[Omah]

Originally Posted by Jords

It has bar a few weeks though throughout 11 BB series and 7 CBB series... its always 'nominate 2 housemates up for eviction'.

No, it isn't

Big Brother 4

Week 5

Cameron (getting special coverage) made his nominations from the Big Brother House in South Africa over the phone to Gaetano. Even though he was allowed to nominate, nobody could nominate him

Week 7

Ray, as leader of the house in Week 7, had to choose the three housemates to face eviction.

[Jords]

Originally Posted by Omah

No, it isn't

Big Brother 4

Think of how many weeks altogether there have been of BB and count the nomination twist weeks, not many... And also most of them were just benefitting the 1 HM and changing how many they can nominate/immuning somebody...


Did you read my post? This isnt about doing that, its about changing what youre nominating...

Aims of the Weeks;
Week 3 - introduces nominating to save.
Week 4 - doesnt work on a who gets the most/least votes system like usual, but who works out on totalling 0 (bar 3+ -3 or less which is unlikey, but is purely to try and help the most hated HM by the others to remain in the house another week).
Week 5 - makes new HMs work to keep their position.
Week 6 - hopefully removes some deadwood.
Week 7 - nomination process linked with task, 1st time 1 person up for eviction in a should they stay or should they go situation.
Week 8 - pure twist, again to help keep disliked HMs in the house to stay - for arguments!
Week 9 - public get more of a say, which is what we like.
Week 10 - shows what the HMs intentions are, will they agree not to vote then backstab?
Week 11 - finish the series off by making it more nicey.


Obvs these are just suggesting what they could do, people may have others which theyre welcome to say!

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Jords

Think of how many weeks altogether there have been of BB and count the nomination twist weeks, not many... And also most of them were just benefitting the 1 HM and changing how many they can nominate/immuning somebody...


Did you read my post? This isnt about doing that, its about changing what youre nominating...

Aims of the Weeks;
Week 3 - introduces nominating to save.
Week 4 - doesnt work on a who gets the most/least votes system like usual, but who works out on totalling 0 (bar 3+ -3 or less which is unlikey, but is purely to try and help the most hated HM by the others to remain in the house another week).
Week 5 - makes new HMs work to keep their position.
Week 6 - hopefully removes some deadwood.
Week 7 - nomination process linked with task, 1st time 1 person up for eviction in a should they stay or should they go situation.
Week 8 - pure twist, again to help keep disliked HMs in the house to stay - for arguments!
Week 9 - public get more of a say, which is what we like.
Week 10 - shows what the HMs intentions are, will they agree not to vote then backstab?
Week 11 - finish the series off by making it more nicey.


Obvs these are just suggesting what they could do, people may have others which theyre welcome to say!

They've all been done, to a greater or lesser extent, before and I don't like them ...... simples .....

[Jords]

Originally Posted by Omah

They've all been done, to a greater or lesser extent, before and I don't like them ...... simples .....

Not true, but some (sorta) have and Ive tried improving them on what Id like to see. And fair enough, but I reckon you would if it was done, itd certainly be more unpredictable and exciting.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Jords

Not true, but some (sorta) have and Ive tried improving them on what Id like to see. And fair enough, but I reckon you would if it was done, itd certainly be more unpredictable and exciting.

No, it wouldn't - as I pointed out, BB has frequently bent the nomination/discipline rules to keep "preferred" HMs, e.g. Cameron, Charley, Makosi, in the house .....

Playing with nominations serves only to confuse the issue, both for the viewers and the HMs, who, as we have seen recently, have taken it upon themselves NOT to nominate, thus incurring more nomination-fiddling from BB .....

As we know, alienated viewers abandoned BB by the million - IMO,too many HMs and too many "twists" (along with appalling simple "tasks") did not encourage viewer particpation .....

[Jords]

Originally Posted by Omah

No, it wouldn't - as I pointed out, BB has frequently bent the nomination/discipline rules to keep "preferred" HMs, e.g. Cameron, Charley, Makosi, in the house .....

Playing with nominations serves only to confuse the issue, both for the viewers and the HMs, who, as we have seen recently, have taken it upon themselves NOT to nominate, thus incurring more nomination-fiddling from BB .....

As we know, alienated viewers abandoned BB by the million - IMO,too many HMs and too many "twists" (along with appalling simple "tasks") did not encourage viewer particpation .....

Totally agree with you here Omah, and thats annoyed me greatly, if they dont nominate they should either be automatically put up or booted the arse out!

However this isnt about 'fiddling' and its not about changing the nom selection for just 1 HM, they all get the same treatment its just the scenario in which they have to nominate differs.

You dont like the idea its cool but yeah, dont think ya getting what Im trying to put forward properly.