[Niamh.]

and Chloe in her place along with Nick, Harry and Jack, how many of them would have bid against her? Cos we know Sams feeling don't count in there.....

I think

Nick and Jack would definitely have bid, Chloe may have done but Harry wouldn't have

[Gillian-73]

I agree, everyone of them but Harry.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

and Chloe in her place along with Nick, Harry and Jack, how many of them would have bid against her? Cos we know Sams feeling don't count in there.....

I think

Nick and Jack would definitely have bid, Chloe may have done but Harry wouldn't have

Sam nominates Jack at every opportunity and she isnt particularly friendly with him so why would he save her? You claim Harry as the better person but she ate Jack's letter quick enough because she doesn't really like him.

We could go on and say if it was Jack in Chloe's place they would have all placed a bid even Harry because Jack is an easy target as they perceive the public do not like him.

IMO these hypothetical are always a bit silly because it didn't happen that way and the circumstances and feelings of those involved are different when you put someone else in there so the what if situation is therefore a completely different set of circumstances.

Also Harry is no angel, or paragon of good virtues. It would just depend if it was someone she liked more or less which is probably the same for most people.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Sam nominates Jack at every opportunity and she isnt particularly friendly with him so why would he save her? You claim Harry as the better person but she ate Jack's letter quick enough because she doesn't really like him. IMO these hypothetical are always a bit silly because it didn't happen that way and the circumstances and feelings of those involved are different when you put someone else in there so the what if situation is therefore a completely different set of circumstances.

She had to eat someones letter though, it's not like she had the choice to read one but decided nah I'll eat Jacks letter instead Also she didn't eat it quick enough, you say that like she was chomping at the bit to do it when quite clearly she was the most upset out of any of them for having to do it.

If you find the thread subject so silly you don't need to reply btw

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Sam nominates Jack at every opportunity and she isnt particularly friendly with him so why would he save her? You claim Harry as the better person but she ate Jack's letter quick enough because she doesn't really like him.

We could go on and say if it was Jack in Chloe's place they would have all placed a bid even Harry because Jack is an easy target as they perceive the public do not like him.

IMO these hypothetical are always a bit silly because it didn't happen that way and the circumstances and feelings of those involved are different when you put someone else in there so the what if situation is therefore a completely different set of circumstances.

Also Harry is no angel, it would just depend if it was someone she liked more or less which is probably the same for most people.

So my point is, there is nothing wrong with what Nick did then if it's just a case of who you like and who you don't rather than the principle of taking someones place in the final week like they were trying to make out

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So my point is, there is nothing wrong with what Nick did then if it's just a case of who you like and who you don't rather than the principle of taking someones place in the final week like they were trying to make out

I never said there was anything wrong with what Nick did actually though it wasnt a nice thing to do it is a game show. I guess it depends really on how close a friend he was to Chloe. I wouldn't have said specially close because he spends most of his time under the blanket with Harry.

Why wouldn't I reply to any thread if I feel I have something to contribute? That remark came over as rather snippy to me and I'm a little surprised from you as I view you as one of the more level headed people on the forum. If you re read what I said you'll perhaps note I wasn't criticising your thread but just saying that hypotheticals are a bit silly because the circumstances change the situation IMO.

As an example what if it had been Jack not Chloe, or Sam? Do you think Harry would have bid? The game changes with the circumstances. It's a bit of a shame we can't find out. I'm curious now.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I never said there was anything wrong with what Nick did actually though it wasnt a nice thing to do it is a game show. I guess it depends really on how close a friend he was to Chloe. I wouldn't have said specially close because he spends most of his time under the blanket with Harry.

Why wouldn't I reply to any thread if I feel I have something to contribute? That remark came over as rather snippy to me and I'm a little surprised from you as I view you as one of the more level headed people on the forum. If you re read what I said you'll perhaps note I wasn't criticising your thread but just saying that hypotheticals are a bit silly because the circumstances change the situation IMO.

I found this part of your post quite snipey "IMO these hypothetical are always a bit silly because it didn't happen that way and the circumstances and feelings of those involved are different when you put someone else in there so the what if situation is therefore a completely different set of circumstances."

The point of my thread was that if a different, less liked HM was up then no one would be taking the moral highground saying that it was selfish to take someones place in the final like that.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I never said there was anything wrong with what Nick did actually though it wasnt a nice thing to do it is a game show. I guess it depends really on how close a friend he was to Chloe. I wouldn't have said specially close because he spends most of his time under the blanket with Harry.

