[joeysteele]

Aaron's because all 3 of them agreed and left the diary room originally stating they would not go that far to buying presents. Then Jay and Louise for some reason decided to go in alone not even saying they'd changed their mind to do so thereby totally excluding Aaron altogether despite them all in agreement originally.

Had I been there, I would have said I was willing to contribute to a present for Tom and Alex but not to that amount, if a more sensibly priced present wasn't forthcoming I would have said to Tom and Alex, that I would get them something once out of the house.

I think Aaron hit a raw nerve with Jay by saying the public would see it as trying to win votes for him and Louise, Jay knows that's right likely.

I wouldn't have kept away from Tom and Alex's party though.
Overall however, I think the prices of the items were ridiculous,only Tom's was a landmark birthday, (21), Anton had a birthday in there and he didn't get an expensive gift.

I think it's Jay and Louise who seem the schemers on this one, they knew Aaron was against pricey gifts, they then cut him out after agreeing with him and went to look good getting the gifts between them.
Louise harping on as to the cost of the gifts to Tom and Alex themselves stunk of desperation on her part. A poor show and unfortunate too at this stage of the series.

I was pleased to hear on bbbots that the poll as to what people would have spent on gifts for Tom and Alex came out with 63% saying nothing,so it seems the public back Aaron too on this one, however I think he should have still interacted at their party.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Aaron's because all 3 of them agreed and left the diary room originally stating they would not go that far to buying presents. Then Jay and Louise for some reason decided to go in alone not even saying they'd changed their mind to do so thereby totally excluding Aaron altogether despite them all in agreement originally..

Let me ask you...

Did you condemn or support Aaron when he betrayed his agreement to the group over the face to face noms?

Also...

What obligation did Jay and Lou have to convince Aaron to spend some money on Alex and Tom? Just because they changed their minds, why do you think it was their jobs to change his?

Also...

Whatever their motivations, do you think it was good and fair for Aaron to spoil two birthdays because he was pissed off that his rivals had stolen a move on him?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Let me ask you...

Did you condemn or support Aaron when he betrayed his agreement to the group over the face to face noms?

Also...

What obligation did Jay and Lou have to convince Aaron to spend some money on Alex and Tom? Just because they changed their minds, why do you think it was their jobs to change his?

Also...

Whatever their motivations, do you think it was good and fair for Aaron to spoil two birthdays because he was pissed off that his rivals had stolen a move on him?

To the first, Aaron was going along with the noms, it was BB who stopped the process of the housemates deliberately nominating everyone the way they were, so they started the noms again, Aaron did indeed alter his noms after BB's intervention in the process, it was Louise who finally killed it though, had she nominated Tom or Alex all the housemates except Tom or Alex would have been up,Louise,(as the last to nominate), chose to nominate Faye so that meant only 2 people were up.

To the 2nd point, I think Jay and Louise could have gone to Aaron and said they wanted to change their minds, would he like to be involved in the contribution,(they had all 3 agreed not to just moments before). The fact they went and did it just themselves looked suspicious.

To the 3rd point, I agree with you, he should have interacted at the party and helped Tom and Alex have a really great time.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

To the first, Aaron was going along with the noms, it was BB who stopped the process of the housemates deliberately nominating everyone the way they were, so they started the noms again, Aaron did indeed alter his noms.

ok, so you rationalise and support Aaron in that and yet you condemn Jay and Lou for not sticking to the 'agreement' in this new case in order to defend Aaron?

Sorry, but obvious double standard, as we see often from the Aaron support.

Originally Posted by joeysteele

To the 2nd point, I think Jay and Louise could have gone to Aaron and said they wanted to change their minds, would he like to be involved in the contribution,(they had all 3 agreed not to just moments before). The fact they went and did it just themselves looked suspicious.

No, you missed my question.

What obligation did they have to convince Aaron to change his mind and spend a bit of money?

Why didn't Aaron approach them and suggest that they do so?

Originally Posted by joeysteele

To the 3rd point, I agree with you, he should have interacted at the party and helped Tom and Alex have a really great time.

Agreed.

