[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

And I can accept that, like I said I don't really care whether people want to be patronising, passive aggressive or bait...whatever, we'll have it out, I'm easy. My points in this thread have mainly been "don't give out what you can't take" and that it's generally other people who dictate how conversations go with me, which is true.

The ball's in their court if they want a civilised conversation, that's what I mean. I post, other people can decide how to respond to it (if at all), and we'll go from there

Well I can't fault your honesty but the point is in that other thread you can't really accuse others of setting the tone of the conversation/interactions with you when you came in with that mocking comment first. I will give you though that you will be happy to change your tone according to how others respond to your original mocking post

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Elliot

But it is kinda hypocritical saying people can’t take what they give when you mock the forum for being mad at obvious rigging then write essays when someone tells you to cut the sarcasm
You clearly care, even just a little bit. If not there wouldn’t be anything to drive you back to this forum, along with everyone else here. Most people on here care about this show and want the best for it, so it can get annoying watching someone champion something they think is dreadful for the show (the Lewis rigging) which is probably what warranted the ‘passive aggressive’ posts on those threads. You have a vision for this show and series as to what would make it it’s best, and so do others. What’s annoyed me particularly about that thread is you packaged what you want from the show as the best option and anyone who’d want to watch.. idk... Sian for example has lesser taste

Are you going to bother responding this time or shall I not bother?

That's not an example of hypocrisy at all. What's the correlation between mocking people for obvious rigging and "writing essays" when someone tells me to the cut the sarcasm? Not only does that not make sense, but it makes even less sense when you consider that my first response to Cherie in this thread was...

Originally Posted by Jack_

I'll do that when you cut out the passive aggression

...ten words long that's some essay!

Just to be clear though, I'm not going to dumb down my posts for you or anyone else on this forum.

As for the bit in bold, the nail has met the head! Do you not see that's exactly how I feel? And that it would explain the tone of some of my posts? Of course I care about the show (well, to an extent), that has nothing to do with caring whether people are passive aggressive/patronising/etc with me or not though.

Lastly, this is what I say to everyone who makes similar comments - of course I think my bloody opinion is right, it wouldn't be much of an opinion if I didn't I know barely anyone agrees anymore, but I don't care, I've stuck by the same consistent arguments for almost the entire time I've been on this forum and I'm not going to change, I'm not going to try and fit in just for the sake of it, if people don't like it they don't have to respond. Like I said to Niamh, most of the time these days I turn up, post a few comments and then leave...if others choose to engage with me that's up to them, no one is asking them to

Originally Posted by Jordan.

I don't care if people are passive aggessive towards me but if you are passive aggressive towards me then we're gonna have it out!!!

Congratulations on not reading my post properly again, it's a real skill!

I don't care if people want to be passive aggressive, therefore when they are I'm happy to respond in kind and have an uncivilised discussion. None of that means I "care", as you are implying. It really shouldn't be that difficult to discern what I mean

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well I can't fault your honesty but the point is in that other thread you can't really accuse others of setting the tone of the conversation/interactions with you when you came in with that mocking comment first. I will give you though that you will be happy to change your tone according to how others respond to your original mocking post

I totally understand why people would respond how they do, that's cool, but they don't have to respond at all or in the same way - either/or I'm happy to proceed however but thanks for understanding haha

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Congratulations on not reading my post properly again, it's a real skill!

I don't care if people want to be passive aggressive, therefore when they are I'm happy to respond in kind and have an uncivilised discussion. None of that means I "care", as you are implying. It really shouldn't be that difficult to discern what I mean

You say you don't care but your actions speak otherwise. But sure keep spending the rest of the day trying to convice us how unbothered you are by it all

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

You say you don't care but your actions speak otherwise. But sure keep spending the rest of the day trying to convice us how unbothered you are by it all

That must be the third time now you've not read a post properly! A record?

Another reminder that it wasn't me who began this discussion, it was those who responded. Unlike some others who prefer to make passive aggressive posts and avoid direct confrontation, if someone quotes me I generally tend to respond. When people stop conversing with me, I'll stop replying...so maybe it's you and they who should consider how to spend the rest of the day?

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

That must be the third time now you've not read a post properly! A record?

Another reminder that it wasn't me who began this discussion, it was those who responded. Unlike some others who prefer to make passive aggressive posts and avoid direct confrontation, if someone quotes me I generally tend to respond. When people stop conversing with me, I'll stop replying...so maybe it's you and they who should consider how to spend the rest of the day?

Cherie made the thread and YOU responded to her hun, maybe if your posts weren't full of contradictions and inaccuracies people wouldn't have such a hard time understanding them!

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Cherie made the thread and YOU responded to her hun, maybe if your posts weren't full of contradictions and inaccuracies people wouldn't have such a hard time understanding them!

