[Lostie!]

Originally Posted by BB6

I don't get the VTE hate.

VTE worked perfectly fine during the eleven year run on Channel 4. And those series are held in much higher regard than BB12-BB13, both of which featured VTS.

Exactly my thoughts. It's a bit of a contradiction to prefer C4 BB, but view VTE as a show-ruining format.

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by Lostie!

Exactly my thoughts. It's a bit of a contradiction to prefer C4 BB, but view VTE as a show-ruining format.

Exactly.

Not to mention when Channel 4 did use VTS, I think in CBB3.

It didn't exactly stop the two biggest characters of the series (John and Jackie) being the first two to be evicted.

Plus any voting system which kept in Conor till Week 8, should be condemned.

[LukeB]

Both VTE and VTS have cons and pros tbh

Lauren being evicted over Luke A on a VTS.
Ricci staying over lesley in CBB14..

VTS seems to be overrated imo

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Jack_

VTE is actually the worse game of the two and the one that's the most detrimental to the show

It's also incredibly easy. All you do is be nice to everyone and don't say anything, you therefore avoid nomination cause you're not pissing anyone off and even if you do end up you've done nothing for anyone to want to evict you so you survive anyway. Then you make the final and there's a good chance you end up winning as the 'nice' person. Just another reason why it's an awfully destructive system

I think its harder to gain support as the 'quiet nice guy' than the 'loud obnoxious guy' So, nah I don't think it's an easier game. Look at the support Marc has over Chloe, if it was VTS all the way through, nobody else would stand a chance. Marc won and it isn't close.

[Visage]

I prefer Vote to Save, I find the VTE creates negativity, whereas VTS can reward good behaviour.

If I'm spending money on housemates by voting I would rather it went towards the people I like in there.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by abhorson

But that is what the majority want. So that is all that counts. I wanted Scottish Independence, but except i was in the minority of voters.

Not if the majority don't have a clue what they're doing though

And besides, if it were a vote to save, the majority would still get what they wanted. In fact, say four people were up, the fans of three housemates (an overwhelming majority) would all get what they want when their housemate was saved

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by Visage

VTS can reward good behaviour.

Conor?
Jim Davidson?
James Jordan?
Perez Hilton?
Katie Hopkins?

[Lostie!]

Originally Posted by Visage

I prefer Vote to Save, I find the VTE creates negativity, whereas VTS can reward good behaviour.

If I'm spending money on housemates by voting I would rather it went towards the people I like in there.

And bad behaviour.

This is why I like VTE, people have the chance to vote to evict people who've acted like knobs, rather than keeping them for the sake of "entertainment" and essentially validating their nastiness.

[EspeonBB]

VTE is better because it means that twats like Aaron, Katie Hopkins, Perez Hilton and Conor wouldn't have stayed as long.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Withano

I think its harder to gain support as the 'quiet nice guy' than the 'loud obnoxious guy' So, nah I don't think it's an easier game. Look at the support Marc has over Chloe, if it was VTS all the way through, nobody else would stand a chance. Marc won and it isn't close.

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

Chloe would be safe in a VTS as well.
Cause she has a big fanbase and many people like her.

[Visage]

Originally Posted by BB6

Conor?
Jim Davidson?
James Jordan?
Perez Hilton?
Katie Hopkins?

Originally Posted by Lostie!

And bad behaviour.

This is why I like VTE, people have the chance to vote to evict people who've acted like knobs, rather than keeping them for the sake of "entertainment" and essentially validating their nastiness.

Yes, great points

I was too busy thinking about myself and what I would prefer to vote for.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by BB6

Chloe would be safe in a VTS as well.
Cause she has a big fanbase and many people like her.

True, although it would depend on the number of people up and who was up with her I think

For the most part though VTE makes it a piss easy game. Say nothing, do nothing, be nice, no nominations, you make the final. Even if you do go up, no one knows you so you aren't going anywhere. This is why we get people like Danny and Cristian, and it's so detrimental to the show.

It:

- festers hatred, anger and negativity and there's already enough of that as it is
- encourages people to radar dive
- means as soon as you start doing something, you risk leaving (case in point: Jade)

Those three are reasons enough to warrant its permanent removal.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Not in the house it isn't though. I mean I know we barely get normal nominations anymore but the point is, the people who are usually nominated are those who are annoying the other housemates and the 'nice' ones who sit in the background avoid nomination for pretty much the entirety of the series. It's pretty easy to just be nice to other people and not say a thing or not give your opinions on anything and thus sail through to the final.

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

I disagree, next time Marc gets voted up for nomination, the producers will probably put him up against one other person and he'll probably survive a VTS and a VTE but he'd be in trouble if there's a third person up too, hence, it is more of an open game.

VTS all series long is just a game of 'who can take the most airtime' and I'm not interested in that.
VTE, you'd have to befriend people and make common enemies with people to avoid nomination, all without the public hating you. Its more interesting for me to watch because its more of a game.

Also Friday nights are always the highlight of the week for me in Big Brother, but they're a bit dull with VTS.

[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by Jack_

In your example, if Marc goes up, he is out. Someone like Chloe is as safe as houses under VTE for the most part.

that sounds perfect tbh

and EspeonBB explained my point well, VTE at least gives us a chance to get rid of the series-ruiners. Get Hopkins and Perez out under VTE and just maybe another storyline would develop, ya know?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Withano

I disagree, next time Marc gets voted up for nomination, the producers will probably put him up against one other person and he'll probably survive a VTS and a VTE but he'd be in trouble if there's a third person up too, hence, it is more of an open game.

