FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
CBB18 Celebrity Big Brother Summer 2016 [CBB 18] won by Stephen Bear here. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-08-2016, 11:24 PM | #26 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
2% was between 2nd and 3rd obviously. Chloe was bottom. James top. Marnie and Bear were the two with 2% between them. So bear could have ended up in the bottom 2. Every poll, the facebook likes and twitter retweets which collectively can prove to be very reliable of how voting is going showed this to be the case.
Last edited by Yaki da; 12-08-2016 at 11:25 PM. |
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:28 PM | #27 | |||
|
||||
Jessica Meuse was robbed.
|
Quote:
__________________
KRO! |
|||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:28 PM | #28 | ||
|
|||
-
|
I would imagine that when they are simply saying "vote to save", then all they have to do to be within the rules is ensure that the person with the most votes stays. All bets are off beyond that. They could for example have 5 people up, and at the last minute say "everyone except the one with the most is leaving". That would be perfectly legitimate.
What they could NOT do, for example would be have a VTE and then at the last minute say "it's a head to head between the two people who got most votes to evict". They would HAVE to evict the person who got most. |
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:29 PM | #29 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
|
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:32 PM | #30 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
I think we all know that BB do what they want, not what we want, its up to us to decide whether we pay for that or not!
__________________
|
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:32 PM | #31 | |||
|
||||
Jessica Meuse was robbed.
|
Quote:
And I would've been disgusted if Bear had've lost to one of the two girls who have done zero.
__________________
KRO! |
|||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:38 PM | #32 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
But Ofcom's time is spent dealing with people complaining about homosexuals blaming bisexuals for AIDS, instead of things like this which is what Ofcom should really be for. Quote:
2.15 Broadcasters must draw up rules for a broadcast competition or vote. These rules must be clear and appropriately made known. In particular, significant conditions that may affect a viewer’s or listener’s decision to participate must be stated at the time an invitation to participate is broadcast. The rules of this vote were not made absolutely clear until Emma Willis announced it at 9 pm, 23 hours AFTER lines were opened and most people assumed that the person with the fewest votes would be evicted. i asumed that. others assumed that. Gamblers assumed that (Hence the reason Chloe was a massive odds on favourite to go until the news came out there would be a bottom 2) They may not have done this intentionally but it is quite clear to see that if you do not make CLEAR what the rules of a vote you've asked people to participate in are then you can be found in breach of that code. |
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:40 PM | #33 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Yaki da; 12-08-2016 at 11:43 PM. |
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:44 PM | #34 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Quote:
I can see your point but I genuinely don't think anything at all is implied by "vote to save", other than that "most votes is saved", and they haven't broken that. Anything else would purely be the assumption of the voter. |
||
Reply With Quote |
12-08-2016, 11:55 PM | #35 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
This would put them in violation of both of these... 2.14 Broadcasters must ensure that viewers and listeners are not materially misled about any broadcast competition or voting. 2.15 Broadcasters must draw up rules for a broadcast competition or vote. These rules must be clear and appropriately made known. In particular, significant conditions that may affect a viewer's or listener's decision to participate must be stated at the time an invitation to participate is broadcast. Voters were clearly led to believe that this would be an eviction like any other (at no point was it suggested otherwise until Friday afternoon) and that the person with the fewest votes would go. Quote:
Quote:
The fact is the majority of people probably thought the person with the fewest votes would be evicted. If only the person who tops the vote is safe, or the top 2 then they MUST make that clear before lines open. This is especially true when the standard procedure has been that whoever does have the fewest votes is evicted. How are voters to know the person with the fewest votes may not be evicted if you do not tell them that this may not be the case. Last edited by Yaki da; 13-08-2016 at 12:38 AM. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
13-08-2016, 01:13 AM | #36 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
I agree with you, Yaki Da.
By pulling this stunt, BB created the possibility that the person who was the third most popular might be evicted, rather than the person who received the fewest votes. If Chloe didn't receive the fewest votes, those who spent money voting for her have been cheated. I'd like to know who actually came third and fourth according to the vote, so that those who were duped into voting could claim their money back. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
13-08-2016, 06:11 AM | #37 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Do they make it clear on the X factor before every vote, that there will be a bottom two and a sing off, with the decision on who will leave ultimately lying with the judges? I know it's been the format for years and so could possibly be considered as "known"... But, they don't explicitly state this every time the voting lines open, and surely you could argue that some at home might be first time viewers and not aware of the format?
|
||
Reply With Quote |
Reply |
|
|