Is it right to rig the nominations?
 

I see a lot of calls around these boards for BB to somehow rig the nominations (by putting all up or whatever) to break up the Nasty power block etc, including me.

I have changed my mind though tbh.

Is it right to fix the nominations, in any way, in an attempt to protect the 'entertainment value' of the house? Are we not the same people who cried and complained very loudly when Charlie Uchea was thrown back in?

Do we want to keep BB 'honest' (as much as it is right now at least anyhow), no matter what it does to the house, or are there situations that BB should be allowed to rig nominations to protect certain HMs?

I don't think BB should mess with nominations. They can't protect a housemate just because of what is happening.

However they can change the nominations by tasks (Siavash saving Marcus, stopping Charlie from voting) or by putting all housemates up. A load of Housemates stole some ice cream from the task. BB could put them up so long as there is a reason.

But to directly interfere for the benefit of a HM, then definately not.

Ah my friend, a subject i have discussed for many years
Charlie was voted out as was Nikki , so they had no right going back in, but it is meant to be entertainment and it will be pretty poor if the 'characters' continue to go and i include Sree in that list!
But not rig, as such many of them have discussed noms, and should be punished for it, so an open vote on all the house would maybe teach them!

No ,it was bad enough when bb brought Nikki back in after I had spent £70 (YES £70)voting the bitch out :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

No it's not right, but an open nomination is fair.

Your avatar looks like a stickman orgy. I like it.

BB, me and my work mates spent over £100 to get that bitch Charley out we all hated her, but now we like her, well in comparison to in the house!
I know know how you feel!:thumbs:

I LIKED Charlie ,the house died when she left

But if that open nomination is solely to break open the Nasties and give Freddie a break, how is that fair? That is the same as just giving him arbitrary immunity right now surely?

If it had been scheduled from the start for this week, fine, but having one just to 'fix' the current situtation (if indeed it is broken)? I am not getting that.

I have to say at this point that I dont see the nominations being all that predictable after this weeks eviction... I just don't see it playing out in the same way as the general concensus. So I guess I am not even really seeing how an 'all up' situtation would benefit the show right now.

lol you guys spend crazy amounts :tongue:

I dont think putting the whole house is rigging AT ALL. Sure it might be unfair to the housemates themselves, but your OPENING UP choices to the actual public themselves, not closing down choices, which is the wrong thing to do.

Throw the lot of them up and have a double eviction. The power block needs to be broken somehow.

I did back then but my hate is reserved for people who deserve it not people on a tv program, at the time we really loathed her, but now, well it doesn't matter does it?

rig no but punishment for discussing noms etc yes definately

Either way it's changing the rules in order to maintain the entertainment value right?

Like I say, if an 'all up' had been planned from day 1 for next week I would be right there in cheering for it, but to put one in now purely to achieve a desired result is a bad thing, and by definition rigging, surely?

This I support 1000% :thumbs:

DID do ,not any more ,until we get red button back ,i have voted once this year ,and i wont do

Again, supported 1000%. :thumbs:

no rigging. the game should be fair.. if they rigged nomos, then the public may think that phone lines are being rigged also..

I like to make my own mind up on the hm8s ,not what the editor wants me to believe ,after years of watching live feed from morning until night ,you can tell when they are trying to brainwash you

I don't think it's right to rig nominations but I think if it has something to do with the task (like bb6 with the you can nominate if you want etc, then the people who didn't nominate were up) or if it is a rule break then i think it's fair. However i think BB should do something even if they "suspect" HM talking about nominations (Team Nasty putting the same people up week after week) not to save one HM but so it's back on an equal playing field for example ALL HM's go up for 2 weeks.

I just won't support a company that treats it customers like crap, after years of those same customers generating millions in revenue for that company.

Me neither ,they think they can drop the red button and everything will be fine and dandy ,well it isnt ,and they have got to learn we are not pushovers !!! :wink:

And breathe .......................

Well at the end of the day we still decide. They might try and nudge us to do a certian thing, but then thats the whole show. If throwing everybody up is rigging, then so was sending in 16 people who were not actualy housemates. And so too then, is making a sixty minuet show out of twenty four hours of footage. The line is blurred, no doubt.

But still, it's for the greater good.

The worse thing that would happen with a task would be that Kris or Charlie would win it and choose each other to stay.

Altho it would be interesting to see if Kris would choose Charlie or Dogface. O.o