VTS all series long is just a game of 'who can take the most airtime' and I'm not interested in that.
VTE, you'd have to befriend people and make common enemies with people to avoid nomination, all without the public hating you. Its more interesting for me to watch because its more of a game.

Also Friday nights are always the highlight of the week for me in Big Brother, but they're a bit dull with VTS.

Well putting producer manipulation which is inevitable aside, if it played out normally, Marc would go and would probably have gone already. I mean the biggest evidence for my argument is Jade, three days ago there's no way she'd have stood a chance of leaving since she's been invisible the last couple of weeks, but since the thing with Brian started up and her argument with Cristian, she was evicted because of it. If you do nothing, you don't go anywhere. If that's not counter productive I don't know what is.

As for the bit in bold that's probably the easiest game ever so much that it's barely even a game. Befriending people and being nice to others is easy, it comes naturally to well, 99% of people. You don't even have to try. So you don't get put up, and even if you do you've not pissed the public off to want to evict you. Under these rules the people whom are annoying the housemates go up and most of the time get evicted, and while that may be great for the housemates, it's not great for the viewers.

On a side note - I've had a discussion with you before where you've said you don't like BBUK being about a 'game'. And to be honest, a 'game' in BBUK doesn't really exist as I've just explained because it's just making friends with each other. Let's adopt the US format and see a real game of social interaction play out, because that's where you have to be clever in getting people on your side but shafting them at the same time.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Macie Lightfoot

that sounds perfect tbh

and EspeonBB explained my point well, VTE at least gives us a chance to get rid of the series-ruiners. Get Hopkins and Perez out under VTE and just maybe another storyline would develop, ya know?

Perfect if Chloe wasn't a nothing character maybe, but for the most part she is

And I never buy into this argument that we should take a punt on letting some other people have a go at developing new storylines. Why evict someone who is consistent at the expense of someone who ~may~ just be coming into their own but may just fade into the background again (e.g. the Cristian vs Jade debates this week)? That's not worth the risk to be quite honest

[Macie Lightfoot]

Gameplay within the house definitely exists, or at least it did at one point when there was actually a consistent nomination process. Lisa Wallace slithering her way to the final week was a thing of beauty <3

[Moviefan]

Which series was it that the save , was it last year when it wens back to evict?

If it's save , there was no why jade would have gone, I think chole would have gone

But now she (chole) will win the show

[Macie Lightfoot]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Perfect if Chloe wasn't a nothing character maybe, but for the most part she is

And I never buy into this argument that we should take a punt on letting some other people have a go at developing new storylines. Why evict someone who is consistent at the expense of someone who ~may~ just be coming into their own but may just fade into the background again (e.g. the Cristian vs Jade debates this week)? That's not worth the risk to be quite honest

Quality over quantity, I've probably enjoyed Chloe the most out of anyone this series but that really doesn't say much.

And I definitely buy into that argument when we've been watching the same repetitive **** on loop with Marc for what feels like months now. It's no coincidence at all that the show went to **** as soon as the intruders came in.

[EspeonBB]

VTS keeps 'big characters' in which take over the show and stifle development in the house most of the time (Perez and Katie Hopkins in CBB is the perfect example of this). The only time I was in favour of VTS was during BB13 because Deana wouldn't have lasted as long (and finding out Ashleigh somehow had more fans than Scott lol).

And 'big characters' can still survive with VTE, see Gina and Dexter in BB14

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by Moviefan

Which series was it that the save , was it last year when it wens back to evict?

If it's save , there was no why jade would have gone, I think chole would have gone

But now she (chole) will win the show

You're wrong.

If last night was a VTS, Harry would've went.

Chloe - She's well liked, and has a lot of support. You say she will win. That's because she has the support. Therefore, if people will vote for her to win, they will also vote her to stay.
Jade - Entertaining.
Cristian - Good looking male. Eye candy vote.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Well putting producer manipulation which is inevitable aside, if it played out normally, Marc would go and would probably have gone already. I mean the biggest evidence for my argument is Jade, three days ago there's no way she'd have stood a chance of leaving since she's been invisible the last couple of weeks, but since the thing with Brian started up and her argument with Cristian, she was evicted because of it. If you do nothing, you don't go anywhere. If that's not counter productive I don't know what is.

As for the bit in bold that's probably the easiest game ever so much that it's barely even a game. Befriending people and being nice to others is easy, it comes naturally to well, 99% of people. You don't even have to try. So you don't get put up, and even if you do you've not pissed the public off to want to evict you. Under these rules the people whom are annoying the housemates go up and most of the time get evicted, and while that may be great for the housemates, it's not great for the viewers.

On a side note - I've had a discussion with you before where you've said you don't like BBUK being about a 'game'. And to be honest, a 'game' in BBUK doesn't really exist as I've just explained because it's just making friends with each other. Let's adopt the US format and see a real game of social interaction play out, because that's where you have to be clever in getting people on your side but shafting them at the same time.

I know it sounds like I'm arguing but i do understand what you're saying..

I think our difference of opinion is because we watch the show differently.. You watch it as an entertainment show and I agree that vts would keep the 'entertaining' ones in longer.. I watch it as a reality show, and to me, vts gets rid of any 'real' element because it's just a show of people being as loud as possible and that's no fun for me to watch

Take sallie axl for example (is that her name, the **** who lost to Gina) she basically said in her interview that she was purposely being loud and brassy because she thought it was vts.. She deliberately wasn't acting 'real'.. It wouldn't be fun for me to watch if people acted like her more often because of vts