Email this topic to a friend Printer-friendly version of this topic Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)		Archived thread - Read only  Previous Topic | Next Topic
Conferences Big Brother Live Feed Updates And Spoilers (Protected)
Original message

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 10:57 AM (EST) "Rigging possibilities?" I just don't believe anyone at BB would risk their careers by rigging the competitions, as has been suggested for the past couple of weeks. Alison practiced like crazy to win HOH, and then Justin had an advantage with knowledge of Alison, so both of those are understandable, even if dumb luck or chance is not considered. I used to work for a CBS affiliate, and I'm pretty sure I know the routine. BB didn't wait until the last minute to decide what contest to hold. Competition sets were built months ago, tested, and scripted into the show. Long before any HG entered the house, BB knew that when they got down to 8 HG competing, they were going to use the ping-pong ball in the tube, and when they got down to 7 HG competing, they were going to use survey questions from the 5 evicted HG (in this case, however, when they got to 7 competitors, Scott had been kicked out, so they used the out-going HOH rather than him). In the ping-pong game, Alison's practice may have contributed as much as luck or skill, and Justin got lucky in that questions about Alison were asked (if Scott or Dave were still in the house, they'd have had similar advantages, with this being a ramification of unsing exes), but this doesn't mean the contests were rigged. According to industry standards and practices, game shows are required to have independent auditors/inspectors monitoring productions so as to varify that the shows are fair to all contestants. Any auditor/inspector who certifies that BB producers have met minimum standards would inspect the sets, witness the random placement of contestants on the ping pong ball game, assure that questions used in the evicted HG survey competition were written long before the determination of who was going to be competing, and assure that such survey questions were then selected randomly, etc.. There are, of course, always folks willing to try to cheat, and it can be done, but I just don't believe anyone would be so blantant as to rig contests in this case. There are so many camera persons, set builders and crew members constantly present, that it would be unlikely that someone wouldn't see. And these folks would be risking their own careers, and even prison, by not reporting the cheating, so I suspect they would indeed come forward. It is also a fact that even the slightest report from any HG would alert the legal and regulatory systems and produce an investigation. This is evidenced by Kent's, from BB2, unaccusitory statement that "Nine of the players had talent agents before they entered the house." Well, Kent was not intending to file a complaint, but the Federal Trade Commission investigated this as a possible violation. The FTC has been involved with television since the Wheeler Act of 1938, and was concerned that contestants having agents might play the game with different motives. The FTC was not so much interested in how much this effected the HG as it was how much this deceived the viewers -- were we watching a game show or an audition? It would be a violation of California fraud laws for HG to be cheated, but under the Federal Trade Act, it is against the law to deceive the television viewers. So the FTC investigated to make sure of concerns. The FTC is currantly investigating American Idol's Ruben Studdard concerning shirts he wore on the show. He may or may not have been paid to wear the shirts, but if so, he deceived the audience by making a commericial appearance on the behalf of the shirt maker. Again, the FTC isn't conecrned about who might have gotten paid, but whether a commercial fraud was committed. One reason I think that CBS would especially be on their toes concerning "rigging" is that they almost lost their LA station for a much lessor offence. The FCC requires license renewals of networks and affiliates, and since the game show scandals of the 1950s, has declared illegal any contest or game with the intent to deceive the audience. Well, in the mid 1970s, CBS promoted "Winner take all" tennis matches between Jimmy Conners and several other players. When it was discovered that all players were given appearence money, CBS was punished severely for deceiving the viewers into believing it was "winner take all". The FCC considered not renewing the LA affiliate's licence (from where the matches originated) and fining the network severely. The affiliate ended up being renewed for only one year, and being put on probation. My arguement so far has concerned the rigging of physical sets or props - making the ping pong tube bigger, or giving the right people the right questions at the right time. Well, it would be more difficult to detect the giving of direct knowledge in the DR, but I doubt that this is happening either. Now there is certainly "coaching" done in the DR, such as how to gracefully speak on camera, but I doubt that anything that would help one HG win over another would be said. First of all, there would be witnesses, and perhaps even the independant auditor/inspector present. Secondly, the producer has been credited with saving the show and performing wonders since the first season, so I doubt he'd risk going to jail and ruining his career. Thirdly, one needs only to look at the current problems UPN's "Manhunt" is having. "Manhunt" has received at least two complaints from contestants alleging violations of Title 47 Section #509 of the U.S. Code, regarding "unfair or deceitful acts or practices". The point of these complaints are that the producers "asked or suggested" that the contestants make certain strategic moves which would allegedly make for better television. Making these decisions might not be in the best interest of the contestants, however, and two have complained that such suggestions are evidence that the producers manipulated the results of the contest. This has so far been my reasoning as to why the production company, network, and television industry would have ample reason to prevent the possibility of rigging, but I also see why no individual would be involved. Rigging the contest, under California law, would, in this case, be felony fraud. Not only would any individual involved be subject to all the state criminal laws involved, but they would be subject to lawsuits from each of the HG for both actual and punitive damages. And less we not forget, Title 18 of the U.S Code (Crime and Criminal Procedure) states in part: "Whoever, having devised or intenting to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud.................transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communications..................shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both." Folks, I just don't believe anyone could rig these contests without getting caught, and no one would be foolish enough to risk prison for the sake of ratings for a summer reality series. Just my opinion. And besides, if I were going to rig something for the sake of ratings, I'd have made sure Dana won POV. LOL!   Top

