[Patrick]

Mark my words.

They constantly mention it now - the producers are clearly looking for feedback.
Over the course of this series, they have mentioned it on Facebook, they have ran internet polls, they have uploaded clips of the housemates discussing the voting format - and just tonight on Bit On The Side, we had Emma ask the audience what they want.

Although IMO, I don't know why they're asking a bunch of horrible chavs in a studio who support people like Alex from BB12 - what they want.

So it's rather sad. I remember for years on Channel 4, we would moan and moan non stop about how we wanted a Vote to Save because all the entertaining housemates kept leaving.

Channel 5 finally gave us it. And people are moaning because they want a Vote to Evict again?

To be quite honest, the best thing to do - would be to scrap nominations [big move but yes] from the whole format.
Simply put all the housemates up, bring in BB11's Save & Replace task - and give a certain number of housemates the chance to win immunity every week.

Then we vote to save from the housemates left up. This means we always get a strong variety and group up - to vote from.

I swear to God. If they go back to that ridiculous Vote To Evict, it will be a massive backwards step for the show.

[Shaun]

it's a shame really that this series is being used as a counter-argument to Vote to Save. I've seen a lot of people complain that we've lost good housemates this year even with VtS, but the thing is there were so many entertaining characters this year it was bound to happen regardless

the only thing that would please everyone is if the nominations system was changed so that, somehow, the most boring housemates were always up for the chop. Maybe a nominate-to-save system would be nice, but then I suspect the Housemates would just save the nice and friendly ones rather than the obnoxious bitch who walks in on day one demanding not to be spoken to

And then someone in the sweaty box suggested just having a continual vote to save with all HMs up every week... this would get rid of deadwood early on, but at the expense of the entire point of Big Brother

I just don't think there's a way where everyone would be happy. I just know for sure it isn't 'vote to evict'.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by JTM45

As i've just said in another thread..........bringing back 'Vote to EVICT' would be a fantastic thing!
Who in their right mind would prefer to have to vote to save several people to try and get one person evicted (which is what many people have been doing this and last year!) rather than just concentrating on voting the actual ONE person they want evicted ?

No one is doing that.. and anyone that has actually done that - is a bellend.
I mean really, if anybody in this country has a braincell they'd be able to see that, voting for everyone else to cancel out another person's vote would never work.

At the end of the day - it's been proven for 10 Years on Channel 4, why Vote To Evict was such a horrible format.

It's predictable, it's boring, and it ruins the show.

Originally Posted by Shaun

it's a shame really that this series is being used as a counter-argument to Vote to Save. I've seen a lot of people complain that we've lost good housemates this year even with VtS, but the thing is there were so many entertaining characters this year it was bound to happen regardless

the only thing that would please everyone is if the nominations system was changed so that, somehow, the most boring housemates were always up for the chop. Maybe a nominate-to-save system would be nice, but then I suspect the Housemates would just save the nice and friendly ones rather than the obnoxious bitch who walks in on day one demanding not to be spoken to

And then someone in the sweaty box suggested just having a continual vote to save with all HMs up every week... this would get rid of deadwood early on, but at the expense of the entire point of Big Brother

I just don't think there's a way where everyone would be happy. I just know for sure it isn't 'vote to evict'.

That idea was for them all to go up every week and have a Vote to Evict - which is a horrible idea.

If they went up every week, and it was voting to save.. then that might not be too bad.
But very expensive.

And very good point about the characters all being good. This is the first series since BB5 that every housemate has offered something - so it was always going to seem like we were loosing big characters.

But I mean having people like Chris and Arron go against eachother, so early on.. well it's just a joke.

[Maia]

Originally Posted by Patrick

No one is doing that.. and anyone that has actually done that - is a bellend.

People are doing that though. Hence why we had Caroline (who no way should've lost against the likes of Ashleigh etc...) getting evicted in a vote to save with 7 other people. There was no way she should've gone that week people were just voting tactically to get her out

[armand.kay]

Originally Posted by Mollie.

People are doing that though. Hence why we had Caroline (who no way should've lost against the likes of Ashleigh etc...) getting evicted in a vote to save with 7 other people. There was no way she should've gone that week people were just voting tactically to get her out

Its because bb kept opening and closing the lines, I'm sure she had more voted than Luke S before the opened the lines for the last time.

[Maia]

Originally Posted by armand.kay

Its because bb kept opening and closing the lines, I'm sure she had more voted than Luke S before the opened the lines for the last time.

Ah I didn't actually know that, only saw the actual eviction didn't see the rest of the episode. Appalling that they did that tbh

But even so it does prove the whole tactical voting with VtS exists, because if it didn't then reopening that vote wouldn't have made a difference anyway.

[DanielLuis]

Originally Posted by Mollie.

People are doing that though. Hence why we had Caroline (who no way should've lost against the likes of Ashleigh etc...) getting evicted in a vote to save with 7 other people. There was no way she should've gone that week people were just voting tactically to get her out

She wonly went because the freezes in the voting, no doubt.

[Jayson]

*reads title*

"ooh interesting"


*reads first line*

"what a let down"

[Jayson]

But yes, my idea has always been that for the first few weeks there are whole house vote to saves, from week 3-7/9 (depending on how long the series is) there are nominations and then vote to save, and then for the last 3 weeks before the final there are whole house vote to saves.

