View Single Post
Old 07-07-2015, 05:15 PM #8
Jack_ Jack_ is offline
oh fack off
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: England
Posts: 47,434

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Tony
IAC2019: Ian Wright


Jack_ Jack_ is offline
oh fack off
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: England
Posts: 47,434

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Tony
IAC2019: Ian Wright


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Withano View Post
No i get that you think the public ruins the uk version but i still dont understand how a show without a public vote would work. The winner is the person who wins a task? Sounds dumb?
Easily and effectively. No it's not like that

There's a competition each week to determine a Head of Household (HoH), this can either be mental/physical or endurance. That person then nominates two other people for potential eviction.

The two nominees, the HoH and three other people selected by a random draw then compete in the Power of Veto (PoV) competition. Whoever wins earns the right to veto one of the HoH's nominations, or to leave them in tact. So if a nominee wins, they can remove themselves from the block, if the HoH wins, they can change one of their nominations or leave them the same. If a nominee is saved, the HoH has to name a replacement nominee.

Then on eviction night, every person other than the two nominees and the HoH goes into the DR and casts a vote to evict one of the two. In the event of a tie, the HoH breaks it.

When two people are left, the last 7 or 9 people evicted (whom have moved into a 'jury house' which is located somewhere in the country and isolated from the outside world) return, question the two finalists on why they believe they should win, and then each cast a vote for the winner. And that's it.

Winning over a jury is far more difficult than winning over the public, and also more fairer. They've lived with them, not the viewers.
Jack_ is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote