Pastagate wasn't against the rules so why were they punished?

Topics

longcat

This is what BB said.
As many of you spotted on the Live Streaming yesterday, Govan and Shabby were caught talking in the Kitchen discussing the Save and Replace Task

Despite talking in a code, we all knew exactly what was going on. They were suggesting that should they win the task, they would replace themselves with Mario (or pasta as they said!)

We’ve had lots of comments from you guys about whether this is a rule break. We decided to go to the top dogs to get an official comment on why they have not been punished.

Here is what they said:

“Save and Replace is an open process unlike nominations which are confidential and take place in the Diary Room, therefore different rules apply.”

Replies sorted oldest to newest

longcatMember

Also nobody seemed to mind that Ben also talked in code to Shabby about putting Sunshine up.

6/23/1011:20 PM

MentalistMember

I wondered that

6/23/1011:29 PM

jacksonbMember

weren't they all discussing who should be replaced when dave won last week?

but maybe no names were mentioned.

6/24/1012:27 AM

longcatMember

BB itself says its not against the rules to discuss who they will put up if they win the task. So why then use it as an excuse to punish them. It makes no sense.

6/24/1012:34 AM

lalMember

Reference:

Also nobody seemed to mind that Ben also talked in code saying he would put Shabby up if he won.

Shabby was already up though...

6/24/1012:39 AM

~Lee~Member

I read they were punished for using code.

6/24/1012:41 AM

~Lee~Member

Reference:

Shabby was already up though...

True.

6/24/1012:42 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

Shabby was already up though...

Sorry I meant he used code to tell Shabby he put Sunshine up.

6/24/1012:45 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

I read they were punished for using code.

Oh I see.

6/24/1012:46 AM

ScottyMember 10 years

Reference: longcat

Also nobody seemed to mind that Ben also talked in code to Shabby about putting Sunshine up.

The difference is, Shabby and Govan`s code talk effected who went up for eviction.

6/24/1012:54 AM

jacksonbMember

but that really shouldn't make any difference, a rule is a rule, regardless of the eventual outcome.

6/24/1012:58 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

The difference is, Shabby and Govan`s code talk effected who went up for eviction.

Shabby and Govans code talk was about who to replace them if they won the task which wasn't against the rules.

6/24/101:12 AM

Rawky-RooMember 10 years

Reference:

BB itself says its not against the rules to discuss who they will put up if they win the task. So why then use it as an excuse to punish them. It makes no sense.

Yeah but it annoys Shabby which is always good

6/24/101:14 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

Yeah but it annoys Shabby which is always good

Agreed

6/24/101:18 AM

ScottyMember 10 years

Reference:

but that really shouldn't make any difference, a rule is a rule, regardless of the eventual outcome.

It`s a different rule. Ben spilled that he had put Sunshine up for nomination in week one.
Govan and Shabby colluded to put Mario up for eviction.
I don`t know why Ben`s getting all the flak. A few of them have hinted at who they nominated.
BB did nothing about them either.

6/24/101:19 AM

jacksonbMember

i thought the rule that was broken was about using code? not in the context of how it was used, because they are allowed to discuss, i think, the replacement thing..

6/24/101:23 AM

ScottyMember 10 years

Reference:

Shabby and Govans code talk was about who to replace them if they won the task which wasn't against the rules.

Seems like BB changed their minds on that.

6/24/101:24 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

It`s a different rule. Ben spilled that he had put Sunshine up for nomination in week one. Govan and Shabby colluded to put Mario up for eviction. I don`t know why Ben`s getting all the flak. A few of them have hinted at who they nominated. BB did nothing about them either.

Ben spoke about past nominations. That's against the rules. Shabby and Govan discussed who they would put up for eviction if they won the task. that's not against the rules. What is against the rules is the fact that they talked in code. There are only about 4 people in that house who are not discussing nominations and trying to influence voting and that is Corin. Nathan, Sunshine and Steve. The rest of them are all at it.

6/24/101:24 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

i thought the rule that was broken was about using code? not in the context of how it was used, because they are allowed to discuss, i think, the replacement thing..

That's what I understand it to mean now. I do wish BB would make it clearer.

6/24/101:26 AM

Rawky-RooMember 10 years

A-HA!! Heres a quote on digi spy that explains things:

After Big Brother announced the failure of tonight's task due to rule breaks, it was revealed that one of the reasons was due to a code Ben used to Shabby to describe how he nominated Sunshine in the first week.

Makes sense now

6/24/101:46 AM

ScottyMember 10 years

Ok, I`m turtelly confused now.