Instead he sulked, caused a bad atmosphere and ruined it.

Nice guy.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by vesavius

ok, so you rationalise and support Aaron in that and yet you condemn Jay and Lou for not sticking to the 'agreement' in this new case in order to defend Aaron?

Sorry, but obvious double standard, as we see often from the Aaron support.



No, you missed my question.

What obligation did they have to convince Aaron to change his mind and spend a bit of money?

Why didn't Aaron approach them and suggest that they do so?



Agreed.

Instead he sulked, caused a bad atmosphere and ruined it.

Nice guy.

I have answered your points so have no intention of doing so again, there would be no point because like you towards me, I will never give the answer you want to see simply because I do not see things your way and you do not mine either.

You listed 3 points, I answered them fairly comprehensively, that is my take on them, yours is different but I did you the courtesy of answering your points while knowing full well the risk I was taking that you would come back in disagreement again.
That however is not my problem.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I have answered your points so have no intention if doing so again, there would be no point because like you towards me, I will never give the answer you want to see simply becasue I do not see things your way and you do not mine either.

I didn't ask you to answer them again...

The first answer you gave underlined completely my point of the double standards being how AGAIN in the defense of Aaron clearly. It requires no re-answering from you.

The second answer didn't answer my question at all and missed the point, as I said...so it wouldn't really be re-answering to reply according to the question... it would be just answering.

The third answer I agreed with completely. It again requires no more re-answering again from you

Despite what I didn't ask for though, I am still interested in a replyto the second point though, if you have time, which I assume you do because your here making statements to rationalise and support Aaron's corner.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by vesavius

I didn't ask you to answer them again...

The first answer you gave underlined completely my point of the double standards being how AGAIN in the defense of Aaron clearly. It requires no re-answering from you.

The second answer didn't answer my question at all and missed the point, as I said...so it wouldn't really be re-answering to reply according to the question... it would be just answering.

The third answer I agreed with completely. It again requires no more re-answering again from you

Despite what I didn't ask for though, I am still interested in a replyto the second point though, if you have time, which I assume you do because your here making statements to rationalise and support Aaron's corner.

I will endeavour to try again but feel I am wasting me energy and time.

From my perspective, had I been Jay or Louise, all 3 of them had been called to the diary room to choose a gift for Tom and Alex,'all' 3 of them said the gifts presented were way too much and refused,then left the diary room.

Had I been one of the 3 and I felt I wanted to change my mind and get the gifts,I personally because all 3 of us were called to the diary room in the first place, I would have got the other 2 together and said I felt we should get the gifts.
That is the obligation I feel they owed to Aaron, he had no idea they had changed their minds and they did not give him the chance to change his mind by telling him that they had changed theirs.

Simple courtesy and since originally BB called all 3 to the diary room,that would have been the better course to take. In my opinion.

No double standards,had Aaron gone in and said he wanted to get the gifts and not consulted Jay and Louise as to his change of mind then I would have said that was equally wrong too.

This is not likely the answer you want or will accept but it's the only one I am going to give. Best to leave it there I think as we will never agree on very much I doubt.

[Jamsey]

Originally Posted by vesavius

No, you missed my question.

What obligation did they have to convince Aaron to change his mind and spend a bit of money?

Why didn't Aaron approach them and suggest that they do so?

You keep making this point and it does annoy me somewhat.

They have a social obligation, not to convince him to spend, but to WARN him that they are going to.

How would you feel if a brother/sister/friend turned up you a parents/friend's birthday with a £500 gift when you had all already agreed to spend say £10?

You would be totally justified in not spending the money but you would still feel guity and annoyed at the other person for not warning you first.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Jamsey

They have a social obligation, not to convince him to spend, but to WARN him that they are going to.

The same 'social obligation' that says you should communicate honestly and clearly to the group you have made an agreed plan with before changing your part in that plan?

Please...

Inventing 'social obligations' for Jay/Lou while ignoring them for Aaron....

[Jamsey]

Originally Posted by vesavius

The same 'social obligation' that says you should communicate honestly and clearly to the group you have made an agreed plan with before changing your part in that plan?

