Warnings, strikes and punishments

[Maddy]

So far this year we've seen two actual punishments for nom's talk, Tully received a strike and Caleb got 2 nominations points, there have been a couple of updates mentioning things like Ed getting into trouble for not wearing his mic (again) but that's all. To me Caleb's punishment seemed unfair, it came with a whole lot more consequences than Tully's yet it was for basically the same thing. I know we only get to see a small part of what's going on and it's possible that Caleb has been really bad at edging near that line, but that's the problem, the punishment seemed to come out of nowhere while Tully, who had been specifically warned, got a 'don't do it again'.

I'd really like to see some sort of score board or punishment update on the OS. I don't need to see video of the warnings etc but I would like to see something so you know how it got to the point that Caleb got smacked with 2 points, for example

Caleb - warned 3 times for nom talk, 2 for no mic and once for his bad tan
Ed - warned 15 times for no mic, 20 for not being able to string two words together
Heidi - 3 strikes for blinding BB.

 

[pawlini]

I have a feeling Big Brother wanted him up this week by doing that, they might want him gone cause he offers nothing and Matt will soon not be long out after.

 

[riddim]

I think that's the problem - without some transparency, it smacks of manipulation. I have no love for either tully or caleb, but you can't watch a competition and not know the rules or have view of the referees and their calls, it's just untenable.

I think a tally board with number of infractions, severity, warnings, strikes, point penalties, etc. would at least bridge that gap. +1 OP

 

[AJO]

How is a strike less punishment then two nominations points? Besides, I think BB was going easier on the rules in the first couple weeks and will now be cracking down, last week's nominations showed this.

I'm not sure how keeping track of how many times someone forgot to wear a microphone would enhance Big Brother. Only if it was specifically being done by a Housemate to avoid being heard, then it would be interesting to see.

 

[Maddy]

I have a feeling Big Brother wanted him up this week by doing that, they might want him gone cause he offers nothing and Matt will soon not be long out after.

It did seem that way.

How is a strike less punishment then two nominations points? Besides, I think BB was going easier on the rules in the first couple weeks and will now be cracking down, last week's nominations showed this.

Because it pretty much meant that Caleb was up for nominations and stopped him from using 2 points on someone else. A strike is nothing unless BB is actually going to kick someone if they hit three, personally I can't see that happening.

 

[TVJunkie]

BB should do away with strikes and take away nomination points for infringements of the rules, not just noms talk. We know they are never going to give anyone 3 strikes.

Say 1 point for every 3 times BB has to tell you to put your microphone on
2 points for first noms talk
3 points for deliberately breaking things in the house
4 points for second noms talk breach
5 points for any noms talk past the second, and then maybe physically fighting another housemate or refusing to do what BB asks.

These are basic off the top of my head examples and I'm sure others will come up with better reasons for the points, than I have.

 

[rachael92]

A better system of punishments was when they had the punishment room in 06 & 07 but also had fines ($5000?) that got taken off the prize money which started at whatever price it was.

 

[mikidiki]

I have a feeling Big Brother wanted him up this week by doing that, they might want him gone cause he offers nothing and Matt will soon not be long out after.

I find that hard to believe. p.s - Caleb would have been up anyway.

 

[pawlini]

I find that hard to believe. p.s - Caleb would have been up anyway.

thats crap, he was given 2 points. meaning without them he would have been on 7 and had he used those 2 points on someone else it would have brought them up. thats why nearly all HM except 2 were up because of that spanner in the works

 

[the Theorist]

It's hard to keep track regardless because since BB moved to Channel 9 a lot of the old rules that were once very, very strict and enforced have now seemingly been lifted and are not being acknowledged when they're being obviously broken.

This has been happening more and more lately, but was also happening last year. A lot of the rules that we knew of during the 2001-2008 days are being broken without BB saying two words about it (and I'm not just talking about the nominations talk), so no one really has any idea what's going on at all anymore.

The problem is, a lot of these rules make up the entire basis of the concept of what BB is. Lately, BB seems to be picking and choosing when he wants to make a "rule" or not, and it lacks formality. At the moment, I don't see Big Brother as the same reality show we once knew - its a show that's similar but is doing what the new producers want it to do, without any thought of what the whole concept is meant to be about. It kills me to see this happening.

 

[timmy]

BB should do away with strikes and take away nomination points for infringements of the rules, not just noms talk. We know they are never going to give anyone 3 strikes.

Say 1 point for every 3 times BB has to tell you to put your microphone on
2 points for first noms talk
3 points for deliberately breaking things in the house
4 points for second noms talk breach
5 points for any noms talk past the second, and then maybe physically fighting another housemate or refusing to do what BB asks.

I think this is a good idea. They have proved in the past that the strikes were pointless as they were too concerned about kicking out a HM and screwing up the timeline of the show to ever give a third strike. The only problem I foresee is that a HM like Tim who senses he is popular and has the idea that they are safe wouldn't care if they are nominated or not, and could go flagrantly breaking the rules without a care.

 

[Maddy]

It's hard to keep track regardless because since BB moved to Channel 9 a lot of the old rules that were once very, very strict and enforced have now seemingly been lifted and are not being acknowledged when they're being obviously broken.

This has been happening more and more lately, but was also happening last year. A lot of the rules that we knew of during the 2001-2008 days are being broken without BB saying two words about it (and I'm not just talking about the nominations talk), so no one really has any idea what's going on at all anymore.

