If we still decided the votes
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archive: Archives One: If we still decided the votes

John32070

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 08:31 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
If it was still like BB1 where we made the decision on who got evicted, would the results have been different? I think the only one for sure would have been Josh out week two instead of Tonya.

Jimmer

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 08:34 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
The problem with the North American viewers voting in the first season was that they always voted out the most controversial (and IMO most interesting) people first. It made for an especially dull show.

Mellbell416

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 08:39 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hear, hear, Jimmer - that change is the single biggest improvement that was made in the show. They keep making it better and better though - the veto and letting in a previously evicted HG both were brilliant - now NOTHING is predictable. Way more fun!

But to answer John's question, Josh probably would have been tipped overboard waaaaay long ago, and Tonya too... Danielle might have been booted because of all of her backstabbing.

Jaysgal

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 08:43 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Yeah, it was so pathetic when they voted out Will Mega and then Jordan. I wondered what kind of viewers they had. It must have been people who were afraid of confrontation and loved the phony Brittany.

BB 1 was so much like Real World 1. Had we had the same cast from Real World 1, I bet they would have voted to evict Kevin from Real World 1 for having such philosophy and running into conflict with Julie.

Cliotheleo

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 08:45 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
But I almost wish that the viewers had a larger role. Maybe they could have just reversed it? Have the viewers nominate who would be on the block and then have the HG's vote who leaves. At least that would control the "Brittany-gate" factor.

Crazydog

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 09:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Clio, no that would be boring. The same people would keep getting nominated each week in terms of decreasing unlikeability. That would encourage even more of the boring under-the-radar strategy. Some of the houseguests that have lasted this long, like Gerry, are there only because everyone knows no one will vote for them at the end.

Draheid

Saturday, August 17, 2002 - 09:41 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Wouldn't it be cool if we decided the nominees instead ... top 2 are up ... if PoV is used 3rd is up, but the 3rd isn't revealed unless PoV is used ... Hahahahaha ...

Charlesfk

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 01:15 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I still think that the PoV wasn't a good idea. It was used once. This should tell something. I would be much better if the PoV holder would also nominated, IMHO.

What555456

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 07:18 am EditMoveDeleteIP
POV would have been much better if, after someone was vetoed, the HG's as a group decided who to put up to replace the vetoed HG and the HOH was eligible to be put up at that point.

Aaronl5

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 08:15 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I think POV is great....even if never used. The important part is that during the week we get to see people stategize about getting it or not...then HG trying to get the POV holder to use it or not....

Stingerman

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 08:19 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Like I said before make the POV more interesting by adding a cash value to it. If you use the POV on someone then you will get $5000.00 dollars for your troubles. I bet you would see it being used a lot more. Plus you would see people really trying to get it instead of throwing it away like it's the pleague.

Keiffer

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 08:21 am EditMoveDeleteIP
For sure the PoV is costing Roddy this week. IT changed Amy's mind from putting Jason up. So it does have an impact on who gets put up. IT forces the HoH to put both people that are close up together. Just like when or if Chiara gets HoH again she will be forced to put Marcy up with Amy even if she really doesn't want to.

Also I think that it is impossible to see how things would have gone if we decided the votes because every HG would have been different people this whole time. None of them would have been outspoken, and each would have done as little as possible to stand out. There would have been no alliance talk, and no plotting. No talking trash about other HG's, and no real bonding because they wouldn't be able to talk open about their lives.

I will say this though, and that is that the person this board seems to hate the most right now would more than likely have won the game of pleasing America into voting for him. Roddy does have charm, he hasn't lied, and he says the nicest things about every HG no matter how unpopular they are.

Bigsister

Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 09:07 am EditMoveDeleteIP
On BB1 the viewers did the eviction voting, and it made for a boring show - not because the houseguests were boring people, but because they did not have to compete with each other for votes. Changing that one feature, letting the houseguests vote instead of the viewing public, changed the whole dynamic of the house. Now there is much more stress, more competition, more strategy and backstabbing, and it makes for a more interesting show.

Whit4you

Monday, August 19, 2002 - 07:06 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
If we decided the vote this year I truely think this show woulda been a yawn fest - the only thing intersting ABOUT this show has been the mental-warfare non-stop endless strategies and strategy twist. I'm very glad we don't do the voting this year. While the OZ BB was totally interesting even with viewers voting -it's cause they did all sorts of fun interesting hlillarious to watch things IN the house.

I would like them to let us participate SOME Though - like maybe if a HG uses the POV WE get to decide the other nom..that'd be fun LOL

Or maybe in tie potential weeks WE get to vote in the event of a tie.. THAT would cause an interesting twist those weeks in that they'd have to really go outta way not to have a tie. lol