Message.. open The Circle chat.. send! (S2 Final)

[SnowyZ]

Shiny new thread all ready for the final tomorrow night love heart emoji ❤️

I thought that was exactly what they meant. They've posted about four times about this. Lots of posters have explained where it's used and yet they still seem to be in denial about it being a genuine saying.
It's an odd thing to be a gf about it, I'll grant you, but that does seem to be what's happening here - hashtag - it's a real saying. hashtag - stop being a gf . crying laughing emoji - SEND

I think next year they should do some kind of strictly style voting. Where they players ratings count but then public votes get added to it.

I think the current format works well until near the end although I also think the first blocking is too early.

@lynsey91 I live smack bang between Notts/Derby and work there too, hear it nearly daily 🤷🏻‍♀️ it's weird maybe it's pocketed!

Oops, OK.

I like the voting format. If more of it was on public vote (50/50 split or collated votes etc) then it would become too much like other reality TV. What makes it interesting is the secret balloting when they haven't met each other.

I was happy with a Paddy win, he seems like a genuinely nice guy who was also prepared to play a bit of a game if it benefited him. It also amused me that after all of Sammie's machinations, the tactical voting didn't actually benefit her. I wonder how Tim will feel about kicking Ella or. It would have been a very different result of she had stayed, I feel.

I do think both him and Georgina genuinely liked both Ella and Paddy which made it a hard choice once Sammie and Woody were safe. Perhaps he won't mind Paddy winning!

It was Georgina and Sammie/James pretending to be nice to people but muttering through gritted teeth about how fake it was that bothered me!

But I agree with PP that Woody is in a different position as he doesn't need to care about the money. I know he's had a job and he said his dad won't give him handouts but he has grown up in an environment where £100 k isn't a big deal (Used to live next door to the Macartneys etc). Equally Tim may not be wealthy but I would guess he has a secure home, good career that he enjoys and a decent pension in his future etc. I think for the two of them, it isn't a life-changing amount in the way it is for Sammie/James, Georgina and Paddy.

I like the voting split too. It's obviously heavily edited so I don't feel we (as viewers) have more, 'genuine' insight into the players. We only see what the editors and producers choose to show us.
Paddy's step/foster mum's video really struck me when she was talking about parents with disabled children worrying about their future and Paddy showing they can have a life, fun, friends,etc. I found that very touching.

KatyCarrCan agreed, the pp kept denying that it was a phrase purely because she hadnt heard it. But more than that, it seemed to be done in a sneering way too

The current format works to an extent. But the vote among them means it is still too tactical. I.e. they weren't all voting for who they wanted to win, eg Woody was v popular overall but ended up last as the COT etc voted more tactically. I don't know what the answer is to that, but I personally feel the most deserving person should win (whether that's the cleverest player, nicest, most controversial, but whoever the contestants feel should win, rather than rating them to engineer themselves being higher up the rankings). Maybe there should be rankings throughout then they're all collated at the end, or something

Or they could do what BB do and ban chats about voting/blocking intentions.

I think there must be a way to work out players average ratings adjusted for how long the have been in of course so it's fair, then highest average should win overall as that is truly the most popular player and it's harder to be tactical over the whole 3 weeks as players and alliances change etc.

I think blocking chats about voting, blocking, besties and I have your back etc would be best to avoid competing factions and gaming.

Average scoring would be better. I doubt most people could manage to manipulate tactical voting over numerous votes over three weeks.
I don't think you can ban chats about besties or blockings. Then you're just rewarding people who can manage to have that conversation using different words. For example, I think Tim, Woody and Ella were very clear that they were voting for each other. They just didn't come up with a snappy name for their group. Look at Tim telling Woody that he had to watch out for Sammie without saying it directly.

Yeah banning chats about stuff like that is almost impossible and the more they police the chats the less natural it will all be

I think the tactical voting is what makes it interesting. The producers obviously don’t just want the most popular person to win or they wouldn’t have had a secret influencer - if anybody other than Woody had been the influencer then it’s likely one of the popular players (probably Tim or Ella) would have gone as most of the players would have been tactical, and the producers knew this.

