[Stacey.]

I don't think it's fair. Don't like it at all.

As Govan said in week 1, what's the point of them even nominating?

[Angus]

The S&R Task ensures that no-one can be certain of flying under the radar. Who cares who's popular in the house, they don't have to sit and watch the snoozefests we often have to endure, (like the JJ&J crap this past week). The viewers are in control and are often handed the dullards on a plate via the S&R Task, so I'm all for it.

[arista]

Originally Posted by cheapbbfan

I think all housemates should participate in these. The top nominated player can replace and the top non-nominated player gets immunity. I dont think its quite fair that people can go up that werent even nominated without at least having a chance to protect themselves

Of Course it
is nasty and unfair,
but that Evil Side is what gives the Final Ch4 Contract
some well needed Edge.

[Visage]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Too much tampering with the format is one of the main reasons why the shows been canceled.

I do see where you're coming from, but sometimes things need a change, for fear of becoming stale.


There's never going to be a format that everyone will agree on, whether it's sticking with the old or moving with the times.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by cheapbbfan

I think all housemates should participate in these. The top nominated player can replace and the top non-nominated player gets immunity. I dont think its quite fair that people can go up that werent even nominated without at least having a chance to protect themselves

The game isn't meant to be fair! People just don't like it because it means their precious favs have gone or could go despite not being nominated! Thems the breaks, as they say!

[Shiner]

I think it's not fair for some of the reasons already mentioned but mainly because the process of nominating has always been anonymous, this just flies in the face of dishing out punishments for speaking about noms.

To those that say it is fair because it puts the radar dodgers up, think about it this way - the only people that get to take part in the S/R task are the house's least favourite HMs therefore the only people put up are least close to them ie. popular HMs. Is that fair?

[cheapbbfan]

Its a good twist but I think EVERYONE should have a chance to protect themselves. The way it is, its more advantageous to get nominated bc then you at least have a shot of saving yourself

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

The game isn't meant to be fair! People just don't like it because it means their precious favs have gone or could go despite not being nominated! Thems the breaks, as they say!

Um not really bc it could have easily saved my fave, Corin this week.

I think it's not fair for some of the reasons already mentioned but mainly because the process of nominating has always been anonymous, this just flies in the face of dishing out punishments for speaking about noms.

Ditto. I think it exposes who nominated who. They can front all they want, but once the nominee chooses soemone new, it gives away who they want out to the entire group.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by Shiner

I think it's not fair for some of the reasons already mentioned but mainly because the process of nominating has always been anonymous, this just flies in the face of dishing out punishments for speaking about noms.

To those that say it is fair because it puts the radar dodgers up, think about it this way - the only people that get to take part in the S/R task are the house's least favourite HMs therefore the only people put up are least close to them ie. popular HMs. Is that fair?

Yes, and if they're popular with the public they will survive the public vote.

[Beastie]

Originally Posted by angus58

Yes, and if they're popular with the public they will survive the public vote.

This. No need to worry if you are already popular

[eye sea]

And Nathan's proof that save and replace can be cruel and unfair.

[Shiner]

Originally Posted by angus58

Yes, and if they're popular with the public they will survive the public vote.

But that is not the OPs question, that's just an explanation of the voting system which I believe we all understand already.
The question is about fairness. It is not fair because it polarises the ones to be replaced by their popularity with the least popular in the house. It is not democratic.

[boomoo]

Originally Posted by Visage

It adds a little spice to the show.

It's cruel yeah, but it's also great to watch them squirm as they wait to see who's going to be chosen.

It is good because it prevents people like last year's Lisa being in the last week.
It would also have given Freddie a chance to save himself.

[boomoo]

Originally Posted by Blueisthecolour

I would keep it, but instead of choosing a random housemate to go, the two people the winner nominated that week should be announced and the winner would have to pick one of them.

That would liven things up a bit.

But Caiomhe had nominated Ife and Corin so she had to choose someone else.
Miserable Mario nominated Caiomhe. So why exactly did he think he should not be put up by her.

Last week she had nominated Nathan so she chose him.He nominated her.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by eye sea

And Nathan's proof that save and replace can be cruel and unfair.

Yep, it was magic, wasn't it?