[JTM45]

As i've just said in another thread..........bringing back 'Vote to EVICT' would be a fantastic thing!
Who in their right mind would prefer to have to vote to save several people to try and get one person evicted (which is what many people have been doing this and last year!) rather than just concentrating on voting the actual ONE person they want evicted ?
The sole reason for introducing 'vote to save' was to get more cash out of the voters and it means week after week arseholes like Conor escape eviction when the vast majority of people wanted him evicted!
The second time he was up (as soon as it was clear what a horrible, brainless, ignorant twat he really was!) he would have been well and truly gone and the farce that ensued with him undeservedly taking half of the REAL winners prize money would never have happened.

[Ramsay]

idiots wanting vote to evict
the reason we lost big characters this years i.e chris,lydia,benedict was because they were only up with one other person making it the same as vote to evict but with more than one person up vote to save really does save the bigger characters

[SharkAttack]

Originally Posted by Karl

idiots wanting vote to evict
the reason we lost big characters this years i.e chris,lydia,benedict was because they were only up with one other person making it the same as vote to evict but with more than one person up vote to save really does save the bigger characters

I concur, Sir Heisenberg. I would suggest that they simply take the top 3 nominees every time to be put to the test. Lots of multiples then, no more duos being put up.

[Coldwinter]

I hope it is a mixture of both Vote To Save and Vote To Evict. BBAUS did it and it looked very popular and not too controversial for the housemates.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Josiah.

I hope it is a mixture of both Vote To Save and Vote To Evict. BBAUS did it and it looked very popular and not too controversial for the housemates.

I said this a few years ago and people said it would never happen, though Im not sure if the aus version does exactly what I said...

I wanted an evict AND a save line for each contestant. Evict votes cancel out save ones, and the person with the fewest save votes left(or highest minus total in some cases no doubt ) leaves. This way you can try to save your fave if they are up, but you can also chose to evict someone you really dislike.

[pcro]

Gotta keep vote to save. While vote to save to does not guarantee keeping controversial or big personalities in the house, vote to evict just about guarantees they go. In a two person eviction it doesnt seem to make much difference. But in a multiple person eviction, vote to save gives controversial people who divide the audience a much better chance at staying. last year vote to save made a huge difference for aaron who, like himor not, was about the only thing interesting in that house.

[MeMyselfAndI]

Originally Posted by pcro

Gotta keep vote to save. While vote to save to does not guarantee keeping controversial or big personalities in the house, vote to evict just about guarantees they go. In a two person eviction it doesnt seem to make much difference. But in a multiple person eviction, vote to save gives controversial people who divide the audience a much better chance at staying. last year vote to save made a huge difference for aaron who, like himor not, was about the only thing interesting in that house.

Exactly, Jay or Alex would of won last year otherwise &the final would of been Jay, Alex, Louise & Aden/Tom

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by MeMyselfandI

Exactly, Jay or Alex would of won last year otherwise &the final would of been Jay, Alex, Louise & Aden/Tom

No chance would Jay have been anywhere near the final with vote to evict

But Alex would almost definitely have won it.

[MeMyselfAndI]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

No chance would Jay have been anywhere near the final with vote to evict

But Alex would almost definitely have won it.

He was always up for eviction with Anton/Jem/Aaron who were public enemy number one, I think he would of got to the final

[Patrick]

Could not of put it better myself. Well said.

[JTM45]

While that sounds like the perfect solution Vicky i'm afraid that it would cause much confusion amongst the voting fans of 'certain' housemates (ie. Conor's and Ashleigh's fans would be mentally screwed!)

[pcro]

Doing the Australia thing with having both vote to save AND vote to evict may be good. problem is, from what I could tell when I watched, no one really understood the maths.just confused looks when Gretchen showed the graphs. there would be even more cries of fixing. lol.

One thing I would absolutey take from australia is putting the top three nominees up rather than the top two. less predictable.also, at least in the season I watched, australia was extremely hardassed about the reasons for nomination. this caused much stress among housemates. you just could not use lame excuses every week like "she's sneaky and snidey". (BTW can someone tell me if snidey is actually a word in the UK?)

[JTM45]

Originally Posted by pcro

(BTW can someone tell me if snidey is actually a word in the UK?)

Well yeah, 'snide' is the actual word but people often say 'snidey'.
It kinda' means maliciuosly sneaky.........sort of.

I do think they should require proper reasons for nominating. Some of the ones used in this series of BB have been ridiculously lame and shouldn't have been valid.
I'm sure i remember Conor saying his reason for nominating Deana one week was "just because like" or "goes without saying" or something to that effect.

One of the biggest downfalls of this series i think has been the complete lack of Rules implementation. They need to have CLEAR rules and severe and detrimental punishments for breaking those rules.
Even the 'official warnings' this series seemed to be extremely wishy-washy and had little to no noticeable effect on those who received them.

[swinearefine]

They had Save and Evict in BBAU 6 and 7. In both seasons most of the entertaining housemates were evicted early. It felt the same as vote to evict.

[starry]

Originally Posted by Patrick

And people are moaning because they want a Vote to Evict again?

I've never moaned and I agree a regular (and truly challenging, not some children's games) immunity task is still needed.

The problem has been although there has been vote to save the producers haven't moved on. They still give huge prominence to the booing crowd, have sneering Marcus, Brian and BOTS. Also they keep it most of the time to a simple head to head. It would also help if they picked more intelligent HMs overall too and had live stream so people could see them more as real people.

[billy123]

Originally Posted by Patrick

I swear to God. If they go back to that ridiculous Vote To Evict, it will be a massive backwards step for the show.

Originally Posted by Patrick

Wish it was a V.T.E this week

ffs both posts 3 hours apart just so cringe and also so telling of some peoples mentality.
#targetaudience #jeremykyle
Just wtf?