Archive through September 16, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archives: Game. Not a Game... Game? Not a Game. (ARCHIVE):
Archive through September 16, 2002
Wcv63 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:17 pm     Once again Tobor you are wrong. You can not assign assign motives to my posts that don't exist. I was posting my opinion and the reasons why I hold that opinion. For you to dismiss my opinion as an excuse is patronizing and condescending. |
Wendo | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:19 pm     Tobor7 said, "I suppose I do care. I hate to hear excuses. I hate to hear a tennis player make excuses for losing. I hate to hear the government make excuses for security mistakes. I can accept, "I made a mistake. I'll try to do better next time." Comparing BB HG's excuses to government security mistakes? Really, Tobor, this analogy is just out of proportion. Excuses and reasons are in many instances very valid, despite your objections to the contrary. For instance, your tennis player analogy, about making an excuse for losing. Well, what if their excuse is they blew their knee out during the match? Because it's an excuse it's not valid? IMO, it sounds to me that the excuses you so decry are ones YOU just don't like. and said, "I say they do what they do because of WHO THEY ARE. And they will do the same outside the house as well." Why are you the moral arbitrator. Your last line sets you up as the only judge. How do you know? Do you know each of the 12 HG's to make such a statement? I have to fall down on the side of Wc here. These people are in an extreme situation and it cannot be applied to real life, and, as such, cannot be a determing factor as to whether the "character" outside the house of each HG is or is not how they are on the show. |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:29 pm     Sorry Wcv-- Not trying to be "patronizing and condescending" You don't agree with me. Then why do you think they act as they act? Are they acting? I say no. I say their real character is exposed. They can't help it. They know of no other way to get what they want. And to make it worse--- they make excuses for their behavior. It does not matter if it is a summer TV game show. Is that the excuse? Just because it is a summer game show? Do pro golf players cheat when they play practice rounds? When it is not for money? When it does not count? I would love to see a shot of one of the HG's sitting at the table and cheating at solitare. I guess that would say it all. (And in their head--- well, it is only a card game... (...it is only a TV show... it is only my workplace... etc.) |
Abbynormal | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:30 pm     I look at the whole thing differently I guess. I consider myself to be a moral and ethical person. I hate lying, cheating and stealing. If I catch someone doing one of those I don't hate them, I just distance myself. It may be flawed to some, but that is the way I handle it. Now, I would be on BB in a minute. I think it would be fun. I wouldn't necessarily be thinking of the money, because I seriously doubt I would get far. I think where I differ from alot of people on the board is that I don't even look at these people as "people". That may be warped to some, so be it. I look at them as more characters on a show on tv. I don't care what they do, don't care who they lie to or backstab, I just simply don't care. I liken it to a soap opera, entertaining at times, but doesn't make a bit of difference in my life one way or the other. There have been 1 or 2 that I really didn't care for. But I loved watching them, wanted to know what they were up to next. It's exciting! If they had stayed it wouldn't have affected me personally in the least. I think whomever is the last 2 standing certainly "deserves" to win. How can you be one of the last 2 and not deserve it? You sure beat the rest of them. I say good for them, no matter if they got there throwing flames the whole way, or didn't open their mouths. |
Wcv63 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:36 pm     Tobor you're correct in that we disagree with each other. I've already answered the question about why I think they are acting in ways that may be completely different from their real life personalities. To restate my opinion again would be redundant. I think we just have to agree to disagree and leave things at that. |
Curlyq | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:38 pm     I gotta say, these conditions hardly rate as extreme in my book. They're in a nice house, have beds to sleep in, have food to eat, often have alcohol to take the edge off, get free clothes, got a private concert with Sheryl Crow,... This hardly qualifies as a situation extreme enough to explain a change in character. It's not like they're stuck out on a frozen tundra and have to decide who to eat first. Yes, they're away from their families, but how many of us were away for our families for 3 months at a time in college and didn't let it change our character? They're not in solitary confinement. They have others to keep them company. I've often heard and believe that what you're made of is what comes out of you when you're squeezed. If these HGs are simply reacting to stress then it should bring out their character, not distort it. I also think we need to remember that in many cases their behavior is not spur of the moment reactions, but rather in keeping with the strategies they laid out in their pre-game interviews before they ever experienced any extreme conditions. |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:40 pm     Wendo said: "...These people are in an extreme situation and it cannot be applied to real life..." I say there is no difference. I suppose this is where we differ. Character is exposed in everyday life AND extreme situations. It is just as important in both. Just to be clear-- are you saying that because it is an "extreme situation" their true character is NOT exposed? |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:42 pm     Thanks for jumping in Curly. Well stated. |
