Celebrity Big Brother 2007

[Treacle Toes]

Jade Goody's goodwill proposed visit to India is in doubt - after her visa application was turned down. The 25-year-old was planning to fly to the country next week to apologise for her racist comments on Celebrity Big Brother.

She reportedly applied for a visa on Monday, along with her security team and aides.

But while they were all granted one straight away, the Indian High Commission in London stalled on Jade.

According to the Daily Mirror, her visit is being discussed "at the

ADVERTISEMENT
highest level".

There have been angry protests in India as well as in the UK over Jade's remarks to Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty.

Her bullying got her kicked off the show and she has since been working non-stop to restore her public image.

A key part of her plan was to visit Shilpa's home country and try to make amends.

Is it wrong to find that funny? ....I'm actually a bit relieved...India sends us Shilpa and we send them Jade?

 

[fear-n-loathing]

i hope she does get a visa and they stone her, I can't stand her

 

[newbie]

The Indian government at the highest level is frightened of her, which kindof proves her point about being one of the most influential people in the world!

 

[rocketman]

The Indian government at the highest level is frightened of her, which kindof proves her point about being one of the most influential people in the world!

And we're ALL frightened of you Newbie. The resolute nature of your constant naysaying is most unattractive. Will you please allow us the luxury of a happy chat without your facetious and constant interruptions?

Thank you

(Go and start an "argue with Newbie" thread somewhere else, please. I promise not to visit it).

 

[Maltin]

that's how it works, yes. If no-one in the house is identifying the bully/victim situation you see so clearly, and neither side of it gets nominated, you can't do anything. But if that's the case, maybe it's not as major as you think it is.

The simple fact that the housemates or the public might not agree with your analysis and your concerns does not necessarily make them all wrong.

I wasn't commenting on any supposed bullying, victims, giving an analysis, expressing concerns, saying anyone was wrong or saying that I actually despised someone, just pointing out that your comment:

"You've identified abusive behaviour, you can vote the perps out if you feel strongly."

is not true, as you can only vote out those that are up for eviction, not those that you dislike.

 

[Structaural]

Is it still on? I haven't watched it since Jade's eviction. Can anyone summarise for me?

 

[newbie]

And we're ALL frightened of you Newbie. The resolute nature of your constant naysaying is most unattractive. Will you please allow us the luxury of a happy chat without your facetious and constant interruptions?

Oh, is this your thread? I'm so sorry.

 

[exosculate]

On Betfair probably, yes. I'd take the Face anytime over a middle-aged woman who's shown her dark, vindictive side in the last week, hence my ungenerous odds. Actually, thinking about it I'd make her a 1.7 shot.

Btw a lot of folks are putting JJ forward as a "favoured" winner for Endemol now - they sidestep the racism debate and also avoid the accusations of a 'fix' if Shilpa wins. Personally I don't think they really care - the public decide once we reach the final six, but it should be interesting watching the edits given to both HMs.

I can't see Jermaine losing, I've felt that for more than a week. Doesn't durprise me that this would be Endemols choise either.

1.7 is good odds I think.

 

[exosculate]

Is it wrong to find that funny? ....I'm actually a bit relieved...India sends us Shilpa and when send them Jade?

On the other board, they are going on about how attacking Jade is akin to attacking all white working class women. A bizarre claim. She is not a good representative of anything to me, other than nasty dysfunctionality.

So no you are totally not wrong.

 

[exosculate]

Contrary to popular opinion, I also have a life. Something you losers wouldn't understand.

I knew that.

 

[Treacle Toes]

On the other board, they are going on about how attacking Jade is akin to attacking all white working class women. .

That suggests that all white working class women are like her....simply not true...

 

[Treacle Toes]

So no you are totally not wrong.

*feels better*

 

[tekla]

And we're ALL frightened of you Newbie. The resolute nature of your constant naysaying is most unattractive. Will you please allow us the luxury of a happy chat without your facetious and constant interruptions?

Thank you

(Go and start an "argue with Newbie" thread somewhere else, please. I promise not to visit it).

Is this a common occurrence on these boards? Posters seeking to instruct other posters on who posts what and where? This isn't an idle inquiry. I've just received almost identical treatement in the drugs forum, now happily resolved.

I responded to an OP bang on topic, but then a load of people yapped at my ankles, told me what to say, what not to say, where to say it. I then received the Royal 'We' treatment (in an effort, presumably, to add spurious authority to their censoriousness) and then various little echoes arrived slavishly to agree with them, the idea being - I guess - that should sufficient people write something stupid it ceases to be stupid.

I objected, mildly, to this behaviour and all hell broke loose. I was accused of 'trolling' 'shit-stirring' and resembling someone called 'Dwyer' (wtf?). When I laughed at this they swore at me, had a mini-flounce, came back, swore some more, had a massive sense of humour failure, then ran off completely.

I had to post several pictures of the Royal Family, and engage in a conciliatory PM exchange, before sanity was restored.

*NEFF ORF*


Here's the link: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=193454

Serious question: is this sort of thing normal - a discussion forum where discussion isn't permitted, and those enforcing non-discussion run round like Mary Whitehouse at a pornography convention?