I`ll wait for the HL show, I think.

6/24/102:11 AM

Eff_JayMember

I actually wondered that. Because it's not talking about who they're going to nominate in the official process, I thought that discussing who you would replace yourself with was okay to discuss.

I think maybe this is a loophole that Big Brother may have overlooked?

6/24/102:13 AM

Rawky-RooMember 10 years

Eff-Jay, look at my post 2 posts up.

6/24/102:16 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

A-HA!! Heres a quote on digi spy that explains things: After Big Brother announced the failure of tonight's task due to rule breaks, it was revealed that one of the reasons was due to a code Ben used to Shabby to describe how he nominated Sunshine in the first week. Makes sense now

So it's all Ben's fault then

6/24/102:16 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

Ok, I`m turtelly confused now.

You, me and the HMs apparently

6/24/102:17 AM

Eff_JayMember

Reference:

Eff-Jay, look at my post 2 posts up.

I read that, but I thought that was about Ben nominating Sunshine, not the Shabby Pasta thing?

6/24/103:16 AM

ScottyMember 10 years

Reference:

You, me and the HMs apparently

Sorry I didn`t reply to your other post longcat...I ran out of steam.

6/24/103:19 AM

DemantoidMember

I bet it would have been against the rules if someone else, rather than their fave Scabby, had done it.

6/24/103:27 AM

BazMember VIP10 years

Reference:

I bet it would have been against the rules if someone else, rather than their fave Scabby, had done it.

You can bet on that Demantoid.

6/24/103:29 AM

DemantoidMember

Reference:

You can bet on that Demantoid.

Second time within days that she's broken a rule. The first time, Caoimhe got punished instead! Wonder how long BB will contrive to keep her in?

6/24/103:31 AM

BazMember VIP10 years

Reference:

The first time, Caoimhe got punished instead! Wonder how long BB will contrive to keep her in?

Given by the last two series I have seen, they will contrive to keep her in as long as they can.... However, the GBP will hopefully thwart their plans, given the chance....

6/24/103:33 AM

longcatMember

Reference:

Second time within days that she's broken a rule. The first time, Caoimhe got punished instead! Wonder how long BB will contrive to keep her in?

I always wonder why BB try to keep in the ones that the forum appear to hate.

6/24/104:25 AM

jacksonbMember

it's the last sanctuary the haters they have .longcat.

see it every year.

6/24/106:21 AM

brisketMember Memoriam

More than one person was involved.
And the coded discussion between Govan and Shabby was intended to influence which housemate should be chosen to be up for eviction.
To me, that's a rule break.

6/24/106:26 AM

PrometheusMember

Shabby was punished for existing which I think is fair enough.

6/24/106:52 AM

BazMember VIP10 years

Reference:

More than one person was involved. And the coded discussion between Govan and Shabby was intended to influence which housemate should be chosen to be up for eviction. To me, that's a rule break.

I agree.. in fact is a double rule break....1. talking in code 2. Trying to influence noms.

6/24/107:03 AM

liverbirdMember 10 years

Reference:

Shabby was punished for existing which I think is fair enough.

6/24/108:14 AM

FairfaxMember

Reference:

Shabby was punished for existing which I think is fair enough

Not enough though

Bring out the thumbnails and screws I say (rubs hands together Shabby styleee)

6/24/108:38 AM

Add Reply

<ul id="{%=id%}ButtonGroup" class="button-group h-popup-buttons even-button-group even-1">
    <li id="{%=id%}Okay_buttonContainer"><a id="{%=id%}Okay" href="javascript:void(0);" class="button success no-margin-bottom h-alert-modal-ok-button" role="button">OK</a><script type="text/javascript">
        (function() {
            function {%=id%}Okay_click(event, data) {
            {%=id%}Popup.hide();
        }
        
                $('#{%=id%}Okay').on('click', {%=id%}Okay_click);
        })();
    </script></li></ul><a href="javascript:void(0);" class="close-reveal-modal" aria-label="Close Modal">&#215;</a><div class="last-modal-focus focus-utility-element" tabindex="0"></div>
</div>
<script type="text/javascript">
        (function() {
            {%=id%}Popup = new SS.Popup.ModalPopup('{%=id%}');
        })();
    </script>

Ad-Free	Search Site	Start Dialogs
Upload Photos	Upload Videos	Upload Audio
Upload Documents	Use Signature	Block Members
View Member Directory	Mark All Topics As Read	Edit Posts Anytime
Post To Walls

Skip to main content

Topics

Add Reply

Membership Required

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

Premium Membership Required

VIP

Please wait...