Curlyq | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:45 pm     Sadly, Tobor, you were able to say the same thing in two sentences that took me four paragraphs. |
Wendo | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:55 pm     Tobor, I'm saying that you're measuring their character to some ruler that doesn't exist in real life. Things in the house get exagerated, distorted, and blown out of proportion. And, yes, I do think it's an extreme situation in that it is in no way how we live life every day, nor do I think it compares in the least to living away from home when one is in college. It may not be "solitary" confinement, but it is confinement none the less. As far as their true character that you feel is being shown, NO, I do not believe we've seen any of the HG's true characters. I think we may be seeing magnified aspects, but not their entire character. The rules and "laws" of the house prevent that. Tobor, how do you judge people who've been in extreme situations and had to resort to cannibalism? Some may have moral and ethical objections to it. Would never do it, even if it meant death. If, say, you were one of these people, would you ding the character of said people who ate others? Basically, who are we, people on some message board in cyberspace, to judge these people's characters? Critique their game play, their tactics, and their behavior in the house. But I think it's pretty arrogant for us to sit on some moral high ground pointing our fingers at the HG's. |
Wcv63 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 10:56 pm     Curlyq no they're not deciding who to eat first but they are deciding who to evict from the game. If they were JUST in the house and the whole point of Big Brother is just a social experiment of human interaction for a 3 month period I'd be more inclined to agree. HOWEVER, there are added elements of gamesmanship all related to jockeying for position in a contest to win a big prize. So in addition to the artificiality of their environment and being at the mercy of Big Brother, they are also at the mercy of their fellow housemates who could threaten their position in the game at any given time. Just as an example: I always enjoyed playing broomball (a form of hockey wearing street shoes and using a broom for a stick and a ball for a puck played on ice). I was a fierce and agressive competitor. I could body check with the best of them. Am I an agressive and physical person in real life outside of the game of broomball? No. I don a certain persona for the game because it is a required element. Is my character adequately displayed during the game? No. Only my competitive nature in one game. Does my use of the body check make me unethical and/or reveal a lack of integrity? No, all part and parcel of the game. |
Wrat1010 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:06 pm     Very well said Wendo and Wcv63. - That BB3 is more of a game than a social experiment - That we have to keep in mind that the people participating in the game are players and should be judged on their gameplay I finally figured out what was bugging me about the punctuation in the title of this thread and thanks to the both of you for clearing that up. |
Curlyq | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:07 pm     Okay, I see the point you're making Wcv. I don't agree with it, but I do understand it. I just think the analogy is a little off because as you said that is a required element of that game. I wouldn't expect you to take that behavior out of the game anymore than I would expect to see Michelle Kwan doing triple toe-loops down the street. The difference (and here's where we probably disagree) is that I don't think backstabbing and lying are required for this contest. Many believe it's required because that is all we've seen these past two seasons, but who knows what would happen if the producers didn't seek out this kind of houseguest. I think that BB casts a group of people who they know will behave this way in order to get good TV out of them. Otherwise the group would probably be a lot more like the BB1 cast, and the contest would be more about who is the easiest to live with rather than who is the best at making covert deals. Of course that might not make for exciting television, but that's a whole other issue. |
Sanfranjoshfan | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:24 pm     Tobor7 - "Are they acting? I say no. I say their real character is exposed." I gotta agree....I look at the HGs as people at work. I have worked with individuals in one company for long periods of time. It was just work....not home life or party time, although there was the occasional office party and company picnic. Some of my co-workers were people I became friends with after I got to know them at the job. They were ALL the SAME people on the job and off the job. The ones that were judgemental at work were judgemental after they punched out. The ones that were very quiet and shy remained quiet and shy after work. The ones that were irritable and/or controlling were still irritable and controlling when they were on their own time. My point is that yes, the BB house is a stressful JOB, but the character of the HG's is not dictated by this game. I simply cannot accept that these 12 people entered the house and immediately adopted brand new personalities that were not indicative of who they already were, "off the job". If the house was the root cause of every HG's character as observed in the house, then why was Marcellas so hateful to Amy while Jason was not? They were in the same environment. Why was Roddy so bored with a lack of intellectual stimulation when Tonya was not? They were sharing the same environment. The game is just a game....but the PLAYERS are still real people, whether the game is stressful or not. Bottom line: The *players* determine the *character* of the game, NOT the other way around...the *game* does not determine the *character* of the players. JMO |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:28 pm     (So many answers... so little time...) A person who high-sticks in a hockey game when the ref is not looking is the same person that doesn't leave a note when he hits your parked car. Is the same person that takes credit