Skip to main content

Anyone Pissed off With Obvious Nominations Talks

tedfthis

tedfthis

OLD Member, Gold Coast
Is anyone else pissed off with the obvious nominations talk in just about every show, by different groups. They are virtually telling each other how to vote now. They know that 7 points put someone in the halfway house this week, so it only needs 2 people to give Mikkayla 4 points each and she is as good as in there again. Two housemates were blatently talking about the Barbie twins and saying they should be up.

Nobody has been penalised for it and its against the rules. Big Brother has made a rod for his own back, by not stamping this out earlier. A few strikes ought to be in place by now and it might actually make things a bit more interesting. I've watched the show ever since its been on, but I am thoroughly pissed off this year, that its been open slather, with virtually no rules. The penny pinching makes me think that Big Brother is definitely NOT watching 24 hours a day.
 
1) The rule is definitely being ignored. I wish it were only Tim and the other HMs I dislike but the blokes are doing it as well.

2) I don't want to see a free-for-all. BBAUS has long stretches of them actually enjoying each other's company and/or participating in activities. Shows e.g. BBUSA where noms talk is allowed are boring and ultimately off-putting repetitions of the same thing i.e. vote-trading. Everything else fades into the background. Those wishing for the same here are asking for 90% bad to gain 10% good.
 
I hate that they are not being pulled up on it. I find when they really get that chance it is hard to break the groups up and we don't get a good mix of choices for eviction. Truthfully it gets boring when they do this, i don't want to see a bunch of cool kids running the gauntlet and knocking out everyone they don't deem worthy.
 
I don't mind as long as BB is consistent - you either enforce it strictly or losely but however you do it you do it consistently. BB is being quite relaxed about it at the moment and that's fair enough as long as they don't suddenly take action against some people after ignoring other comments.
 
They aren't openly disclosing who they nominated.

They are talking strategies and tactics. It's a game.

Tully said she would swap the twins is pure strategic, other housemates are on the same level as her.

I say it's all good unless they clearly say I nominated "Tim" then something should be done.

This is changing the game.
 
If they were taking it seriously, Tim would have been punished for deliberately revealing he nominated Tully.
 
sergie said:
That rule was shit in the first place. When everything is out in the open it's a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...

Exactly, that's why big brother US is so good, the dynamics and cliques in the house constantly shifts and allows more room for drama
 
I think it is fantastic that they are strategising.
Having a show where they all sit around and pat each other on the back is dead boring.
On BBUS it does consume the show..so i dont want it to go that far..but having everyone being all nicey nice is only going to make ratings sink lower and lower and lead to non renewal
 
Michka26 said:
Exactly, that's why big brother US is so good, the dynamics and cliques in the house constantly shifts and allows more room for drama
Click to expand...

Really??? I guess it is something about the grass being greener on the other side...I gave up on the US big brother years ago...can't stand all the plotting and it is all about the votes...annoys me..
 
Goon said:
They aren't openly disclosing who they nominated.

They are talking strategies and tactics. It's a game.

Tully said she would swap the twins is pure strategic, other housemates are on the same level as her.

I say it's all good unless they clearly say I nominated "Tim" then something should be done.

This is changing the game.
Click to expand...

Completely agree.
 
Goon said:
They aren't openly disclosing who they nominated.

They are talking strategies and tactics. It's a game.

Tully said she would swap the twins is pure strategic, other housemates are on the same level as her.

I say it's all good unless they clearly say I nominated "Tim" then something should be done.

This is changing the game.
Click to expand...

treescancatchfire said:
Completely agree.
Click to expand...

Yep. +1
 
Goon said:
They aren't openly disclosing who they nominated.

They are talking strategies and tactics. It's a game.

Tully said she would swap the twins is pure strategic, other housemates are on the same level as her.

I say it's all good unless they clearly say I nominated "Tim" then something should be done.

This is changing the game.
Click to expand...
That's fine, except back during 2001-2008, basically ANYTHING that bordered nominations talk (even strategy talk) was punished and/or picked up on and stopped.

I absolutely wouldn't mind if they're now allowed to discuss "strategies", as long as we had actually been TOLD that they were allowed to do so. Even a fleeting comment from Sonia or BB about it. Just acknowledge that the rule has been "eased up" since 2008, not ignore it and cause all of us who have been following the show for years to think they're being light on the HM's now, especially since the rule was a very strict one back in the day.
 
I always thought enforcing that rule was ridiculous, since getting to hear the HMs strategising is entertaining and enlightening.
 
When 2 or more housemates are whats called talking strategy, its pretty obvious to me that what they mean is "if we all vote for so and so, they will be on the other side." I want a show, where they have to be on their toes as to what they do AND say 24 hours a day, thats supposed to be the concept of Big Brother is always watching. I doubt he is watching much, perhaps he is bored shitless too, but he sure as Hell isnt listening 24 hours a day and enforcing the rules.

Groups have nearly always formed in every series, but they have never been given enough rope, to openly strategise, like they have this year. The only good thing this year, is that one of them gets switched on Thursdays, it might be better if 3 of them get switched instead. As someone else pointed out, some of the so called safer characters like Matt, you might only get 1 chance to vote them out before the end, or before they all get put up for eviction. I'm all for shock evictions, it would play with their heads more in the confines of the house inasmuch as a safe but boring character, like Ed or Matt, could actually get evicted early. Plus, it would drive the bookmakers mad :)
 
It is a game of strategy, and not allowing talk about noms doesn't thwart block voting anyway. However, in a season of BBUK they didn't put in the rules about noms talk and HMs quickly picked up it wasn't against the rules and then day in day out the daily show was just the hms talking about nominations and nothing else. It got very boring very quickly so BB had to change the rules. I don't mind how it is going ATM so long as the shows don't focus too much on nominations talk.
 
Its more a game of strategy towards the end, in the early weeks popularity or being unpopular on the outside, seems to count. I'm all for keeping the stirrers like Tim and Rohan in and also leaving in the drama queens like Tully & Tahan, just to play with their heads. I think they would have been surprised by the nominations this week, but they didnt realise that the halfway people virtually all voted for each other. In fact, even the halfway house people dont realise that they nearly all voted for each other. About half of them in the house, had no votes at all.
 
I'm happy with the amount of noms discussion that they are allowing. However I would hate for them to open it up as free as the US BB. IMO BB US is a totally different show. More like survivor in a house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top