because they aren't willing to accept somebody thinks the format should be altered is rude, why should I when I've been watching BBUK since I was ten years old?

I am perfectly entitled to say I think it would be better if we adopted the US format. Is the format ever going to change? No. So why people get so outraged at this is beyond me, just let me post my opinion (which everyone on here should know by now) and leave me in peace if you don't agree :shrug:

The 'just watch BBUS then' remark that's recited whenever one of these discussions arises is a stupid one because it makes no sense. No one is yet to tell me why if I prefer one format, would I be happy to settle for two versions of it when I could have three? It is totally illogical. I am not saying that preferring the BBUK format itself is stupid, people are entitled to those opinions too...but telling me to 'just watch BBUS' is idiotic, and I've explained why on several occasions.

Okay but objectively speaking every BBUK winner deserved their win too. The rules are that the HMs nominate every week, someone is evicted every week, and then at the end the public votes for someone to win. All the winners are never evicted by the public and then the public voted for them to win. It might not be the result you want, but there's nothing unfair about it. And all your criteria about having a penis and being boring and not doing much only applies to Sam?

I get that you're not happy about a lot of the winners and how certain evictions have gone but I don't think that calls for a whole overhaul of the show's format.

Every post I've read of yours in this thread is just a re-hash of some long-ass essay you wrote a month and a half ago when arguing over the same topic. Over it. Over you. It's boring. You're boring. A bit like the type of housemates you tend to support.

Oh and if you're going to use "bless" and the :pat: smiley to try and patronise me - don't do it in the same sentence you're supposedly claiming I've been proven wrong. I might as well have a debate with chuff ffs.

:clap1:

it's just getting really boring seeing this same debate over and over again tbh

But my point is the requirements for crowning a BBUK winner are arbitrary and moronic and to succeed on the show you don't need to exercise any kind of skill whatsoever, there is no merit to it in the way that those who win or succeed on BBUS do.

The criteria can all be applied standalone or in conjunction with one another. So yes Sam would tick all of the boxes, but Anthony won because he's an attractive man, Brian, Pete and Luke won because they were 'nice guys', as did people like Sophie, Rachel and Chloe except some of those could also tick the 'did and said nothing all series' box too. There's no skill to it at all, it's easy.

If it's a rehash of the same things I've been saying over and over again in debates like these that have already taken place then doesn't that tell you something? That I've explained my argument on several occasions, people know where I stand, and yet people still try to incite this same discussion - and then I get the blame for it! TiBB logic eh :rolleyes:

Yet again you criticise me for writing 'essays' with no semblance of irony given your posting history, even in this thread :laugh2: as I said before, if you are incapable of reading comprehension above the age of ten then perhaps a forum isn't the best place for you!

Your last sentence makes no sense. You have been proven wrong, you failed to respond to any of my rebuttals of your baseless accusations because I provided you with evidence and you didn't know what to say, so instead pretended you didn't read the post (as I'm sure you'll do here too). If you patronise me I will patronise you back babe, that's the way it works. If anyone's 'over' anything it's me with your boring inconsistency, hypocrisy and refusal to accept facts. You tried and you failed I'm afraid.

I agree, so maybe people should stop making threads like this or jumping on people and inciting the same debate when someone posts their opinion

In comparing the different versions I think it should be admitted that neither have been pure and set up to be a regular procedure all the time. Both have used public vote elements and housemate vote elements at times, and both have used all kinds of twists and producer manipulation.

I don't think the path to victory is quite as easy as you make it out to be though? Luke A and Rachel both came close to being evicted and Rachel just barely won, Sophie had a bunch of her friends evicted early (and if you want to get into The Game, her win was deserved because she hustled the **** out of everyone and played a flawless social game after Kris was evicted), Chloe had to deal with all the end-game "ur mask is slippin hun xx" bull**** with the money (and, again, if you want to get into The Game, choosing to stay the **** away from Helen at all costs was really the best strategic move one could make), Rachel had to deal with a ton of BS from start to finish because she didn't have a personality disorder and wouldn't bitch about people 25/7... I could go on and on. I think generalizing the typical winner's journey to "sit back and do nothing" is really underselling what pretty much every winner had to go through.