[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by Shiner

That's not my assumption at all. If a vote to evict (eliminate) was a fair way of doing it then we'd adopt it in general elections or other occasions where we need to know what consensus of the majority (not the entirety as you suggest) is.

You said..and i quote:

"The disappointment is that last night's result is not representative of how the GBP feel "

I say that last nights result is a reflection of how the public felt in that more people voted out the likes of Corin than others like JJ2 etc. But that is because it was a VTE.

Elections have sod all to do with it. In a general election, the party with the most votes (fanbase) does not get to be in power as the last election showed. They have to have a majority yes vote over all the other parties yes votes combined, hence we have a coalition parliament.
In BB, with multiple HMs up for the vote, then VTE & VTS is unfair in one way or another to someone. Only a direct one on one contest can anyone truly ascertain the public feeling.
Its not hard.

[Shiner]

Ok to expand on my point...
Hypothetically, if this system was adopted for elections then you would have to put a vote in for each of the opposing parties to the one that you actually want to vote for. Which is a little bit of a waste of everyone's time but does no actual harm. Now factor in that you now must pay for each vote (thus eliminating people who have a sense of value of money and may not wish to waste it on something so intangible - it obviously also reduces the votes for poor people who can't afford to cast their vote more than once - the only people benefiting from this situation is the people that take the fee) and then further factor in the randomness of multiple votes per person.

Would you still be willing to accept this as a fair representation of the countries opinion?

The reason for the coalition is that someone set a limit of maximum votes that a party must achieve before getting full power.

[StGeorge]

Originally Posted by Shiner

The reason for the coalition is that someone set a limit of maximum votes that a party must achieve before getting full power.

Er yes correct....and that figure gives them an overall majority otherwise it becomes a hung parliament as you will have the potential situation where all the other parties vote the same and the governing party never manages to govern.
This is not what happens either way in a BB vote and so as i say they are chalk and cheese.

What im saying to you is that it doesnt matter if its a VTE or VTS, its always a diluted vote, and so not truly representative for some, if its a multiple eviction.

[Shiner]

Originally Posted by StGeorge

Er yes correct....and that figure gives them an overall majority otherwise it becomes a hung parliament as you will have the potential situation where all the other parties vote the same and the governing party never manages to govern.
This is not what happens either way in a BB vote and so as i say they are chalk and cheese.

What im saying to you is that it doesnt matter if its a VTE or VTS, its always a diluted vote, and so not truly representative for some, if its a multiple eviction.

Actually the limit isn't an overall majority. It's a sufficient majority.

Well it does matter because if last evictions had been VTS then the results would have been the opposite. The only situation where it doesn't matter is when you don't have all of them up in the first place.

[Omen]

There should be no vote to save/win at all. The winner should be the least unpopular, most unnoticeable hm. That would be funny - it would be a shameful honour to be the winner. Lol.

[StGeorge]

As it happens Shiner, i agree that a VTE works exactly as you say, but only because it works in exactly the same as a VTS in that with multip;e HMs, the votes either way can be diluted.
ie: Corins fanbase would have to be so large to counter all the votes to evict her by voting for 4 more HMs to go than her.

Another example IMO is when Shabby picked Dave to go in the save & replace. This meant that Govan went up against the fans of two similar HMs and his fanbase just wasnt strong enough.
Again..ditto that with Sunshine against Shabby and Caoimhe.
Only two HM evictions give true reflection of the publics feeling.

Do you see my point now?

[Pato]

should have been vote to save now we got the 3 of the most dullest housemates this series it should have been sam john james and corin instead of JJ andrew and mario

[StGeorge]

IMO if its VTE in all those weeks leading up to the final, then it has to remain that way irrespective of it upsetting people due to their fav going.
BB have been accused of manipulation before, and even though it is now missing those that people like, it would be wrong to change the system just to save them.

If BB does survive elsewhere, then the producers need to set the rules at the beginning and stick to it so everyone knows where its at and going.

[Shiner]

The whole point of last night's show was to ensure that the least threatening HMs went through to join BB's favourite in the final.