Please...

Inventing 'social obligations' for Jay/Lou while ignoring them for Aaron....

Are you saying they did not have a social obligation to WARN him they were buying the presents?

Because they did.

[Cromwell1900]

Originally Posted by Jamsey

You keep making this point and it does annoy me somewhat.

They have a social obligation, not to convince him to spend, but to WARN him that they are going to.

How would you feel if a brother/sister/friend turned up you a parents/friend's birthday with a £500 gift when you had all already agreed to spend say £10?

You would be totally justified in not spending the money but you would still feel guity and annoyed at the other person for not warning you first.

This kind of all boils down to if you think Jay see's Aaron as a player. If Jay does then Social obligations be damned right? I'm pretty sure with all that's been going on over recent weeks there is plenty of reason for Jay to suspect Aaron's is a player. The correct thing was for Jay to tell him he's change his mind but being incorrect is a small crime when a game involving 50 grand is at stake.

[Jamsey]

Originally Posted by Cromwell1900

This kind of all boils down to if you think Jay see's Aaron as a player. If Jay does then Social obligations be damned right? I'm pretty sure with all that's been going on over recent weeks there is plenty of reason for Jay to suspect Aaron's is a player. The correct thing was for Jay to tell him he's change his mind but being incorrect is a small crime when a game involving 50 grand is at stake.

Not sure what you are saying.

Just so you are aware i am having a discussion on one part of the present-gate saga and not the whole thing, so that may be why I don't understand.

[jet]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Let me ask you...

Did you condemn or support Aaron when he betrayed his agreement to the group over the face to face noms?

Also...

What obligation did Jay and Lou have to convince Aaron to spend some money on Alex and Tom? Just because they changed their minds, why do you think it was their jobs to change his?

Also...

Whatever their motivations, do you think it was good and fair for Aaron to spoil two birthdays because he was pissed off that his rivals had stolen a move on him?

Great post. I don't see how anyone can in all honesty disagree with this.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Let me ask you...

Did you condemn or support Aaron when he betrayed his agreement to the group over the face to face noms?

Also...

What obligation did Jay and Lou have to convince Aaron to spend some money on Alex and Tom? Just because they changed their minds, why do you think it was their jobs to change his?

Also...

Whatever their motivations, do you think it was good and fair for Aaron to spoil two birthdays because he was pissed off that his rivals had stolen a move on him?

what aaron did that night was sneaky and sly and it was virtually exactly the same as what louise and jay did to him tonight. i.e. agree with others to a deal then go back on your word at the last minute.

tonight I thought jay and louise especially did make a right horlicks out of what should have been a kind gesture. so in the end they looked a bit like prats. BUT that didnt necessarily make aaron look good. he too was a prat with his attitude and dragging yet another celebration into the gutter.

jay and louise have spent their own money the ONLY thing they did wrong was not consult aaron. that looked a bit silly. ok hed said no twice and told them to do what they liked but still I think they should have kept him informed, I would have through principle. ok they knew though as hed been in twice hed say no. but still

I think louise mentioning the £500 twice was cringeworthy and also aaron was bemused as tom thanked him. he could have easily told tom he hadnt contributed
I think all 3 looked prats in different ways .....louise mentioned the money didnt consult aaron - prat jay less so but didnt consult aaron and later lost his rag -prat
aaron endless pouting ruined yet another occasion and he should have ONLY really told jay off for not informing him, he had no real right to say the public would see them as a fake gesture. but aaron has throughout bitched about everyone direct to the public instead of to their face. but he lost hi srag tonight and crossed the line a bit. its not for him or anyone to say it was only for the public. maybe it was maybe it wasnt. maybe everything nice anyone does in there is for cameras? its big brother its articial reality. jays rant about chairs and windows was embarassing but also proved hes not preparing everything he says, he just says it.


BUT to prove I am a fair man overall Id say aaron came off best out of this situation. for once he pouted for a legitimate reason. trouble is when you cry wolf 50 times you lose credibility

after tonights fiasco Id say tom came out looking the best, again.