[Callum]

Would you rather an entertaining housemate who causes drama in the house and is often featured heavily in the highlights shows to win or would you prefer a nice type of housemate to win who floats under the radar, someone like Gareth who has done nothing I personally would deem interesting during his time in the house but he is a nice guy. Do you vote on entertainment value or because a housemate is nice?

I always vote on entertainment value personally, the twins would be a nightmare to live with but they're brilliant housemates and the series would have been rubbish without them. I think they deserve to win much more than someone like Gareth who I find dull. I would rather see a controversial housemate win for being entertaining and contributing lots to the series than someone simply winning because they are a nice likeable person.

thoughts?

[Ramsay]

Entertainment >>>

[Shaun]

best hms ever = makosi, aisleyne, nikki, nadia, science, kemal.

not rachel, maysoon and jonathan.

[Patrick]

Anyone who votes on niceness should just ****** off and stop watching.
They're the people that ruined BB9.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Shaun

best hms ever = makosi, aisleyne, nikki, nadia, science, kemal.

not rachel, maysoon and jonathan.

YOUR SIG

[Monkey Slut]

If they're a mix of both (like Aaron was IMO) then that's great but entertainment above niceness.

[iRyan]

Entertainment value.

I like nice people in my real life.

But when I am watching TV I wanted to be entertained.

[Niamh.]

Ideally you would have an entertaining but also nice HM like Brian Dowling, Kate Lawler, Helen Adams etc but if it's a straight choice between an entertainer who may not be especially nice or a radar floater then I choose entertainer

[iRyan]

Entertainment value.

I like nice people in my real life.

But when I am watching TV I wanted to be entertained.

[bbfan1991]

If I bother to vote it is because I like the person in particular, why would I waste money on someone I dislike even if they are entertaining when there are better things I could spend it on?

[troy4783]

Entertaiment defintely but if u come across a nice/ entertainng housemate for example Pete Bennet BB7 Or Josie then thats great

[vortex]

Entertainment value.

[Sophiee]

a mixture of both. it depends though.

[Jack_]

Entertainment every single day of the week, and I find it just plain stupid when people vote based upon how nice somebody is.

The twins are ****ing vile. But they make incredibly great TV, and should definitely be one of the contenders to win. I could not live with them, or be around them, their arrogance is disgusting and they have pretty repulsive personalities, but their entertainment value to a show like Big Brother is of significant importance.

Gareth, however, and housemates like Rachel Rice, while lovely, kind people, are excruciatingly dull and as such, offer absolutely nothing to the show whatsoever. Housemates that cause drama, start arguments, are involved in controversy spark discussions and debate that forums like these thrive on and shows like Bit On The Side rely on, without them we would have nothing to talk about, the show would fall flat on its face and would be rendered almost unwatchable. It is crucial that these interesting, entertaining housemates remain until the very end so that the entire series remains interesting. Rachel Rice and Gareth type housemates are completely disposable, they sit in the background and offer nothing of importance and almost always make the final undeservingly through no other reason than slipping under the radar.

It is essential that the interesting personalities remain, and when the final night comes, it seems completely illogical to me that anyone could even begin to consider voting for someone that has offered up **** all to the show. It just doesn't make sense. Yes, they're nice people...but this is a TV entertainment show, not a tea party with your friends. There's a big difference and sadly, people stupidly make the mistake of thinking the two are the same thing and should be treated as such, when they really aren't.

Winners like Rachel Rice in effect kill off the show. At the end of the day, the housemate who has offered the most up to the show, i.e. sparked the most discussions throughout the series...is the housemate who should win. They made the show, they should be rewarded for it. It's as simple and as easy to understand as that.

[joeysteele]

Both things really.

[karezza]

Entertainment: Sam Pepper
Sympathy: Freddie Fisher
Depth: Aaron

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Ideally you would have an entertaining but also nice HM like Brian Dowling, Kate Lawler, Helen Adams etc but if it's a straight choice between an entertainer who may not be especially nice or a radar floater then I choose entertainer

*Remembers when Kate was a nice awesome winner.. now she's a arrogant bitch*

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Patrick

*Remembers when Kate was a nice awesome winner.. now she's a arrogant bitch*

Haven't even seen her any where since then tbh

[bbfan1991]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Haven't even seen her any where since then tbh

Kate likes to keep a low profile but she does a lot of DJ'ing.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Entertainment every single day of the week, and I find it just plain stupid when people vote based upon how nice somebody is.

The twins are ****ing vile. But they make incredibly great TV, and should definitely be one of the contenders to win. I could not live with them, or be around them, their arrogance is disgusting and they have pretty repulsive personalities, but their entertainment value to a show like Big Brother is of significant importance.

Gareth, however, and housemates like Rachel Rice, while lovely, kind people, are excruciatingly dull and as such, offer absolutely nothing to the show whatsoever. Housemates that cause drama, start arguments, are involved in controversy spark discussions and debate that forums like these thrive on and shows like Bit On The Side rely on, without them we would have nothing to talk about, the show would fall flat on its face and would be rendered almost unwatchable. It is crucial that these interesting, entertaining housemates remain until the very end so that the entire series remains interesting. Rachel Rice and Gareth type housemates are completely disposable, they sit in the background and offer nothing of importance and almost always make the final undeservingly through no other reason than slipping under the radar.

It is essential that the interesting personalities remain, and when the final night comes, it seems completely illogical to me that anyone could even begin to consider voting for someone that has offered up **** all to the show. It just doesn't make sense. Yes, they're nice people...but this is a TV entertainment show, not a tea party with your friends. There's a big difference and sadly, people stupidly make the mistake of thinking the two are the same thing and should be treated as such, when they really aren't.

Winners like Rachel Rice in effect kill off the show. At the end of the day, the housemate who has offered the most up to the show, i.e. sparked the most discussions throughout the series...is the housemate who should win. They made the show, they should be rewarded for it. It's as simple and as easy to understand as that.

Well said Jack, well said.

The last part especially is bang on right, people got BB12 right with Aaron winning - but had it of been a vote to evict he would of gone by Week 4, I just hope the same thing happens on Friday and people vote for those who brought the most to the series.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Haven't even seen her any where since then tbh

She DJs alot now and keeps a low profile as Reggie said but whenever she's asked about BB she refuses to talk about it and dismisses it as if it's a cheap show that has no part in her life, even though she would be doing ****** all and wouldn't be working in Ibiza Clubs constantly if it wasn't for Big Brother 3.

Ungrateful bitch.

[MTVN]

Bit of both, I don't reckon I'd bother voting for someone who was a complete bellend even if they were pretty entertaining, like with Denise there's not a chance in hell I'm gonna spend money trying to keep her in because she's a drunken mess and I think she was in the wrong with both Michael and the Twins, but I do appreciate that she's provided great entertainment. Similarly I wouldn't spend money keeping someone in when they're boring me just because they're a nice guy or whatever, especially not at the expense of someone who genuinely has been an interesting housemate.

So yeah I'm just gonna sit on the fence because I wouldn't vote at all if a housemate was all of one and none of the other.

[King Gizzard]

Didn't watch this series, but usually I feel sympathy for the nice HM's cause they're picked on..can't help it

(not that i've ever voted)

[aj2463]

Entertainment the people who want Gareth to win surely can't be thinking the same

[bbfan300]

Both, i would vote for a nice boring hm nor would i vote for a hm who is evil and entertaining.

To vote for some won I have to like them and be entertained by them.