[OnlyFoolsVote]

I made a thread that only got 24 views (because it contained a title that actually forced readers to engage their brains), so now have come up with a title to get you morons reading my excellent ideas

To quote my brilliant self:

Why Adding Isaac is a Stupid Idea



Rumour has it that Isaac (Noirins ''ex'') is to be going into the BB house. On paper, it looks good. However, like I have said many times in the past, the BB format is seriously in need of a rehash if ideas like this will actually serve their purpose. Simply put, the the voting public/pleb-lic cannot be trusted to keep entertaining housemates in on eviction night, hence if Noirin, Marcus or Shiavash leave on the day/day before Isaac arrives, there will be considerably less drama had the system CHANGED.

How can it be changed?

Simple: let the plebs vote on PUNISHMENTS for the losing housemate on a friday night, but do not, whatever you do, have votes for evictions. Evictions should be used at the final 1-2 weeks, which ensures entertaining tv for at least 95-99% of BB's entire run.

Important Info: to the idiots who think I'm repetitive, let me just tell you that one of the fundamentals in advertising a great product (or idea) that would otherwise fall on deaf ears (yes, BB voters certainly aren't the brightest) is this:

Tell them, tell them again and tell them what you told them.

No truer words could be spoken when addressing the imbeciles who vote on BB, and the inept producers who supposedly ''run'' the show

[Beastie]

yeah i dont want noirins ex in..

noirin is going to be evicted soon anyway!!

in beas words "its a bloody rotten idea" lol

[Marc]

Boooo to Isaac...

[OnlyFoolsVote]

As I suspected, the responses thus far have lacked in any depth and imagination

[Prole]

God... not you again. Please stop using different usernames, you're filling up my ignore list, you bore.

[Claymores]

Originally posted by OnlyFoolsVote
As I suspected, the responses thus far have lacked in any depth and imagination

we're all plebs

[Chuckyegg]

idiot

[ElProximo]

Originally posted by OnlyFoolsVote
How can it be changed?

Simple: let the plebs vote on PUNISHMENTS for the losing housemate on a friday night, but do not, whatever you do, have votes for evictions. Evictions should be used at the final 1-2 weeks, which ensures entertaining tv for at least 95-99% of BB's entire run.

No truer words could be spoken when addressing the imbeciles who vote on BB, and the inept producers who supposedly ''run'' the show

It would be such a fundamental change in the game/social experiment that you would end up with something else but 'Big Brother' as we know it.

This doesn't work for me and not just because I am a purist but for a few other reasons:

- A huge part of the drama, intrigue, excitement and suspense is most definitely in the eviction.
For both the viewers and the HMs themselves.
It is exactly what creates stress, tragedy, tears and busts up stasis among HMs.
It is the huge thrill of each week.

- Rather than continue social dynamics it might put them in the aforementioned 'stasis'. A great example would be a block of wannabe models who lock up at poolside and insulate themselves. Another group locks up their smoke area. After a few weeks you get a set social dynamic established when everyone supposes they have found their place.
versus,
by removing parts you see the machines forced to morph, abandon, realign and win/lose social advantages. There is nothing like a lost HM to reshuffle the decks.

- Why less and less HMs 'ought' to be what interests the curious, the deeper thinkers, the social analyzers and engages the mind?
Well, the idea is that at first we have so many we just get more brief superficial personalities and characters exposed.
As we get down to less HMs there is less 'brief' social interactions and more sophisticated, meaningful and intimate exchanges. We the viewer also get more time for each remaining HM.
The less and less the more and more 'in depth' we go into each remaining character. Same for them with only a few remaining HM to deal with.
The final 5 week becomes far less of a HL show of so many outrageous 'superficial dramas' and more like a documentary really just focusing on individuals we know and examine and see in close relationships.
Now this 'ought' to be what happens. To a large extent that is what happens.
The danger is, sometimes you do end up with just a few who remain 'face value' and introverted, or course that can happen too,
but, the very idea of dropping HMs is to give greater and 'deeper thoughts' into remaining ones.
Which you should appreciate more than anyone I suppose?

This week is (for me) a time where I am ready to see about half of the least interesting and most 'superficial' and/or dull HMs cleared out.
Again - for the purpose of then focusing closer and deeper on the more interesting ones left.

Another reason for liking the reductions:
- In fact the less people around is another intriguing psychological aspect of the social experiment.
Examples:
A HM who is very flamboyant and confident in a large group with a lot of action might face a real psychological challenge in a group of just 4 or 5 in a large house.
or
A HM who easily avoids conflict by 'vanishing into the crowd' or instigates power by working 'behind the crowd' might find themselves in intriguing and strange territory when forced to experience a small intimate social situation of just several people.

So basically I think your idea would lead to a very superficial program that might be big on 'eye-candy' and action scenes but lacks any depth into the hearts and minds and removes the ability to focus more on individuals complex experiences and psychological challenges.

[reallynow]

I must say I do not want Noirin's ex to go in, I hope Marcus and
Noirin leaves period, enough is enough now. I like Noirin, but ENOUGH.

[OnlyFoolsVote]

Originally posted by ElProximo

It would be such a fundamental change in the game/social experiment that you would end up with something else but 'Big Brother' as we know it.

This doesn't work for me and not just because I am a purist but for a few other reasons:

- A huge part of the drama, intrigue, excitement and suspense is most definitely in the eviction.
For both the viewers and the HMs themselves.
It is exactly what creates stress, tragedy, tears and busts up stasis among HMs.
It is the huge thrill of each week.

- Rather than continue social dynamics it might put them in the aforementioned 'stasis'. A great example would be a block of wannabe models who lock up at poolside and insulate themselves. Another group locks up their smoke area. After a few weeks you get a set social dynamic established when everyone supposes they have found their place.
versus,
by removing parts you see the machines forced to morph, abandon, realign and win/lose social advantages. There is nothing like a lost HM to reshuffle the decks.

- Why less and less HMs 'ought' to be what interests the curious, the deeper thinkers, the social analyzers and engages the mind?
Well, the idea is that at first we have so many we just get more brief superficial personalities and characters exposed.
As we get down to less HMs there is less 'brief' social interactions and more sophisticated, meaningful and intimate exchanges. We the viewer also get more time for each remaining HM.
The less and less the more and more 'in depth' we go into each remaining character. Same for them with only a few remaining HM to deal with.
The final 5 week becomes far less of a HL show of so many outrageous 'superficial dramas' and more like a documentary really just focusing on individuals we know and examine and see in close relationships.
Now this 'ought' to be what happens. To a large extent that is what happens.
The danger is, sometimes you do end up with just a few who remain 'face value' and introverted, or course that can happen too,
but, the very idea of dropping HMs is to give greater and 'deeper thoughts' into remaining ones.
Which you should appreciate more than anyone I suppose?

This week is (for me) a time where I am ready to see about half of the least interesting and most 'superficial' and/or dull HMs cleared out.
Again - for the purpose of then focusing closer and deeper on the more interesting ones left.

Another reason for liking the reductions:
- In fact the less people around is another intriguing psychological aspect of the social experiment.
Examples:
A HM who is very flamboyant and confident in a large group with a lot of action might face a real psychological challenge in a group of just 4 or 5 in a large house.
or
A HM who easily avoids conflict by 'vanishing into the crowd' or instigates power by working 'behind the crowd' might find themselves in intriguing and strange territory when forced to experience a small intimate social situation of just several people.

So basically I think your idea would lead to a very superficial program that might be big on 'eye-candy' and action scenes but lacks any depth into the hearts and minds and removes the ability to focus more on individuals complex experiences and psychological challenges.

Long winded psycho-babble And seriously, the ''thrill'' of evictions is mindless. 2 minutes of boos and a quick interview with Davina is pitiful next to my proposal. If you punish (not evict) the losing housemate, then that would open up a whole can of worms and potential entertainment dwarfed by the ''thrill'' of any eviction.

[bronaaaa]

I do like like your idea OP.

[ElProximo]

[2 minutes of boos and a quick interview with Davina is pitiful next to my proposal. If you punish (not evict) the losing housemate, then that would open up a whole can or worms and potential entertainment dwarfed by the ''thrill'' of any eviction.]

The Eviction is far more than two minutes. The suspense and consequences of an eviction even more,
but,
By all means feel free to explain why your can of worms would dwarf any thrill of eviction?
Remember not to use any 'psycho-babble' and keep in mind you have removed evictions.
Explain?

