Episode v. Feeds: To Tell the Truth

[Kromm]

Specifically for focused discussion of the differences between facts as presented by the live feeds and the broadcast show.  How does this change perceptions of specific Hamsters?  Of specific "plot" threads?

[Runningwild]

Thank you for starting this topic. I was wondering myself what live feed viewers thought should have been shown last night that wasn't. Seems like there was something I specifically wanted to ask about, but I'm a little loopy from pain meds this morning.

[Kromm]

Is Jackie as much of a non-entity on the feeds as she has been on the broadcast?

 

Seems like while she was at least decent at the game of Amazing Race (well, on the high side of middling if I'm being honest), she's not so good at the Big Brother.

 

I mean unless she's thinking a Survivor-like "floater" game works on BB.  Which generally it doesn't (work as well).

[Nashville]

Is Jackie as much of a non-entity on the feeds as she has been on the broadcast?

 

Seems like while she was at least decent at the game of Amazing Race (well, on the high side of middling if I'm being honest), she's not so good at the Big Brother.

 

I mean unless she's thinking a Survivor-like "floater" game works on BB.  Which generally it doesn't (work as well).

Can't speak to the feeds, only BBAD, but - yeah.

[peachmangosteen]

I mean unless she's thinking a Survivor-like "floater" game works on BB.  Which generally it doesn't (work as well).

 

I don't know if I agree with that. A lot of the winners played floater type games IMO. But it depends on your definition of floater. There seems to be a lot of different ones around for it.

[Nashville]

Actually, the biggest reality disconnect I'm seeing with the broadcast is its portrayal of Audrey's game - or lack thereof. The other HGs seem to like her on a personal level - but nobody believes a single word coming out of her mouth game-wise, and with good reason.

Audrey's strategy seems to have devolved to a point where she thinks the only way to recover from the damage caused to her game by her earlier lies is to come up with bigger and better lies - like she believes somewhere in all the little foolish lies is the one Big Lie which everybody will believe without question, and her game will be magically restored to its once-lofty heights. The problem with this strategy is it requires everyone around you to accept everything you say unconditionally, and that ship sailed a LONG time ago. People still talk to her about the Game, of course - what ELSE is there in the House to talk about? - but I don't think anybody discusses anything of real strategic value with Audrey, because she no longer brings anything of real strategic value to the table. Nobody talks game with Audrey any more because of her lies, and everybody knows nobody talks game with her - so every time she says, "So-and-So told me this and that", the other HGs already know YAAL* will be immediately forthcoming. It's usually easy to pick up on as well, because the lies usually start within the first three or four sentences. The sheer volume of YAALs actually concerns me more than a little - it's either egregious gameplay, or indicative of something more pathological in her personality. Personally, for her sake, I hope it's the just former.

But how much of this constant lying is making it to the broadcast?

* YAAL = Yet Another Audrey Lie

[Skittl1321]

I don't know if I agree with that. A lot of the winners played floater type games IMO. But it depends on your definition of floater. There seems to be a lot of different ones around for it.

It seems like the unaligned "float until the end" kind of person generally makes it pretty far.  Those people usually are just aiming for jury though. (The stipend must be good- I've never understood why there is so much interest in "gotta make it to jury")

 

The float from alliance to alliance people (which is what I think a floater is) don't usually fare well.

Of course this year, when everyone is aligned with everybody for a few minutes at a time, I don't know if that floater can even exist. They ALL do that.

[Nashville]

It seems like the unaligned "float until the end" kind of person generally makes it pretty far. Those people usually are just aiming for jury though. (The stipend must be good- I've never understood why there is so much interest in "gotta make it to jury")

The float from alliance to alliance people (which is what I think a floater is) don't usually fare well.

Of course this year, when everyone is aligned with everybody for a few minutes at a time, I don't know if that floater can even exist. They ALL do that.

My own definition of floater (which is mine and mine alone - but I'll share) is a person who is not a member of an active, operational alliance. This type of floater tries to stay out of the way of the established House alliances and hopes they decimate each other to the point s/he can sneak into F2 - at which time they tout their independent survival sans alliance as worthy of the win.

The type of in-alliance person you describe could fall into a couple of different classifications (of my own making, of course):

• "Coat-tail rider" - an alliance member in name only. Willing to ride the gravy train for as long as it lasts, let other alliance members do the dirty work, but avoiding any unnecessary action or movement whatsoever - unless they make it to F2, of course, at which point they'll explain to you how they were secretly the brains behind the alliance ALL ALONG.
• "Judas" - ingratiates self with whichever alliance is in power and milks it for all it's worth - unless the alliance ends up on the losing end of a power struggle, or course, at which time they jump ship, go to the leader clique of the winning alliance, and offer their services to help dismantle their former alliance. Most easily identified by zero votes at finale.

:)

ETA: gosh dang clickety-click editor

Edited July 7, 2015 by Nashville

[Kris117]

I like your definitions, Nashville.

It seems like the unaligned "float until the end" kind of person generally makes it pretty far.  Those people usually are just aiming for jury though. (The stipend must be good- I've never understood why there is so much interest in "gotta make it to jury").

Why Skittl1321, I am shocked, yes shocked, that you missed the obvious answer: they do it for the sheer prestige that comes with that seat on the BB jury!

Seriously, I remember reading somewhere that the stipend for being in the jury is about the same as the stipend for being in the house. It's just that if you get booted out before jury, you don't make any more money. I'm sure that some of them look forward to getting revenge, or at least more camera time, from being on the jury as well.

Most of the differences I'm seeing are of degree than of fabrication. Jace was far more obnoxious in the house than was shown, but the broadcast showed enough to make it easy to understand why he was a target. Audrey's game is even worse than was shown on air, but the highlights (lowlights?) were shown.

I think the biggest difference they're not showing is as per usual, the sexism. Jeff in particular is just plain disgusting, with James also having his ugly side. Until they show the clip of Jeff lying next to Julia or Liz where he appears to be masturbating under the covers, and then seemingly wiping his hand on the back of her hoodie, they're hiding something.

[DAngelus]

On a pure editing topic, I just wanted to say that I find most of the complaints about editing in the episode threads overblown.  Yes, you see more via the feeds or even BBAD.  But I don't think every little near-plot twist merits CBS airtime, anyhow.

 

For example, here's my critique of what we "missed" in episode 17.16:

 

I always find it funny when the live feeders turn out to have missed something crucial that made the CBS show, which I find ironic considering the number of "you don't know what's REALLY happening unless you get the feeds" posts I see on various fora.  (To be fair, the feeds only show you two rooms at any given time, so you're almost bound to miss conversations.)  Last week, they didn't see the Audrey/James conversation in the storage room (where she said he had to split up Clay/Shelli and he promptly ran and tattled) and this week there was no mention of Liz telling Austin that James threw the BotB and his becoming suspicious because what would it matter who won BotB if they were all (Austin thought) agreed on getting Steve out?

 

In contrast, here's a distillation of what was omitted from the CBS episode:

 

1) Suspicious of the events, Austin went up to the HoH and said that maybe they shouldn't backdoor Steve, he's a useful number for their side. (Ironically articulating the argument for saving him, although he didn't know it at the time.) He also hypothesized that perhaps the other six people in the house (not counting the five active Sixth Sensers and Steve) were in a counter-alliance and perhaps Becky also threw the BotB to get Clay evicted.  (This is really a stupid suggestion, but when Shelli later saw Becky being emotional, she started to wonder about it.)

 

2) After the Veto was played, Vanessa did her usual dithering about who on the other side should be the renom, vainly looking for a "reason"/excuse to sell to the house.  Shelli/Clay wanted Becky (or perhaps Jackie) gone, since they were closer to Jason/Meg than those two, but Vanessa ultimately went the other way.  Given that Vanessa had already given Jackie her word and that Shelli never came up with a serious pawn suggestion to evict Becky, it's not too surprising.* Essentially, Sixth Sense compromised, as a good alliance should do.  Shelli and Clay kept Vanessa from wavering and going back to putting up Austin, and Vanessa got them to see there was no point in trying to evict Becky. And that's really pretty much the it.

 

Yes, Vanessa was upset that Austin had cast the hinky vote and she thinks his wrestling character being called "Judas" means he's untrustworthy (says the woman who's lied about her profession and financial situation to everyone…it's a wrestling character, sweetie!  Chill out) and she decided that Jason was lying about Da'Vonne getting the "Last Laugh" power, but none of that begs to be shown, IMO.  If Jason and Austin had been in a fractured showmance (Austin has dropped hints he's at least bi-curious and possibly attracted to Jason [remember his saying he felt like Seabiscuit and Jason was his jockey?  That was a metaphor, folks…]) or if Clay had been secretly campaigning against Shelli, then I would have been upset at the editing.  But this?  I think the episode spent enough time on Becky's fears as it was, IMO.

 

*-There really aren't any good pawns to go against Becky anyhow.  Liz/James/Clay are safe, Austin and Steve are pre-declared targets that "Dark Moon" would have the numbers to evict, Vanessa promised Jackie safety this week and she promised John in Week 3 that she wouldn't pawn him until one week past Jury, and if they're going to nominate Jason or Meg, why not just evict them and have done with it? (As apparently they are going to do.)  That only leaves Shelli herself as a possible pawn, and she wasn't going to volunteer and Vanessa would look very shady in naming her.  So Becky, tears aside, was always good to stay. And since backdooring Jackie or John would mean breaking a promise needlessly and James was safe, it was pretty much always going to be Jason or Meg.  That Vanessa took 10,000 words where 10 would do is neither unsurprising nor in need of emphasis, I say.

 

So I don't see anything worthy of a "you missed so much!" post.  But that's just me.  (Does this mean I'm against there being a thread like this?  Heck, no…how else could I discuss this?  And sometimes, as noted upthread, they do screw with reality.  Just not as much as claimed, I claim. )

[Katesus7]

I was the one who mentioned not seeing the James/Audrey conversation on the feeds, which helped blow up her game.  I love getting little things on the show which helps explain things to me, which I somehow miss from the feeds/Hamster Time/Jokers. 

 

This episode probably annoyed me more than normal just because I spent about 6 hours on Saturday watching it all go down, in great detail, so it was more jarring to me what was excluded in the episode.  But I certainly don't complain about it, I just don't post at all or post just silly things in the episode threads instead.  I've already commented on everything in the Life Feed thread.

[Cutty]

The biggest omission for me from the episode was Shelli's paranoia because no one cheered for Clay after he won veto. She was very adamant to Vanessa that the other side was in a secret group that were planning to vote out Clay if he remained on the block. That is what ultimately changed Vanessa's mind. The episode edit gave Austin way too much credit when in reality it was Shelli who changed the plan.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Cutty

[DAngelus]

The biggest omission for me from the episode was Shelli's paranoia because no one cheered for Clay after he won veto. She was very adamant to Vanessa that the other side was in a secret group that were planning to vote out Clay if he remained on the block. 

 

But Clay did win the Veto, he's not named Marcellas, and so his being endangered was a moot point.  (And had Liz won the Veto and frozen the nominations, Clay probably would have gone home.  Jackie would have saved Becky, Jason wouldn't have passed up a shot, James and Meg had already promised Becky their votes, and I believe Steve would quite willingly have cast the lethal vote against Clay and tried to pin it elsewhere.  So Shelli wasn't wrong to worry, even if her "evidence" was sketchy.) To parse quite so deeply into the origins of Shelli's realization that the other side has numbers and, given a shot at a big target, won't remain disorganized forever seems excessive, IMO.  

 

And I thought the episode did clearly show that Shelli/Clay were the ones who made a wavering Vanessa finally resolve to get the infamous "blood on her hands".  I don't mind them skipping every detail of why Shelli was so insistent, even if it does mean that the show passed on a chance to make "Clelli" look like entitled asses.  But somehow I'm thinking they'll have more chances at that. Just a hunch.

 

(Actually, the one thing I would have loved to have seen from the feeds thread is Jackie chomping on the Endless Box of Cheez-Its™ while Vanessa clearly wants her out of HoH.  That sounds hilarious.  If anyone finds the video, please post it in the feeds thread. Thanks in advance.

 

But I do hope I made it clear that I wasn't criticizing any single poster on this board for talking about the editing; I'd simply reached critical mass on comments like this over the course of the season.  Hope nobody felt offended.)

[Nashville]

But Clay did win the Veto, he's not named Marcellas, and so his being endangered was a moot point.

 

And that shot's good for three from center court, folks.

::thumbsup:: ::thumbsup::

[Turtle]

Here's a thread to compare what gets shown in the episodes to what feed watchers see. After an episode airs, feed watchers can post here to say "Wow, they didn't show any of the talk about backdooring X" and curious episode-only watchers can ask "Did that discussion really only last five minutes?"

This is *not* a place to discuss comps, nominations, and re-noms that have not aired yet. We don't want to spoil things for episode-only watchers; instead, we can all just talk about some of the social game that doesn't make it to air.

However, because we will be talking about stuff that isn't on the episodes, it will get a little spoiler-y. When in doubt, tag your comments and let the reader decide whether to read. But seriously, don't post about comps and vetoes and nominations that haven't aired yet.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Stinger97

[Kris117]

One example was brought up in Sunday's episode thread. Becky reported to Shelli that she had tried to steer James away from nominating Shelli and Clay, but the clip shown of that conversation with James and others showed her doing absolutely nothing, so it made Becky look shady. While Becky is on the shady side, in this case she actually did try to sway James.

[Turtle]

Yep! Becky definitely has her shady moments but the way that conversation was edited made it look like she was lying to Clay and Shelli when the opposite is true.

It's been driving me nuts that they're not showing all of Vanessa's insanity. Granted, they'd have to have ten to twelve episodes a week to do it, but those marathon cuckoo sessions have played a big part in some of the decisions that have been made.

On the other hand, the episodes are managing to capture Austin's creepiness perfectly.

[Turtle]

I'm glad they showed Shelli and Clay throwing Austin under the bus, but there was so much more of a pathetic effort to save themselves. They tried for hooouuurrrsss to get James to nominate Steve, but refused to even mention Becky's name when James was pressuring them for the name of their "rat." Of course they can't show it all, so this isn't a complaint- overall, I think this episode did a pretty good job of showing what really went on. Plus, they reminded everyone how ridiculous Judas is!

[Turtle]

Vanessa is exhausting. I don't have the feeds, was the show accurate on how self centered she is? I was hoping Shelli would walk in on #scandal. She cries so much that I'm starting to think she's secretly a mermaid and her tears keep her from drying out.

Tonight's episode was the most accurate depiction of Vanessa to date, I thought. She is really exhausting, almost manic on the feeds. Talkity talk talk talk nonstop, and almost always about game and always trying to sway everyone to do what's best for her game. She usually ends up getting what she wants, so it's working, but it is still exhausting to watch. She constantly makes everyone give her their word on whatever, tells them "don't you dare lie to me," and then she lies to them. It's crazy.

[Katesus7]

I'm pissed that they didn't show Johnny Mac (apparently drunkenly) crying when Clay and Shelli lost the veto. That's actually become a 'thing' in the house and has gone a long way to ruin his game.

I hate that according to the show it was Vanessa (with a side of Liz) being the driving force behind saving Austin, when it was really Shelli getting incredibly paranoid that no one was happy enough when Clay won veto, which meant the "other side" of the house was secretly planning to boot him, which made her badger Vanesa for over an hour to keep Austin. She wanted either Becky or Jackie gone, not Jason, but it was absolutely her who got the ball rolling on keeping Austin.

[candall]

I'm pissed that they didn't show Johnny Mac (apparently drunkenly) crying when Clay and Shelli lost the veto. That's actually become a 'thing' in the house and has gone a long way to ruin his game.

 

What?!?! 

 

Okay, that little nugget alone is worth all the trouble of doping out this new hybrid thread.

 

So the "thing" you refer to is that Johnny Mac cries a lot and people don't like it?  Or that he gets drunk and starts crying?

 

But he's such a happy whackadoo. . .

 

Please tell more.

[pennben]

I think the "thing" is people thought it was odd that John is/was so emotional over one of Clay/Shelli leaving the game.  Folks are trying to figure out why he is so close to them.  Of course, Vanessa has a conspiracy theory that he is related to one of them.

[ghoulina]

Ugh, don't tell me that! I love Johnny Mac, I don't want to hear that he's ruining his game. 

 

 

 

Can any feed watchers fill us in on if the amorous bathroom moment between Meg and Clay last night was something out of left field? Or have they been flirtatious and cuddly before?

[butterbody]

THANK YOU for this thread! Happy happy happy happy

[pennben]

 

Can any feed watchers fill us in on if the amorous bathroom moment between Meg and Clay last night was something out of left field? Or have they been flirtatious and cuddly before?

 

As far as I have seen, they've always been friendly with each other, but nothing like this. Others may know more about this than me.  I did think the episode did a nice job of showing Meg getting sauced during the competition.  She was drinking that wine like it was kool-aid!

[kellog010]

Also to throw it out there, the DR from Steve a couple weeks ago regarding Becky was not out of left field. There is legitimate reason behind his dislike for her that if you didn't watch the feeds wouldn't get.

[peachmangosteen]

Also to throw it out there, the DR from Steve a couple weeks ago regarding Becky was not out of left field. There is legitimate reason behind his dislike for her that if you didn't watch the feeds wouldn't get.

 

I watch the feeds and I still don't get it lol. What is the reason? Is it just that Becky wants him out? Because if so, I don't really think that warrants that creepy DR from Steve.

Edited August 6, 2015 by peachmangosteen

[blixie]

 

She usually ends up getting what she wants, so it's working, but it is still exhausting to watch.

 

One person's exhausting is another person's entertaining as shit. Vanessa and players like her are EXACTLY why I fell in love with BB, I don't need a Vanessa every season, and there are lots of ways to win and lose this game, but in my heart of hearts it's the Nicoles, and Aliisons, and Vanessas that will always be my favorites.

 

 

She wanted either Becky or Jackie gone, not Jason, but it was absolutely her who got the ball rolling on keeping Austin.

 

Yeah that bugged me, they showed Vanessa's "crazy" for the first time, but I actually think that was one of her more relatable freak outs with Slay trying to pin it ALL on her. Noooo. Otherwise I think they're doing their best to accurately show what's happening, we have really really active plotting  hammies and I think it's always hard to convey just how NUTSO they get, and so much of ends up being circular arguments that I'm not surprised they pare it down to nothing.

 

The funniest thing about Becky and Steve is that they kind of decided to hate each other, and they have very similar games, so it both makes me sad and amuses me that they so focused on dissing one another.

[lezlers]

Great thread!  I always want to know what's happening behind the scenes, but hate getting spoiled, since it ruins the broadcast shows.  This is perfect!  

[candall]

Tonight's episode was the most accurate depiction of Vanessa to date, I thought. She is really exhausting, almost manic on the feeds. Talkity talk talk talk nonstop, and almost always about game and always trying to sway everyone to do what's best for her game. She usually ends up getting what she wants, so it's working, but it is still exhausting to watch. She constantly makes everyone give her their word on whatever, tells them "don't you dare lie to me," and then she lies to them. It's crazy.

I love it when Vanessa goes all mafiosa with the "Lie to me once and you're DEAD."  Heee.

 

But here's the thing about Vanessa--I was excited to have a professional poker player because I thought she'd be sly and stealthy and unreadable.  (I broadcast every emotion like my forehead is a movie marquee, bummer.)

 

So why is Vanessa's tactical game just wearing everyone down to a nubbin?  All this manic yammering and weepy handwringing is the opposite of the skillset that earns her living.

 

(I should go over to the Vanessa thread, but this is my new happy BB home.  Thankyouverymuch to the feed watchers who share the goodies.)

[RedheadZombie]

I'm new to the feeds, but the first thing I noticed was the difference in James.  He seems to play up the redneck and accent for the show.

[Turtle]

Vanessa goes non-stop, talking at a breakneck speed for hours on end. She doesn't sleep much and she's always thinking out loud at someone. I don't know for sure that she was exhausting to people in the house from day one because I haven't heard anyone talk about it, and probably being a part of those conversations is different than being a spectator to them. But boy, spectating is stressful. She latches on to every little thing said and just drills down on it, and then when she gets an idea in her head, it's nonstop talking until she convinces others of it. An example:

When Shelli, Clay, and Vanessa were talking about getting Jason out, Vanessa needed a "reason" to go back on her word to the Dark Moon group. She stayed up most of the night coming up with that reason, eventually deciding that Jason lied to her about Day having had the phone booth advantage from two weeks before. Don't try to understand why- it never made sense. She talked about it for literal hours and called everyone up to the HoH one by one to discuss it with them (not Jason, James, Jackie and Meg, of course). She just talked and talked at them until they finally were like "oh, okay, sure" - I don't know if they actually agreed or just couldn't keep on with the conversation anymore. Those are the conversations she referred to when she later told Jason and his crew that "everyone in the house said they wanted Jason out." No one can really deny it, because they did agree to it, but they didn't really *want* him out. That's how she's done everything all season. The episodes show only a couple of minutes of her making these decisions but leave out the hours of haranguing and manipulation that go on before and after.

I'm glad people like this thread! Should be fun.

[Donny Ketchum]

Vanessa goes non-stop, talking at a breakneck speed for hours on end. She doesn't sleep much and she's always thinking out loud at someone. I don't know for sure that she was exhausting to people in the house from day one because I haven't heard anyone talk about it, and probably being a part of those conversations is different than being a spectator to them. But boy, spectating is stressful. She latches on to every little thing said and just drills down on it, and then when she gets an idea in her head, it's nonstop talking until she convinces others of it. An example:

Actually, Vanessa was pretty quiet and subdued in the early weeks.  She only started this excessive talking and overthinking during week three, which was her first week as HoH.  After that, she's rarely stopped.

[Turtle]

You're right, Donny, thanks for the correction. Her quiet week or two had completely slipped my mind with all the insanity of the last couple of weeks. Although I maintain that her crying that first week was fake and a ploy to make people think she was weak and not a game player. I don't even care if it's true, it's true *for me*!

[Kris117]

I hate that according to the show it was Vanessa (with a side of Liz) being the driving force behind saving Austin, when it was really Shelli getting incredibly paranoid that no one was happy enough when Clay won veto, which meant the "other side" of the house was secretly planning to boot him, which made her badger Vanessa for over an hour to keep Austin. She wanted either Becky or Jackie gone, not Jason, but it was absolutely her who got the ball rolling on keeping Austin.

They also made it look as if Austin helped save himself by talking to Vanessa, which, no. Besides Shelli's efforts, Liz was more convincing in her pitch to Vanessa than Austin was, if I remember correctly.

[Skittl1321]

I'm new to the feeds, but the first thing I noticed was the difference in James. He seems to play up the redneck and accent for the show.

How can he know what will be on the show?

[blixie]

He doesn't the editors and producers decide what storylines and character beats to play up, though I guess you could say he lays it on thicker in the DR which is show only footage.

[Donny Ketchum]

So now that Clay's been quite deservedly evicted, I'll bring you up to speed on how we got to his unanimous vote to go home.  It was actually close, with the vote bouncing back and forth between him and Shelli.  But today, James, Jackie, Meg, and Becky got wind of the fact that Austin, Liz, Julia, Vanessa, and Steve wanted to keep Shelli.  Even worse, John said some things to cause a blowup between James and Vanessa, and then James and Clay.

 

After it all subsided, Jackie, Meg, and Becky relented and, along with an also-reluctant John, decided to vote out Clay, like he wanted.  So that's how and why Clay was voted out unanimously tonight.

[pennben]

Actually, I think Meg relented to Shelli before the big blow up; and was discussing it with Jackie/Austin as well before then.  John definitely changed his tune/vote after the blowup.  Don't know about when Becky changed course.

Edited August 7, 2015 by pennben

[Turtle]

It just now occurs to me that I have never posted a spoiler, and I have no idea how to do it! Help?

Edited August 7, 2015 by Turtle

[Katesus7]

I thought the big miss in tonight's show was showing the big group meeting up in the HOH about forty minutes in. The reason for the meeting was for all of them to agree that if it was a double eviction this week, for them all to agree to target the remaining Shelli/Clay member, Johnny Mac and Steve (the only people not in the meeting). Vanessa went so far as to go around to everyone and ask them to give their word. The vote conversation happened after, which I feel made James/Jackie/Meg a little more reasonable in saying "well, we all agree to nominate the other one, why can't we just do what James wants this week and boot Shelli, if it doesn't matter".

Vanessa firmly stated she had to vote to keep Shelli and everyone should vote how they want (I wonder what would've happened if someone told her that when she was HOH), James said fine, but either he or Meg asked her if she would really be fine nominating Shelli, and she kind of paused and said "Uh, yeah". Yeah, no.

[candall]

Ooh, yeah.  Good stuff!  I was stunned when they all marched in and voted Clay.

 

 

 

Turtle, the ghostbuster icon at the end of the string with the bold and italic options in Full Edit will get you a spoiler box.

[Harperlee1]

Would any of the feed watchers care to elaborate on what John said that caused the blowup between James and Vanessa and James and Clay? Would that be considered a spoiler since we might see it on Sunday? I'm confused still about what caused the non-6th sense members to change from wanting to vote out Shelli. Thanks!

[Zahdii]

From pennben in the Live Feed Discussion thread at 4:22 pm 8/6/2015

 

So, what I've pieced together from twitter and feeds:

 

1. John and Clay were talking, Clay asked John to vote him out; John didn't want to because he thought Vanessa was controlling Shelli;

 

2. Clay told V/S, that James told John that Vanessa was controlling Shelli;

 

3.  Vanessa went to James to ask him why he would say that, James denied it and decided to confront Clay;

 

4.  James/Clay almost come to blows; simultaneously Vanessa is confronting John...then fishes

 

5.  When we come out of it,  James/Clay apologize (I'd love to hear the house voice during fishes), John initially denies saying anything about Vanessa, then admits he came up with the idea on his own;

 

6.  Clay tries to cover for John and says it was all his doing;

 

7  Vanessa doesn't believe believe either because she thinks they are both related

 

8  House, she be blown up.

 

http://forums.previously.tv/topic/27663-live-feed-discussion-s17-watch-people-sleep-all-day/page-97

[Petunia13]

He doesn't the editors and producers decide what storylines and character beats to play up, though I guess you could say he lays it on thicker in the DR which is show only footage.

They know when After Dark tapes. And act turned up for that.

[Turtle]

Also mixed up in all the he said- she said is that John said he was targeting Vanessa because he thought Vanessa was targeting him. I've lost track of who said what to whom and whether any of it was true, but Vanessa challenged John about it, saying "I know you didn't think of that on your own" and other such flattering things. She also 'cried,' because that's what she does.

[Kris117]

Would any of the feed watchers care to elaborate on what John said that caused the blowup between James and Vanessa and James and Clay? Would that be considered a spoiler since we might see it on Sunday? I'm confused still about what caused the non-6th sense members to change from wanting to vote out Shelli. Thanks!

They are going to have a lot of footage to edit before Sunday. That post of pennben's that Zahdii linked to happened over hours and hours of discussion, so I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with it.

[ladyrott]

This thread is my new favorite place to be!  I am a Spoiler Mary so I stay out of the feed threads.  This.Is.Awesome!  Thanks so much to whoever came up with this idea and to whomever got the ball rolling with it.  I can totally see Vanessa doing this non-stop talking/arguing at everyone.  I don't like her, Shelly or the hairless bat, if truth be told.  Can someone tell me if the John getting drunk and crying thing is an actual "thing"?  Oh, and exactly what has Becky said/done to Steve that he sounded like a revenge fueled psycho in his DR speech?

Edited August 8, 2015 by ladyrott

[Donny Ketchum]

John got drunk after the last Veto Competition and cried his eyes out over the thought of losing Clay.  It got everyone's attention that he was Clay's bitch, and now people don't trust him since they know he was Clay and Shelli's little toady.

[peachmangosteen]

Oh, and exactly what has Becky said/done to Steve that he sounded like a revenge fueled psycho in his DR speech?

 

I'm still waiting to hear about this, too. I watch the feeds, but I still don't get it lol! kellog010 could you give us the reason why Steve gave that creepy DR speech?

Edited August 8, 2015 by peachmangosteen