 

[exosculate]

That suggests that all white working class women are like her....simply not true...

Indeed, I said it was an insult to white working class women.

 

[nonamenopackdrill]

Is this a common occurrence on these boards? Posters seeking to instruct other posters on who posts what and where? This isn't an idle inquiry. I've just received almost identical treatement in the drugs forum, now happily resolved.

I responded to an OP bang on topic, but then a load of people yapped at my ankles, told me what to say, what not to say, where to say it. I then received the Royal 'We' treatment (in an effort, presumably, to add spurious authority to their censoriousness) and then various little echoes arrived slavishly to agree with them, the idea being - I guess - that should sufficient people write something stupid it ceases to be stupid.

I objected, mildly, to this behaviour and all hell broke loose. I was accused of 'trolling' 'shit-stirring' and resembling someone called 'Dwyer' (wtf?). When I laughed at this they swore at me, had a mini-flounce, came back, swore some more, had a massive sense of humour failure, then ran off completely.

I had to post several pictures of the Royal Family, and engage in a conciliatory PM exchange, before sanity was restored.

*NEFF ORF*


Here's the link: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=193454

Serious question: is this sort of thing normal - a discussion forum where discussion isn't permitted, and those enforcing non-discussion run round like Mary Whitehouse at a pornography convention?

I'm sure you had a good old belly-laugh and I think a bill of rights would fix it.

 

[tekla]

I'm sure you had a good old belly-laugh and I think a bill of rights would fix it.

I admit I laughed. Was that a mistake? When someone seeks to censor discussion on a discussion forum and gets in a strop when called out, then becomes abusive, then releases the 'trolling' 'shit-stirring' argument (when you've been bang on topic from the start) what's the right response? The release of a massively smelly computer virus into their laptop?*

The funniest bit was when little echoes arrived. As I say, everything was resolved and the debate continues in a civilized manner, but why are these little censors tolerated? What's their function?

* Just joking!

 

[exosculate]

Nice tagline.

 

[tekla]

Cheers mate.

 

[newbie]

Is this a common occurrence on these boards?

it's a common occurrence on all boards and IMV it's simply not worth worrying when someone lets off steam. I prefer to keep discussions non-personal and stick to the topic at hand, which is CBB and not board censorship.

 

[tekla]

it's a common occurrence on all boards and IMV it's simply not worth worrying when someone lets off steam. I prefer to keep discussions non-personal and stick to the topic at hand, which is CBB and not board censorship.

You're 100% right. I ranted and I apologise. But normal service will now resume on this thread and the chance of Mrs Whitehouse making a further apearance, at least in the short term, will be reduced.

 

[rocketman]

Hell no! There's no 5th eviction market up at the moment but I'd price Cleo up at evens tops for that one.

Saw This article in Casino Times, and thought of you.

 

[pk]

<personal info about some obsessed dullard removed>

 

[Griff]

^^^^^^

 

[souljacker]

I really wish you wouldn't bother with all this internet cop bollocks PK. Its fucking boring and only serves to derail threads.

I really couldn't give a shit.

 

[souljacker]

I would pity you if I gave a shit about you.
Alas - I do not, as well you know.

So leave it then. And shut up.

 

[tarannau]

To be fair, PK's got more a point with this intervention than most of his contributions. And I usually hate all the real-life tosh.

I can't be certain, but I think he may right about Tekla. If he is then he's a serial returner, smartarse and general all round tosspot around town. I'd love to think PK was wrong, but he's talking about one seriously obsessed and delusional idjut. And disruption and scoring points off the mods/regular posters will be his only real aim.

Probably be better to report it and leave it to the mods mind, but given Tekla's recent influence on this thread.

 

[nonamenopackdrill]

The funniest part is pk pretending he doesn't care.

 

[ZAMB]

Either way the problem you've identified, that they might "push him to a psychotic break", is averted.

I don't think C4 has been acting responsibly in letting it get this far - the fact is that the coven's plotting has been shown live - with their suggestions of how he could be 'cracked' - chili powder in his pants etc - right down to Jo's confession in the diary room last night that she got her 'fun' out of seeing how far he could be pushed.

AFAIK, they haven't had any little 'chats' with the coven about their treatment of Dirk - in the way they had about Shilpa - because in this case race isn't involved so there hasn't been the same outcry from the public - even though the bullying has been just as severe.

Or do you think that men are immune from bullying? If a male contestant had done to Cleo what she did to Dirk the country would've been up in arms about attempted rape etc. There are double standards here. When someone, anyone, says no it should mean NO. Doesn't matter who they are.

 

[rocketman]

So - what are people's thoughts on Big Brother cancelling all the votes taken last night as a result of what it claims to be "human error"?

They say people who voted can get their money back, but it doesn't say how.

This series grows more farcical by the day, IMO

 

[nonamenopackdrill]

So - what are people's thoughts on Big Brother cancelling all the votes taken last night as a result of what it claims to be "human error"?

They say people who voted can get their money back, but it doesn't say how.

This series grows more farcical by the day, IMO

Is that true?