Subject     Author     Message Date     ID    RE: Rigging possibilities? SaphireLady 08-12-03 1    RE: Rigging possibilities? bb4fan 08-12-03 2  Disagree SurvivinDawg 08-12-03 3    RE: Disagree bb4fan 08-12-03 4        RE: Disagree SaphireLady 08-12-03 5            RE: Disagree bb4fan 08-12-03 6                RE: Disagree SaphireLady 08-12-03 7                    RE: Disagree bb4fan 08-12-03 8            RE: Disagree SurvivinDawg 08-13-03 13        RE: Disagree SurvivinDawg 08-13-03 12            RE: Disagree bb4fan 08-13-03 14            RE: Disagree bb4fan 08-13-03 15  Really Interesting Drive My Car 08-12-03 9    Totally disagree...... jase 08-12-03 10        RE: Totally disagree...... SurvivinDawg 08-13-03 11

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

SaphireLady 2491 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model" 08-12-03, 11:05 AM (EST) 1. "RE: Rigging possibilities?" Actually I agree with you. I was just saying what some of them (HG) have said. Like Jack and Erika saying it was rigged. Or Jack saying that in DR he was told he would win (but he could have meant could win, HOH. I also suspect they, DR, ask leading questions so while this is not rigging it does help to screw up alliances.   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 11:27 AM (EST) 2. "RE: Rigging possibilities?" I agree with the "fine line" you've mentioned elsewhere. For instance, on Paradise Hotel last night, the cameras caught one guy stealing a $1000 chip that is good towards saving himself and evicting someone else. The voice-over teased that the other contestants will find out about it, but I wonder if that means the producers are going to tell on him. Would the producers telling on this guy, and thus turning others against him, be akin to, for instance, telling Justin in the DR that Jee has been plotting against him (not true - just an example)? Certainly the producers might be thrying to stir things up in the DR, but it would be illegal if they influenced the outcome of actual competitions. I think a lot of the conversations the HG have complaining about what they're told in the DR is instructions for on-air behavior. Gosh, there's been some really eloquent speeches and compliments that I don't think are consistant with HG's normal vocabulary. I'd expect to hear, "she's a sneaky b****", but instead, we hear, "she's a cunning competitor". And gosh, I'm sure there's a lot of coaching and rehearsal in the DR concerning conducting the various ceremonies. Still, I bet they're careful not give someone an advantage to anyone.   Top

SurvivinDawg 6816 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 08-12-03, 12:11 PM (EST) 3. "Disagree" The Big Brother producers have told the players that they can do whatever they want. I mean they *TOLD* the players that. And they just about can, also. Since the Stilman lawsuit over Survivor I, the producers of these shows have been very careful about making sure that these things don't come under the provisions that the game shows do. In fact, someone (I think NBC) has gone out of its way to call them "unscripted dramas" instead of any type of "game" show. And in "For Love Or Money" 1 & 2, they've been very clear in the closing credits that the producers "consult" on who will remain and who will go. I am also sure that the player's contracts have provisions that allow the producers to do this to the players. All of the Big Brother seasons have had rule changes and sudden switches in the middle. As to rigging, they could easily do it in ways that they'd never be caught, or it could be proven. In the ball-dropping HOH game, they could've tilted Alison's tube slightly toward her to aid seeing it and aiming... and aimed the 3Amigo's tubes slightly away. In fact, on the feeds, Alison mentioned that it was easier in the real game than in practice because the tube was lined up better. Last but not least, after Amy Crews was allowed back into the BB3 house, ChiWhora was so upset about the fact they weren't told (and ChiWhora couldn't compete for HOH again because she was the past week's HOH) that she threatened to sue... and I heard that she DID file the lawsuit, but I never heard any result. So I'm sure the Legal Eagles for the network have made damn sure that no one will go to prison, or be fined, or so much as lose a night's sleep over what's going on in the Big Brother house. Contradictions don't exist. If you are faced with a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong. -- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 02:07 PM (EST) 4. "RE: Disagree" And the surest way to make sure that no one goes to prison, or is fined, or loses one night's sleep is to make sure that nothing is done illegally. You've just proved my point, Dawg. I think we have to take the "anything we want" line in context. I don't know the exact context or situation, but as I recall, the HG were upset about things BB was making them do, and BB said what they did. HG are upset about the sequestering, and I think that may have been what the HG were complaining about. HG say you can't do that after we're evicted, and BB says he can too. BB was saying we can make you jump through whatever hoops we want to, but not that they can manipulate who wins or loses. Gosh, how many parents have told their children, "You'll do whatever I tell you to?" Parents have much more legal right over their children than does BB over the HG, but parents can't do anything illegal or harmful to their children. BB can tell the HG all day long that they can do anything they want to them, but it's not true. No contract allows for illegal or dangerous actions. They can sequester them, make them eat PPJ, etc., etc., and if the HG fail to comply, they've broken the contract. But no contract allows for illegal actions. Also, show me where BB has changed the rules after the HG were in the house. It's really a case of the HG, and the viewers, were not informed of specific rules in advance. For instance, the originals didn't know there were going to be exes in the house. Nor did they know that the POV was going to be the GPOV. I'm sure the contract states that the HG will be subjected to "twists" that they will not know about in advance, so they do indeed know that the rules say the rules will change. Your example from last year also provides support for my position. BB started sequestering the evicted HG from day one, with the intention of bringing one back. The remaining HG went on about their business without knowing this, but Amy was chosen to return in a fair competition, and it could have been anyone as HOH when she did. Kiki got the worse of it because the twist effected her negatively. If Eric or Tonya had returned, or if Kiki had not been HOH, she might have benefited from the return. But the return of someone was planned from day one, and only the events as they played out in the house made it negative for Kiki. Well, Justin's HOH win was the same way. BB knew before the show started that when they got down to 7 competitors they were going to use questions from the surveys of the 5 evicted HG. Scott's ejection meant they only had 4 evicted HG, so they used the current HOH as the 5th. It just turned out that Justin had the advantage because he was Alison's ex - just as it would have been an advantage for any ex who answered questions about his or her ex. But again, the events in the house were such that it was advantageous for Justin when it came time for the survey questions. Think about it - how would BB even know that Justin would still be alive when that question was asked? Now if BB had deliberately selected Amy to return to the house because they wanted Kiki to lose, you'd have a case. My point is, why would they? Why would they tilt the tubes in the ping pong drop, when ratings might have benefited more by having Ali and Dana fight it out for several weeks? Why would they want Justin to win HOH, when watching the stooges squirm might make for better TV? Especially if I'm correct about the penalities, why do any of that? Yes, all reality shows are staying away from the "game show" label, and using words like reality and drama. Certainly the HG behavior and decision making is unscripted, but the fact is that they are playing a game that offers the chance to win $500,000. The competitions and ceremonies are scripted, in the same way the game shows are scripted. Now if the contracts say that the producers will determind the winner of the money, than it might not be a fraud against the HG, but they are still telling viewers that the outcome is the result of a fair competition, and that is indeed illegal under the FCC "game show" regulations. While Title 18 was written as a response to deceitful game shows, it covers all "transmitted communication in interstate or foreign commerse." And the Jimmy Conners tennis match I mentioned was not a game show, but the violation was deceiving the viewers, which rigging the competitions would be also. As far as the Stillman lawsuit, what was the outcome? Anyone can bring a lawsuit, and networks and production companies are often sued in hopes of a settlement. This time last year, BB was being sued by a BB2 HG. The key for networks isn't to avoid lawsuits, but to be on solid ground and not lose them. If you don't break the law, you'll not be penalized for it. And as far as "For Love or Money" concerned, I confess that I don't know anything about it. I suspect that the disclaimer you mention is in regard to the producers being the final "judges", but not that they manipulate competitions such that someone they favor wins. And as I explained before, I really think a lot of people would be negligent if it is as easy to chat as you seem to think it is. Oh, and Alison's comment about the tubes was that the sturdily built platform was lined up better than the smaller, less sturdy, probably unlevel practice tubes. No one disagreed or suggested that their tubes weren't lined up better or equally. I coach a girls' softball team, and our practice balls are terrible compared to our "game" balls, but the other team hits a "game" ball too.   Top

SaphireLady 2491 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model" 08-12-03, 02:42 PM (EST) 5. "RE: Disagree" actually I can tell you where BB broke their own rules. Robert was on the PBJ diet and had a HOH cookie, one of Ali. The rules say that by eatting something else while on PBJ is an automatic being put up for eviction. Didn't happen though did it? So they broke their own rules. I too want to know the outcome on Stillman, have never heard anything. "Do you know, I always thought unicorns were fabulous monsters, too? I never saw one alive before!" "Well, now that we have seen each other," said the unicorn, "if you'll believe in me, I'll believe in you." Lewis Carroll; Through the Looking Glass   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 03:00 PM (EST) 6. "RE: Disagree" I heard about Robert eating the cookie, but didn't know there was a rule concerning the punishment. I'd have thought BB would have left itself leeway to do something appropriate - let the punishment fit the crime. For a cookie, maybe PPJ for an extra day, or extra chores, while for pigging out - maybe immediate ejection. I honestly don't remember ever hearing or reading a list of punishments for such things. If Robert were put up for eviction, would someone else get off? Gosh, that would impact POV and voting numbers. Can you explain the rule, especially as to how it effects those already nominated?   Top

SaphireLady 2491 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model" 08-12-03, 03:04 PM (EST) 7. "RE: Disagree" The HG and other posters at the live feeds were stating the punishment. But Rob said that they told him in DR that it was okay. And Ali herself said we were talking and just didn't think about. She even hollared, Rob you just ate and cookie, then Rob called to DR and Ali was like I am sorry, should not have said anything. Think DR gave him slap on hand. I am not saying put in hot seat is wrong, and I agree big fallout for a cookie, by the same token, it just struck me as weird. The HG were talking about in that I am going to eat and screw the consequences, of course they didn't. The live feeds were saying the put up for eviction. would love the see the rules on this one myself. "Do you know, I always thought unicorns were fabulous monsters, too? I never saw one alive before!" "Well, now that we have seen each other," said the unicorn, "if you'll believe in me, I'll believe in you." Lewis Carroll; Through the Looking Glass   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 03:13 PM (EST) 8. "RE: Disagree" I don't like Robert, but this sounds like an "oops, no harm done" kind of thing. And I'd hate to blow everyone's strategy (even if it might help my favs) just because Robert made a simple mistake, the likes of which we all make.   Top

SurvivinDawg 6816 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 08-13-03, 06:23 AM (EST) 13. "RE: Disagree" You're right, Saphire. Good call! Contradictions don't exist. If you are faced with a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong. -- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged   Top

SurvivinDawg 6816 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 08-13-03, 06:21 AM (EST) 12. "RE: Disagree" LAST EDITED ON 08-13-03 AT 06:21 AM (EST) I'm not going to get into a long drag-out, especially when everything you wrote dances around the points I made earlier. But I will address this one line: My point is, why would they? Why would they tilt the tubes in the ping pong drop, when ratings might have benefited more by having Ali and Dana fight it out for several weeks? Why would they want Justin to win HOH, when watching the stooges squirm might make for better TV? 1) Because ratings will not benefit more for seeing Dana and Ali fight. IMHO, people don't want to watch the hamsters fight day after day after day. They like the plotting, they like seeing what happens, who gains the upper hand. Some conflict is fine. But too much conflict starts to wear on the audience's nerves. Also, seeing the 3Amigos "squirm" is one thing, seeing them defeated and sitting there for three weeks awaiting their inevitable evictions (i.e. their pagonging) is another. Pagonging is the bane of the Survivor show; it would be audience anesthesia for Big Brother. 2) It is better for BB's ratings sake to have neither side gain too much ascendancy over the other. After Dana tilted the game towards the Ex's, having Alison win brought it back towards the Originals. Then, when it looked like the Originals had the better hand, suddenly an Ex is winning again. It would be lousy watching if the last 4 people in the house are Jun, Jee, Justin and Robert. Ditto if the last four were Alison, Jack, Nathan and Erika. It would be over, one side or the other would've won. Not much drama left to play out. Remember how BB1 was totally boring towards the end. Contradictions don't exist. If you are faced with a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong. -- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-13-03, 08:48 AM (EST) 14. "RE: Disagree" My bad. I've been watching a totally different show. In the show I've seen, the whole world knew that Alison would go after Dana rather than one of the exes. And by the time Justin won HOH, we all knew that Alison and Jun had made secret alliances with the exes, so if I were going to rig the HOH so as to even the sides, I'd have given it to Nathan, Jack, or Erika. I think Justin winning HOH is likely to create just the scenerio you're suggesting. I suspect Nathan is evicted tonight, leaving the entire house against Jack and Erika. Neither of them has shown a talent for winning competitions, but even if they get HOH this week, they would have only a 1-in-5 chance the following week. The original alliance is dead - with Jack or Erika likely going next week, and the survivor hanging on only if the stooges elect to go after Alison or Jun first. (I believe Alison and Jun would evict Erika first as long as there are 3 stooges left - nominating or evicting one of them would mean at least 2, a majority of those competing for the next HOH, would be left in the house). Giving the HOH to Justin greatly increased the likelihood that the final 4 will end up being the stooges and either Jun or Alison. The Dana-Alison-Justin HOH progression has effectively shattered the original alliance, so if BB rigged it for Alison and Justin, they themselves helped eliminate the competition. Certainly, any one individual in the house can still luck out an win, but as far as the originals vs. the exes, it's over - the exes have not lost a man since the second week and have benefited by 3 defections, while the originals have fallen apart. Lisa and Will won the last two years by staying under the radar while the powers fought it out, and that's what it's come down to this year. The stooges are the only power left in the game, and the only way anyone will win is if the competitions make it impossible for the stooges to evict others, and the odds are against that, expecially since Jun and Alison are afraid to go against them just yet. It's extremely likely that at least 2 of the stooges will be in the final 3.   Top

bb4fan 141 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-13-03, 10:50 AM (EST) 15. "RE: Disagree" Dawg, I didn't "dance around" your earlier points and was actually careful to respond to them directly. Forgive me if I wasn't very clear, so I'll try one more time to be more direct, paragraph by paragraph, in the order in which you brought them up: (1) The HG were told BB could do whatever BB wanted to them. I believe the big issue here was that the HG were upset after hearing that they would not be sequestered in the paradise they had thought. I used the example of a parent telling a child, "You'll do whatever I tell you!" Well, just as a parent can't make a child do anything illegal or harmful to the child, BB cannot do anything illegal (such as rig the contest) or harmful to the HG (such as leaving in the house someone who put a knife to Krista's throat). "Whatever" meant that BB can make the rules for HG behavior - how they live and what they do - but did not even address the possibility of rigging the competitions. (2) The Stilman lawsuit and references to "game shows". As in the example I gave of the Jimmy Conners tennis matches, FTC and FCC regulations apply to any broadcast that deceives the viewers, and not just game shows. Unless they tell the viewers that the competitions were rigged, these laws apply. And fraud is fraud, whether it is in a "game show" or not even on TV - a church bingo game that is rigged is illegal. Stilman has the right to file a suit, but no chance of winning unless the show was rigged, and it's more likely that he filed hoping to get a settlement. (3) The contracts and rule changes. I'm sure the contracts do indeed allow BB to dictate HG behavior and to add "twists". Twists do include what on first glance are rule changes, but really it's a case of HG and viewers not being informed of rule changes. For instance, long before the show started last year, the rules were that after 5 HG were evicted, one would return. Clearly this was a rule from the start, or else the evicted HG would not have been sequestered, but it was not revealed until the time came, such that it was a "twist". BB did not suddenly change the rules, but rather suddenly revealed a rule change that was planned all along. (4) They could rig the competitions without getting caught, and Alison said the tubes were lined up better. Again, I believe there are too many people who would discover this, including the industry standards and practices regulators, to make this worth a risk for one lousy summer-season program. No one is getting rich off this show, no matter what the ratings are, nor is anyone even working on it year round, so even if it's canceled, it's just a disappointment and not a catastrophy. And Alison said the tube on the big, well-built competition set was lined up better than the tube on the small, less sturdy, HG set-up practice tubes. Well, all the HG had better lined-up tubes in the competition, so this doesn't suggest rigging. (5) Amy's return to the house, to Kiki's detrement. Again, at the time it was determined that a evicted HG would return, it was also determined how that HG would be determined. No one knew at that time that Kiki and Amy would be enemies, that Amy would have been evicted, and that Kiki would be HOH. Amy went through a fair competition with the other evicted HG, and ultimately reentered after being voted in by the HG. It is very clear that the Amy-Kiki situation was created by the "twist" and unscripted progression from week-to-week, and not by BB rigging the show so that Amy would beat Kiki in any competition. (6) Finally, the Legal Eagles. You're suggesting that the legal eagles would know how to get around the law. I think the legal eagles would tell the producers not to break the law. Simple as that.   Top

Drive My Car 20045 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 08-12-03, 07:43 PM (EST) 9. "Really Interesting" Thanks bb4fan. I found your posts really interesting and informative. I agree that CBS would hardly take such a risk to rig the game. Twists in the game? Sure. But rigging competitons seems unlikely. People do love to speculate though. Again, I appreciate the insights, and it's nice to have you posting with us. Buggy   Top

jase 187 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 08-12-03, 09:46 PM (EST) 10. "Totally disagree......" Any way you slice it, this is a reality show and not a game show like the "Price is Right" or even "Dog eat Dog". I doubt ethics or morals are on the top of (or even on) the producers list of concerns for this show or any other reality show. Money and ratings will always take priority on shows like this and people will do whatever they can to insure they have huge amounts of both. It's often about entertaining the masses, not about being fair. Let's be honest, who's going to tell what's going on if they're cut in on the deal, signed a contract that keeps them from saying anything ever and/or are clueless about/don't care what's happening in the first place? While some of us like think people are above stuff like cheating or rigging, we are however aware the possibilities are there.   Top

SurvivinDawg 6816 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 08-13-03, 06:11 AM (EST) 11. "RE: Totally disagree......" What jase said. Contradictions don't exist. If you are faced with a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong. -- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged   Top

Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Select another forum Lobby The Amazing Race Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--The Amazing Race Fanatics Forum (Protected)   |--The Amazing Race Basher Forum (Protected)   |--The Amazing Race Spoiler/Speculation Forum (Protected) American Idol Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--American Idol General Discussion Forum (Protected)   |--American Idol Individual Contestant and Judge Discussion Forum (Protected) Big Brother Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--Big Brother Fanatic Forum (Protected)   |--Big Brother Bashers Forum (Protected)   |--Big Brother Live Feed Updates And Spoilers (Protected) Survivor Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--Survivor Fanatic Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Basher Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Spoilers Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Games Forum (Protected) Other Reality TV Shows (Conference)   |--The Bachelor / The Bachelorette Forum (Protected)   |--Dancing with the Stars Forum (Protected)   |--Other Reality TV Shows Forum (Protected) Off Topic (Conference)   |--The Help Forum (Protected)   |--Off-Topic Forum (Protected)