Why wouldn't I reply to any thread if I feel I have something to contribute? That remark came over as rather snippy to me and I'm a little surprised from you as I view you as one of the more level headed people on the forum. If you re read what I said you'll perhaps note I wasn't criticising your thread but just saying that hypotheticals are a bit silly because the circumstances change the situation IMO.

As an example what if it had been Jack not Chloe, or Sam? Do you think Harry would have bid? The game changes with the circumstances. It's a bit of a shame we can't find out. I'm curious now.

I don't think Harry would have bid no matter who it was, i just don't think it's in her nature and tbh I think Harry is in a state of mind where she wouldn't mind leaving the house anyway

[Vicky.]

Out of everyone in there, Harry is the only one who wouldn't save herself at the expense of another Sam.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I found this part of your post quite snipey "IMO these hypothetical are always a bit silly because it didn't happen that way and the circumstances and feelings of those involved are different when you put someone else in there so the what if situation is therefore a completely different set of circumstances."

The point of my thread was that if a different, less liked HM was up then no one would be taking the moral highground saying that it was selfish to take someones place in the final like that.

I could have said imo hypotheticals are pointless because the circumstances change with the person but I chose to say a bit silly because it sounded less aggressive to me. Wrong choice of words in the end perhaps.

What Nick did was selfish but I think often we forget that BB is a competition and the object of a competition is to win. So really he was just playing the game. I think had Jack gone ahead with his bid it would have been more of a betrayal as he has been close to Chloe but she also has treated him poorly over recent days so does she deserve the loyalty?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I could have said imo hypotheticals are pointless because the circumstances change with the person but I chose to say a bit silly because it sounded less aggressive to me. Wrong choice of words in the end perhaps.

What Nick did was selfish but I think often we forget that BB is a competition and the object of a competition is to win. So really he was just playing the game. I think had Jack gone ahead with his bid it would have been more os a betrayal as he has been close to Chloe but she also has treated huim poorly over recent days so does she deserve the loyalty?

Well, she gave Jack a hard time eventhough he didn't bid, saying that he would have done if it weren't for the 4k thing so I think there would have been a major blow up if he had bid on her. Basically taking her frustrations of being up for eviction out on Jack instead of Nick because she thinks Jack is unpopular and Nick is popular. Harsh.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well, she gave Jack a hard time eventhough he didn't bid, saying that he would have done if it weren't for the 4k thing so I think there would have been a major blow up if he had bid on her. Basically taking her frustrations of being up for eviction out on Jack instead of Nick because she thinks Jack is unpopular and Nick is popular. Harsh.

If I had been in Jack's position, after allowing myself to be nominated for her and her not even having the gumption to take the immunity, I would have sold her down the swanee for 10k but maybe Jack is nicer than I am.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

If I had been in Jack's position, after allowing myself to be nominated for her and her not even having the gumption to take the immunity, I would have sold her down the swanee for 10k but maybe Jack is nicer than I am.

She's been a horrible bitch towards him the last while, she doesn't realise it but she's making him popular again

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

She's been a horrible bitch towards him the last while, she doesn't realise it but she's making him popular again

Indeed she is, I love it.
She not only makes Jack more popular but we are getting to see the real Chloe at last.
She is nder the distinct impression that we the public worship the ground Danny walks on hence her bigging him up and saying it is his money in the pot etc....if only she knew the truth.
He is another marmite character like Marc. Reckon.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Indeed she is, I love it.
She not only makes Jack more popular but we are getting to see the real Chloe at last.
She is nder the distinct impression that we the public worship the ground Danny walks on hence her bigging him up and saying it is his money in ge pig etc....if only she knew the truth.
He is another marmite character like Marc. Reckon.

Do you think? Problem is though, he's likely going to sail into the final and not have to face a VTE so it may not matter if he's marmite

[Alf]

Sam is a terrible housemate so who cares?

She took the place of a good housemate who had something about them in Sara.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by wannashag

Sam is a terrible housemate so who cares?

She took the place of a good housemate who had something about them in Sara.

It's hardly her fault Sarah wasn't saved (as much as I would have liked her to have been)

[jennyjuniper]

I'm just laughing at the numpties who said 'It will be a happy house now Marc has gone'.