No babe, I responded to the thread, there's a clear difference. If I'd quoted her OP you might've had a point but I didn't

I've asked you to provide receipts of the contradictions and inaccuracies several times and you haven't been able to, so I'm going to take that as clarification that there aren't any and you just don't know how to respond. Unless you've finally got an answer now? I'll be waiting

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

No babe, I responded to the thread, there's a clear difference. If I'd quoted her OP you might've had a point but I didn't

I've asked you to provide receipts of the contradictions and inaccuracies several times and you haven't been able to, so I'm going to take that as clarification that there aren't any and you just don't know how to respond. Unless you've finally got an answer now? I'll be waiting

Oh sorry so you responded to what Cherie posted but didn't direcetly quote her therefore that wasn't you engaging a conversation with her first, my bad LMAO

& literally the entire thread is now everyone calling you out on your contradictions, what more evidence needs providing?

[Elliot]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Are you going to bother responding this time or shall I not bother?

That's not an example of hypocrisy at all. What's the correlation between mocking people for obvious rigging and "writing essays" when someone tells me to the cut the sarcasm? Not only does that not make sense, but it makes even less sense when you consider that my first response to Cherie in this thread was...



...ten words long that's some essay!

Just to be clear though, I'm not going to dumb down my posts for you or anyone else on this forum.

As for the bit in bold, the nail has met the head! Do you not see that's exactly how I feel? And that it would explain the tone of some of my posts? Of course I care about the show (well, to an extent), that has nothing to do with caring whether people are passive aggressive/patronising/etc with me or not though.

Lastly, this is what I say to everyone who makes similar comments - of course I think my bloody opinion is right, it wouldn't be much of an opinion if I didn't I know barely anyone agrees anymore, but I don't care, I've stuck by the same consistent arguments for almost the entire time I've been on this forum and I'm not going to change, I'm not going to try and fit in just for the sake of it, if people don't like it they don't have to respond. Like I said to Niamh, most of the time these days I turn up, post a few comments and then leave...if others choose to engage with me that's up to them, no one is asking them to



Congratulations on not reading my post properly again, it's a real skill!

I don't care if people want to be passive aggressive, therefore when they are I'm happy to respond in kind and have an uncivilised discussion. None of that means I "care", as you are implying. It really shouldn't be that difficult to discern what I mean



I totally understand why people would respond how they do, that's cool, but they don't have to respond at all or in the same way - either/or I'm happy to proceed however but thanks for understanding haha

I’m not asking you to dumb down your posts but how can you say you couldn’t care less then come out with these huge posts articulating every which way you feel? It’s almost undermining people who still care about this show/ this series
Also I didn’t respond last time because someone put what I was gonna say better than I would’ve so sorry...?
Nobody is asking you to fit in, post less, change your opinions, not be righteous with your opinions ect ect ect again most of this is down to the ‘haha all of you being pissed off at the rigging haha’ posts in the other thread, which came off as condescending af. And you don’t have to change that either but it’s just kinda confusing because you heckle Cherie for doing something (barely) similar, that’s all.
It’s bound to cause disagreements because we’ve both conceded we all have different tastes and different things we want from this show. And I agree it probably isn’t just as blsck and white as people don’t want rigging. It’s certainly a factor but only amplified by
- it clearly being a ploy to keep a hated housemate in that I personally think is dragging the series down
- if it was implemented earlier we would’ve saw personal favourites and unique housemates like anamelia and Kay last
- they’ve been consistent with production and had seemingly ditched their sloppy c5 ways. This seemed like a 180 on their other production decisions

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Elliot

I’m not asking you to dumb down your posts but how can you say you couldn’t care less then come out with these huge posts articulating every which way you feel? It’s almost undermining people who still care about this show/ this series

The past 24 hours are probably some of the longest posts I've made all series and they're not even about the actual show, so I'm not getting your point?

Honestly, if you look back at my posts I bet most of them over the last few weeks are one or two lines if that. The only reason these posts are so long is because so many people are responding and it's one of the first times this series anyone has engaged

Originally Posted by Elliot

Also I didn’t respond last time because someone put what I was gonna say better than I would’ve so sorry...?

And then I asked you a question, which I asked someone else too, and you had no response.

Originally Posted by Elliot

Nobody is asking you to fit in, post less, change your opinions, not be righteous with your opinions ect ect ect again most of this is down to the ‘haha all of you being pissed off at the rigging haha’ posts in the other thread, which came off as condescending af. And you don’t have to change that either but it’s just kinda confusing because you heckle Cherie for doing something (barely) similar, that’s all.

I've not HECKLED Cherie at all omg what? I made a sarcastic post, she had a problem with it, I responded flippantly with a ten word post and the rest is history...that's not my doing???

Originally Posted by Elliot

It’s bound to cause disagreements because we’ve both conceded we all have different tastes and different things we want from this show. And I agree it probably isn’t just as blsck and white as people don’t want rigging. It’s certainly a factor but only amplified by
- it clearly being a ploy to keep a hated housemate in that I personally think is dragging the series down
- if it was implemented earlier we would’ve saw personal favourites and unique housemates like anamelia and Kay last
- they’ve been consistent with production and had seemingly ditched their sloppy c5 ways. This seemed like a 180 on their other production decisions

This is retreading old ground that was covered in the other thread so I don't really want to bring it here but, all I'll say quickly is:

1) I agree VTS should've been implemented pre-series, it should've been five years ago
2) Producer manipulation is part and parcel of reality television, so long as it's in the interests of a better show I don't care
3) When producer manipulation has benefited forum favourites in the past, a lot of people had no issue with it. I can admit that, so others should too