The problem is, a lot of these rules make up the entire basis of the concept of what BB is. Lately, BB seems to be picking and choosing when he wants to make a "rule" or not, and it lacks formality. At the moment, I don't see Big Brother as the same reality show we once knew - its a show that's similar but is doing what the new producers want it to do, without any thought of what the whole concept is meant to be about. It kills me to see this happening.

Totally agree. Somewhere in the back of my mind I was thinking how unfair and arbitrary it all seemed but I hadn't realised how much it bothered me until someone recently posted the rules and the whole Caleb and Tully punishments.

Oh and I really liked your idea, TVjunkie, that would be a good way of handling it.

Rachael92, I remember that and it not only was a good punishment but caused quite a bit of conflict between the HM's as some really didn't care.

 

[riddim]

BB should do away with strikes and take away nomination points for infringements of the rules, not just noms talk. We know they are never going to give anyone 3 strikes.

Say 1 point for every 3 times BB has to tell you to put your microphone on
2 points for first noms talk
3 points for deliberately breaking things in the house
4 points for second noms talk breach
5 points for any noms talk past the second, and then maybe physically fighting another housemate or refusing to do what BB asks.

These are basic off the top of my head examples and I'm sure others will come up with better reasons for the points, than I have.

This kind of system would be great for drawing the line on the nominations talk, but not for other things like mic infractions

A better system of punishments was when they had the punishment room in 06 & 07 but also had fines ($5000?) that got taken off the prize money which started at whatever price it was.

How about instead of prize money it affects the food budget - but only for the non-game-changing infractions, like not wearing a mic, singing copyrighted songs, talking about what to do with iwinnings, excessive swearing, etc.

The problem is, a lot of these rules make up the entire basis of the concept of what BB is. Lately, BB seems to be picking and choosing when he wants to make a "rule" or not, and it lacks formality. At the moment, I don't see Big Brother as the same reality show we once knew - its a show that's similar but is doing what the new producers want it to do, without any thought of what the whole concept is meant to be about. It kills me to see this happening.

This is a really great point - it's been bugging me too that it feels like they've defaulted back to "producing entertainment" rather than living up to the BB concept. I'm not even sure they could articulate the concept anymore, actually. When TV viewers lament the lack of truly creative new shows, we can look at the drifting of BB's centre as evidence that it's the industry that is its own worst enemy.

 

[the Theorist]

There's just so many things I could list from the last couple of weeks alone that just go against everything that's supposed to be fundamental to the Big Brother "rules".

HM's attempting contact to the public and to the outside world, writing on surfaces (even with fingers), discussions about who HM's think will be evicted, conversations directly about the nomination process, HM's being told about everything before they happen (HM's are not supposed to be told absolutely anything about what's about to happen in the house, but this year they've been told when there's going to be Showdown, that there was going to be a Double Eviction, how the voting process works, etc), there's been very clear production influences as well (the whole contrived Late Night Feast stuff and the pre-production sponsorship advertisements), among so much more.

This is what is ruining the whole concept of Big Brother.

 

[Elspie]

There's just so many things I could list from the last couple of weeks alone that just go against everything that's supposed to be fundamental to the Big Brother "rules".

HM's attempting contact to the public and to the outside world, writing on surfaces (even with fingers), discussions about who HM's think will be evicted, conversations directly about the nomination process, HM's being told about everything before they happen (HM's are not supposed to be told absolutely anything about what's about to happen in the house, but this year they've been told when there's going to be Showdown, that there was going to be a Double Eviction, how the voting process works, etc), there's been very clear production influences as well (the whole contrived Late Night Feast stuff and the pre-production sponsorship advertisements), among so much more.

This is what is ruining the whole concept of Big Brother.

I agree with this. Channel 9 seem to be completely clueless when it comes to reality shows. Like any bad middle management they are trying to mirco-manage everything to the last detail and not allowing the house/housemates to have a natural flow. They are forcing on us storylines and house mates they think we would like/want instead of making up our own minds.

For example the fact that the tasks only goes for 2 days, as well as only during the day is the perfect example of them wasting opportunities to get well raw interactions. Showdown is a joke, a poor man's Friday night live. And don't even get me started on the 6 nominees (if you are going to have that many - make sure you have enough time to give them all story time or just have less housemates to being with).

I truly believe that the reason they aren't pulling them for breaking the rules is that they have removed so much of the old BB style, that the housemates are already running out of topics to talk about/things to do (we are only day 35 atm). It would also kill off Tim's gameplan, as he needs them to talk about him, get him nommed every week so he can knock people out and as he is the only real character at the moment, BB isn't going to stop that anytime soon.

 

[Thing]

It's so non transparent - BB could allow them to chat away about noms until Alex & his cronies decide its time get them out THEN they start dishing out the punishment OR as in Tully's case, they want her to stay so they give her a strike.

They would never give her three strikes, they'll just mix up the punishments if they have to

The punishments will be dictated by the 'ratings' of the individual HM...

 

[tw2g]

A better system of punishments was when they had the punishment room in 06 & 07 but also had fines ($5000?) that got taken off the prize money which started at whatever price it was.

i think this was the best punishment, and with the prize monies only starting at $250,000, they'd quickly have not much left and would quickly learn their lesson, im really hoping for a badass evil bb next year!

 

[markie_mark23]

BB is not a game show. It is a public study of human behavior. BB can make any rules he wishes and break them. The prize money is to entice people to participate in the BB experience and is pretty much given to whom ever BB wishes.