Should housemates be judged on the things they do before the show?
 

I've always judged people on what they've done before the show.. But Adam from Deanas year and Dappy left to overwhelming cheers.. (Katie Hopkins also came 2nd but I always secretly liked her, most of the time, before she went in the house #controversialopinions)

With the threads on both of Danny and Marcs disgusting tweets from a few years back, do you judge them both or neither of them?

I've also seen some people judge Chloe for her past of ****ting in somebodys shoes?

Only if they bring up their past or make it relevant in any way, which doesn't often happen. It's different with CBB, as everyone (well, the ones we've heard of...) are inevitably going to be judged at least partially on their reputation.

This.

However I wont pretend that reading those tweets today hasnt disgusted me a bit D:

Well the only things to go off from Danny and Marc's time in their time in the house in my opinion as been fairly negative, so these tweets that have surfaced just add more disgust towards them tbh

This poll has only occurred as Marc's foul-mouthed Twitter comments have come to light,. When Danny made nasty comments on Twitter no one was asking whether we should judge on previous comments. So meh.

Wrong first question. TBH.

I Was banned from commenting this morning.. My ban has been recently lifted.. Danny, for me went from middle to my second least favourite after I saw the tweet, Marc stayed as my least favourite throughout the day.

I treat people as i find them and if someone's done scummy things before they go in the house and are generally not good people and then go in the house and put a complete act on and act like butter wouldn't melt i'm not gonna' be a mug and think "yeah ok, they've be known to trip old ladies over and spit on people in their everyday life but i'm going to pretend they haven't because they've acted like a total gent in the house".:nono:

Sorry but the "i'm only going to judge them on what they've allowed me to see of them in the house, even though it could be a 100% fabrication" doesn't wash with me .

If they end up winning the cash they're gonna' spend it in the real World as the person they really are so that's how they should be judged.

My opinion on neither Marc or Danny has changed. I already disliked Marc, and I already liked Danny.

Yes, why shouldn't I base my opinion on their actual true colours outside the house rather than them probably playing up to cameras?

exactly, for CBB it's definitely fair because the whole reason these people are cast is because of their past.

Absolutely not and to be quite honest I'm pretty sick of this witch hunt that seems to be going on over the last 24 hours against Danny and now seemingly Marc. I'm not even that much of a fan of Danny's but the whole thing is pathetic. Who cares what he tweeted a few months ago, or in the case of Marc, two years ago? It is totally and utterly irrelevant to what he is doing in the house.

The same goes for people who like to dig for dirt on other housemates, criticising them for being prostitutes, or not having a job, the list goes on. The point of this show is to judge the people that partake on a blank slate based upon what they do inside the house, not out of it. Their jobs and personal lives are totally irrelevant and quite frankly I think it's pretty disgusting that year on year all of their lives are uncovered either by forumers and/or the press.

The housemates are just people taking part in a reality show that we watch for 48 minutes a night, it's not akin to a gunman shooting down a school and then people wanting to monitor their old social media activity. It just goes to show that if you're going to appear on a show like this then you really need to be careful about what you've posted on the internet before, but as far as I'm concerned they shouldn't have to be.

.

I get what you're saying and I presume many people agree, but so that I can get an idea of the extent in which you believe your statement, if Hitler was hilarious and in the final 2 with Florence nightingale who was a new housemate and was really boring for a fortnight.. Who would you personally prefer to win?

If they voluntarily put themselves into Big Brother and have shady pasts, I will judge them like Judy.

Depends, really... if it's something minor then I don't mind however things like Marc's comments which were found (which included him using derogative language about women, as well as making rape threats) are not excusable and definitely apply. If it was 10 years ago and he turned it around and stopped saying things like that then I'd probably accept that it was deep in the past, but it was only just under 2 years ago and his attitude has not changed.

I think it's ok to prejudge as there is enough time for them to convince you otherwise. I thought Danny was a **** and what I have learnt since confirms it!

I'm watching her right now :love:


But yeah, If you're judging their personality and whether they're being real or not, then you would be silly not to take into consideration all information about them imo It gives you a more whole picture of what they're really like

I was told a few days ago that Judge Judy, along with Judge Rinder, is actually fake :ninja2::ninja2::ninja2:

Vicky... you were the last to know x

I didn't think they would be allowed to have the disclaimer thing at the start...you know 'the cases are REAL, the judgements are REAL' if that was a lie :joker:

If it's brought up in the house then it becomes part of the legitimate discussion of the show,If not then no i just judge on what i see.

Probably but I still love her :laugh: Hate Judge Rinder though, he's so smarmy

I think we have the right to judge someone it there a homophobic bully surely