for your work to get promoted before you do. If you know something is wrong, then you don't do it. (And if you do, then sad for you.) If you see someone doing something wrong, you try to stop it. (And if you don't, then sad for all of us.) Wendo- You said: "Basically, who are we, people on some message board in cyberspace, to judge these people's characters? Critique their game play, their tactics, and their behavior in the house. But I think it's pretty arrogant for us to sit on some moral high ground pointing our fingers at the HG's." I'll keep that in mind when I read your other posts in other discussions. You keep it in mind as well. Who are we? You ask? We are who we are. They are who they are. And this is how I feel about it. |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:32 pm     Sanfran-- Very well said. I wanted to start a discussion about "If BB was an office, who would the HG's be?" But I did this instead. |
Tobor7 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:33 pm     BTW- The title of this thread was intended as a play on Will's very funny, "metal, not metal" scene from last year. |
Oregonfire | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:38 pm     Tabor, I am interested in your take on each of the remaining HGs. Do you think that one HG is more deserving over the others to win the half mil? Is being "deserving" a requirement of winning the game, and just how would you define "deserving" if so? Who would it be and why? I'm very curious. |
Wrat1010 | Sunday, September 15, 2002 - 11:54 pm     How about "if BB was Shakespeare's Hamlet, who would the HG's be?"... for Gerry. |
Groucho | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:06 am     I cheat at solitaire all the time. Does that make me a bad person? |
Tobor7 | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:10 am     Oregonfire-- I could make individual comments on each one, but I decided to describe how I felt in general terms in the first post of this thread. I usually try to post something funny. Bring a smile to the face... but this topic is one that has been on my mind for a while. And it seems a few others share this. I don't want to get into a thing with you, and I am sorry if I got you upset. If you are really interested in my take on each remaining HG and don't want to use it as just something else to fight about, then you will be able to read it in another thread that is proper at a later time. That is not what this thread is about. Don't confuse what this thread is about. Hey, I'm a fan of the show. The TV broadcast is the entertainment value. Watching the live feeds is a study on human behavior. And seeing what the producers use and what they do not use is another, more complex study. Deserve? They all walk in the door with the same chance. There is a luck factor involved. I picked my favs from the CBS bios before I ever saw show #1. Since then I've changed my thoughts a number of times based on what I saw. I may change them again. There is no requirement to win the game. I'm a NY Yankees fan. Have been for a very long time. THEY deserve it every year! (LOL) Do I like Steinbrenner? No. Does he deliver a winning team? Usually. Will I watch if my team is not in the World Series? Not if I have anything better to do.
 |
Tobor7 | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:18 am     When you cheat at solitare and win do you jump up and call everyone in the room to see that you won? or Do you quietly put the cards away knowing it was a job well done? (Never said it made you a bad person.) What do you do when you win when you cheat? How does it make you feel? How about when you cheat and still don't win? (That's what I like about computer solitare-- you can't cheat!)  |
Hawaiiandew | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:26 am     Wow Tobor---well said From a fellow Yankee fan! |
Tobor7 | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:27 am     So that's what it feels like to post #100!
 |
Wendo | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 12:59 am     Tobor said, "I'll keep that in mind when I read your other posts in other discussions. You keep it in mind as well." I think my posts on this board have been, to the best of my ability, kept to criticism and observation of the HG's game playing, their tactics, and how they are IN THE HOUSE. I make every effort to not make any claims of KNOWING these people's characters, who they are, and what they are outside of BB. I don't need you to tell me that I should "keep it in mind". I keep it mind everytime I make a post. IMO, I don't think the same can be said about your first and subsequent posts here, nor the purpose of this thread. You've made several claims to know who these people are and their true character when, in fact, all you know of them is in some artificial environment while playing a game. Tobor said, "Who are we? You ask? We are who we are. They are who they are. And this is how I feel about it." This is a child's answer; and a surprising one coming from someone who's placed themselves in the position of arbitrator of these HG's true characters and their "real" personalities. IMO, you are acting as judge and jury to defendents of which you know nothing about other than from some behavior observed in a tv game show. You make claims (and other posts support it) that we are viewing these HG's true characters and their true natures. When, in fact, it's impossible to know who these people truly are outside the house, outside the game, and outside their confinement. It's interesting, really. A poster above who agrees with you states that they "cannot accept that these 12 people entered the house and immediately adopted brand new personalities that were not indicative of who they already were." However, when such statements were made about Roddy in the threads analyzing his game play, said poster disagreed when some posters were suggesting that Roddy's behavior in the house may "possibly" be the same outside of the house. In addition, said poster stated it was not right and inappropriate. Perhaps it's ok to stand on moral high ground when it comes to a player you dislike, but not one who is your favorite. *shrug* |
|