I think the game is about being popular enough to make it into the final, but then when it comes to the final it’s a case of tactics and alliances. If it was just the average score over the series that would be boring, and would mean it wouldn’t really matter who the final 5 were in terms of influencing the vote. Losing Ella, who always voted Woody and Tim #1 & 2 meant that suddenly they weren’t the popular players in that group so they didn’t deserve to the win based on the ratings of previously blocked players. Also the game is about keeping up your persona for the whole game, for example Sammie/ James let their mask slip right at the end leaving them with low ratings, it would be wrong if their high ratings from earlier in the game before anybody had sussed they might not be genuine were taken into account. I think the tactics are interesting and particularly that sometimes they can backfire, and the conversations about who might be fake and alliances are what makes it good tv.

I think having a public winner as well as the show winner works fine to resolve the fact the players might accidentally vote for a catfish or mediocre player to win. The only thing I would change is having the public vote after the winner has been announced and the interviews conducted - last year I think most viewers voted Alex/Kate because they didn’t expect him to win the player vote whereas I think if the public had known he’d win they may have felt one of the other players (probably Sian but maybe Dan) deserved the money too. It felt very awkward seeing one person, and the catfish at that, win both prize pits!

I seem to be in a minority but I think the tactical voting and the volatility adds to it for me.
There's plenty of reality shows where it's fairly obvious who is going to win towards the end and it loses momentum.

I wanted Woody or Tim to win (and I'm pleased that Tim got a viewers award!) but I genuinely didn't know what would happen.

Last year the candidates were pretty keen on original group against newbies and anti cat fish (perhaps led by Dan who was a strong character). This year they happily kept in people they (rightly) thought were cat fish and/or new to give them a fair shot.

Next year (if it runs) it could be totally different. I'm sure when they're choosing players, the production team ask questions like, "would you vote tactically? Would you do anything to win? Would you vote out a catfish?" Etc so they have a mix of personalities and it's fascinating to me too watch it play out.

I think you're right MyBear, they do need to keep their niche but I do think they need to be realistic about viewer satisfaction. There is a reason most reality shows other than cooking shows are done by viewer vote, and that's that viewers like to feel like they've got something out of watching and that their feelings throughout watching are vindicated at the end. The players having the main say will probably always lead to a middle of the road player winning through tactical votings, which is part of the game, but with both series it feels like viewers have really enjoyed the actual show but been left feeling frustrated and deflated at the end. The ending leaves a bad taste in their mouth and colours their feelings on the whole show because that's their lasting memory of it.

I think they've got it right in making it a mix of the two I just think it should be 50/50 so viewers feel more instrumental rather than an afterthought.

Agree, I have no desire to just watch a load of people being unpleasant and backstabby just so they can get money. There's enough of that in the real world. I don't mind catfishes winning if they seem to be friendly empathetic entertaining people. Kate/Alex was great Last year. Sammie/James dropped the pretense of caring about anyone else and never came across as genuinely caring about his team. They seemed to be pawns to him.

It's interesting. I think James genuinely liked Paddy and was glad he won.
Badness actually you're right. The volatility did add to it for me too There's maybe a life lesson in Paddy winning. If you're incredibly popular, it's likely you're excluding some people and will attract some negativity eg Tim, Ella. And, ultimately, no matter how selfish the world seems to be, we're still in a place where there's a lot of compassion towards people with difficult lives/conditions/disabilities.

In real life no-one includes everyone though. We are drawn to certain people and choose to socialise with them. There is only so much time in a day. It sounds as though in the Circle they were only allowed so many conversations so it's not surprising that they chose to chat to people they liked and felt supported by even though that led to cliqueyness. If they had more time to chat they may be less cliquey, or if all chats had to be open to everyone.

'In real life no-on includes everyone though.'
Yy exactly, that was my point. People who attract strong feelings one way or the other will ultimately be disadvantaged in a popularity contest compared to people who float along in the middle.