[OnlyFoolsVote]

Originally posted by bronaaaa
I do like like your idea OP.

And I appreciate your support Bronaaaa.

You give me hope that BB could still be the greatest reality show on earth, provided the voters petition BB to change the WAY in which Friday's vote is cast. And I do hope those idiotic producers would engage their brains for once in their lives and start making the changes BB desperately needs

[OnlyFoolsVote]

Originally posted by ElProximo
[2 minutes of boos and a quick interview with Davina is pitiful next to my proposal. If you punish (not evict) the losing housemate, then that would open up a whole can or worms and potential entertainment dwarfed by the ''thrill'' of any eviction.]

The Eviction is far more than two minutes. The suspense and consequences of an eviction even more,
but,
By all means feel free to explain why your can of worms would dwarf any thrill of eviction?
Remember not to use any 'psycho-babble' and keep in mind you have removed evictions.
Explain?

Okay. Say if Lisa and Marcus were up. Well, the voters could decide 1 of 3 punishments. Either, the loser has to:

1) Sit in a cardboard box in the rain for 3 whole night and days (only toilet breaks allowed) and watch the other housemates enjoy parties/treats for the duration

2) Have all negative comments they have said about anyone aired to all the housemates

or 3) Whilst everyone else gets an hour's visit from a relative/loved one, the losing housemate must wear a dunce cap and chicken outfit whilst hopping around the house on one leg

A failure to comply means that the whole house would get no luxury shopping budget, each must spend 3 hours in jail per day for a week and that all their beds are taken away, plus hot water.

Arguments/entertainment will provail with this new format.

[Chuckyegg]

Originally posted by OnlyFoolsVote

Okay. Say if Lisa and Marcus were up. Well, the voters could decide 1 of 3 punishments. Either, the loser has to:

1) Sit in a cardboard box in the rain for 3 whole night and days (only toilet breaks allowed) and watch the other housemates enjoy parties/treats for the duration

2) Have all negative comments they have said about anyone aired to all the housemates

or 3) Whilst everyone else gets an hour's visit from a relative/loved one, the losing housemate must wear a dunce cap and chicken outfit whilst hopping around the house on one leg

A failure to comply means that the whole house would get no luxury shopping budget, each must spend 3 hours in jail per day for a week and that all their beds are taken away, plus hot water.

Arguments/entertainment will provail with this new format.

you're repeating yourself

[kathypink]

Originally posted by ViaVerde
God... not you again. Please stop using different usernames, you're filling up my ignore list, you bore.

I second that! OnlyFoolsVote = saddo / geek / get a life!

[JustSkipIt]

Originally posted by OnlyFoolsVote

Long winded psycho-babble And seriously, the ''thrill'' of evictions is mindless. 2 minutes of boos and a quick interview with Davina is pitiful next to my proposal. If you punish (not evict) the losing housemate, then that would open up a whole can of worms and potential entertainment dwarfed by the ''thrill'' of any eviction.

Having read both posts I found ElPoximo made the most sence when talking about format. The nominations and evictions are vital to the house's relationships and dynamics.

OnlyFool - you ignorance coloured my opinion somewhat. You appear to be of the assumption that you posses a supperiour mind - to be honest, you sound a bit like Ken. Irksome.
To keep withing the rules of advertising, OnlyFool would do well to remember that abuse is no way to win supporters. To whine about the lack of intelligent responses then ridicule the first one posted is, frankly, infantile.
Your idea may well have some credit - but I guess I'm too much of a pleb to see past the ridicule.

[AhmedFan2004]

Originally posted by OnlyFoolsVote
As I suspected, the responses thus far have lacked in any depth and imagination

Ultimately the BB bosses have to make the decision to change the format next year. It's almost an essential action now, since the series is dying.

They probably aren't much brighter than the voting BB public who still don't comprehend the consequences of voting out entertaining, controversial HMs.

It has to change, and has to have less influence from the critiquing public. Otherwise, same old.

Vote to Save, Less Evictions in the early weeks, better tasks, more food/booze/exercise facilities to keep them active and happy, more twists and turns, a re-vamped house, better audition process, etc.

Maybe it's too late.