TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . DONATE . CONTACT . CHAT  
 Wikia  Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
Time to Change up the Veto???

The TVClubHouse: Big Brother 8 ARCHIVES: Big Brother 8 - Part 2: Time to Change up the Veto??? users admin

Author Message
Broxi
Member

08-04-2005

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - 10:48 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Broxi a private message Print Post    
I don't know about the rest of you but I am a bit BORED with the POV being so straight forward.

I was thinking they need to shake it up a bit and I was curious if anyone else felt the same..... here are my thoughts on changing it up and would really like other peoples opinions and thoughts on making the POV better.


Wouldn't it be interesting to have different Vetos???? {name them after something, in my example I used Gemstones} and have them each do something different.

BUT the hamsters don't know what that particular Veto will do until the veto ceremony. They can supply them a sealed envelope with the instructions just prior like they do on BB UK.

An Example... Ruby POV would allow the Veto holder to remove either nominee then Nominate a replacement to go on the Mac.

Emerald POV if used on one allows the person remaining on the Mac to choose who they want to be sitting next to.

Opal POV would allow the holder to remove BOTH nominees and name TWO replacements...including HOH.

I think it would shake it up and remove most possibilities to backdoor someone.
Everyone then could play for Veto and want to win it for fear of what might happen.

What do you guys think? I posted it at another site I visit but I also want the opinions from the members here who have some great ideas.

Stopthemadness
Member

07-15-2005

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - 10:51 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Stopthemadness a private message Print Post    
I like that. They do need to change it up.

Calimom3
Member

07-12-2007

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 - 11:33 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Calimom3 a private message Print Post    
I liked it when ALL the houseguests could compete for POV.

I REALLY like the idea of the POV winner getting to choose the replacement, or the HOH has to nominate a replacement as soon as the POV is used.

Sunshyne4u
Member

06-17-2003

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 12:37 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Sunshyne4u a private message Print Post    
I would like to see a change as well. For instance, if the HOH had to choose immediately WOW that could be good.

Kep421
Member

08-11-2001

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 4:43 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Kep421 a private message Print Post    
Didn't there used to be a diamond veto?

Seem's I remember something like that...There was a regular veto, which only saved the person holding it (so if you won, and took someone else off, you would still be eligible to go up), then a golden veto which protected the winner and anyone they gave it too, then I remember a diamond veto...but can't remember what it was all about...

Dfennessey
Member

07-25-2004

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 5:24 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Dfennessey a private message Print Post    
I think that the person who wins POV gets to decide who goes up and they can even nominate the HOH

Costacat
Member

07-15-2000

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 6:57 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Costacat a private message Print Post    
The Golden Veto is the last veto. When the POV holder decides who will be evicted from the house.

Wilsonatmd
Member

01-23-2001

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 7:30 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Wilsonatmd a private message Print Post    
Maybe you can add some risk....have some certain powers, but it's determined at random but weighted..

Fox example:

-Status quo: HOH gets to pick replacement, veto holder immune (60%)

-I want you out: Person who goes off block gets to pick replacement, veto holder immune (10%)

-I want to go against you: Person left on block gets to pick replacement, veto holder immune
(10%)

-I took you off, I'm putting you on: Veto holder gets to pick replacement (10%)

and the nasty ones:

-You made your bed,now you go lie in it:HOH picks replacement, but Veto holder IS NOT immune (5%)

-Actions have consequences: Veto holder AUTOMATICALLY BECOMES replacement (5%)

and it's only known if it's used...so the veto holder might sweat knowing there's a 1 in 10 chance the veto would backfire on them and they would go up..

Spunky
Member

10-08-2001

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 8:05 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Spunky a private message Print Post    
Excellent suggestion... I'm a bit surprised US BB didn't try it following the UK example, I'm sure they know what's going on in other BB's around the world and could have made an effort to do the same or better... oh well...

Poptart
Member

07-19-2006

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 8:14 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Poptart a private message Print Post    
I have been saying this for two seasons now. Love your suggestions and I think at the very least the VETO holder should be the one allowed to put up their replacement. At the rate its going it really makes the Veto a non issue unless one of the actual Noms. get it. Last year I emailed this over and over to BB/CBS but I guess they didn't get the Memo. LOL

Maris
Member

03-28-2002

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 8:49 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Maris a private message Print Post    
I think they should not make the veto a given every week. ie one week say there will be no veto competition, and the nominations stand. What BBUK does which is so much better than the US is that they keep the HGs constantly on the ropes, no idea what is happening when or how things are going to change up. Punish people by not letting them vote if they break a rule.

Cricket
Member

08-05-2002

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 8:54 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Cricket a private message Print Post    
Very interesting posts. Changing the Veto Comps/usage is a great idea. It would certainly spice things up. I don't think it's been as good since they stopped letting everyone play. I like the idea if it being for different things and some weeks not having a Veto.

Spear
Member

08-06-2001

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 9:24 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Spear a private message Print Post    
The Golden Veto is the last veto. When the POV holder decides who will be evicted from the house.

No -- the Golden Veto is just the regular veto now. When the POV was first introduced in BB3, you couldn't use it to save yourself. The Golden POV was introduced at F5 with the new "power" that allowed the holder to save himself/herself if they were on the block. This was the infamous veto that Marcellas declined to use. In BB4 and subsequent seasons, all vetoes were "Golden".

You're thinking of the Diamond POV, which was introduced at F4 of BB4. It's really just a Golden POV but as a consequence of the numbers, the winner (if it's not the HOH) automatically becomes the sole vote to evict.

Justin42
Member

08-05-2001

Thursday, July 19, 2007 - 9:48 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Justin42 a private message Print Post    
I wouldn't mind seeing the veto go entirely.

Part of the fun of BB2/early BB3 was that people would melt down after being nominated for a week... and that could drastically change who the house decided to vote out. Like Tonya's (sp?) meltdown in BB3 which ensured she was going after she was perfectly safe until that moment.

Now it's not a sure thing who's nominated until Monday/Tuesday, and people just spend a day "officially" nominated with no hope of getting off. They may spend a day or two scrambling for votes, but we don't see the same effects. (And people don't even really fully start moving for votes until after the veto is played since they assume there a 1 in 6 chance they'll get out of it)

Yeah, it's kind of cruel but I think it led to a more uncertain game. Veto gives too many options.

OR-- just thought of this-- make the veto for the NEXT week's nominations, and it must be used (or not used) at time of nomination. So if you win the veto, you must use it immediately at the nomination ceremony. I.e., at the end of the ceremoney, the HoH would say "I have nominated X and Y, does the veto holder have an objection?".

Veto would be used, or not, and would expire-- you couldn't save it. Maybe have ONE comp per season to get some sort of multi-week super-veto.

HOH would probably know you had it (unless they could make a secret veto?) and not nominate you, but if they nom someone you want to protect, you can stop them.

Still allows some level of immunity, but makes people have to stay on the block longer.

If you win veto while you are nominated you cannot use it to save yourself-- but you could make a deal with people to vote for you, and you would use the veto to save one of them if they were nominated. If you kept the deal secret, the new HoH wouldn't know you were "protecting" someone, so they wouldn't nom you, and if they nom your ally, you could save them.

Am I making sense?