evictor:

It's quite obvious Nicola has insecurity issues, most likely born out of feeling insignificant.. hence the fake breasts to match the fake person.

So what's the reason for DVD's fake face  then evictor ??

 

DVD is just vein and hasn't sabotaged his body.. whereas Nicola has mental issues and has mutilated her body with grotesque and laughable silicone breasts to help her insecurity at being a nobody. Also her jealous seethe of anger at being inferior to Jordan and 99% of the human population. The 1% being you

evictor:

DVD is just vein and hasn't sabotaged his body.. whereas Nicola has mental issues and has mutilated her body with grotesque and laughable silicone breasts to help her insecurity at being a nobody. Also her jealous seethe of anger at being inferior to Jordan and 99% of the human population. The 1% being you

DVD doesn't have mental issues. Now I know you're not watching the same programme as me. All that cocaine snorting has done his head in. Just listen to that slurred speech.

Oh and by all accounts, looks like Nicola SHOULD have been believed over DVD. Looks like she was the one telling the truth.

But surely not, ALL you DVD fans not spotting that one - maybe you do have very poor judgement after all.

Enjoy

all supposing she was telling the truth - 1 why did she have to go back to the camp and spread the goss and 2 why did Joe get so annoyed about it?  Why not just shrug it off and say why would I be jealous?  Seems like one big mountain over a very small molehill (a bit like Nicola's boobs).

lol

Agree, she didn't have to tell the rest of the camp, but maybe DVD knew she would. He has said that he thought his last little plan cost him the title. He has also said that he was 'feeding off' what was going on in camp and perhaps it had gone a little quiet. He might just have been trying to stir it up, to get more to feed off.

will we ever find out ? 

I don't think it really matters.  Fact is it's just a bit of light entertainment which is how DVD saw it and treated it.  Just a pity others didn't do likewise.  Some of those people there took themselves soooooo seriously (including the winner)!  Having said that if he deliberately tried to wind people up then he got what he deserved.  Can't stand wind up merchants.  

I still go on proper evidence rather than hearsay by just one person. All we have against DVD is exactly what we knew at the time, someone having a joke. He committed the "crime" of saying let's wind-up Joe a bit by flirting together. A bit of fun which Joe took seriously. But then that was only because Nasty Nicola had got to him before, spreading malicious gossip around the camp, which she did like a poisonous snake, turning Joe against him. She had been brooding over the fact that Joe had shown the decency to stand up for David when he was being bullied. The others were willing conspirators.

As for the "conspriracy" she spoke about with so much relish, the only one I actually saw and heard being created was the one by her when she behaved like a nasty school bully, trying to turn everyone against some poor individual by spreading lies, or at least half truths.

 So glad he got further than her, and prove most people weren't naive enough to fall for her poison.

Nicola's grudge seemed to stem from when David told her "to get a sense of humour girl".  Very patronising to a girl who's tried to make herself look more like a woman by having massive implants.  The whole programme though was set up to cause ill feeling from the start - having two camps competing and then adding two more to the mix on the condition that the originals had to give up one of their luxuries to free them.   I've never ever watched the prog from the beginning (always start watching half way through) - is it usual to split the camp in two?

That's the problem with winding people up I'm afraid - not everyone appreciates the "joke" because a wind up is used to laugh at people rather than with them.  A cruel form of "humour" and he received cruelty back in bucketfuls (literally on the last day!).

I don't think he was being cruel in the slightest. He's mischievous but not nasty. 

Sometimes the real nasty individuals purposely look for "reasons" to attack people they don't like and justify being cruel.

A little wind -up shouldn't justify bucket loads of cruelty!

I've just been catching up with the earlier editions and it seems it was all one big wind up.  He even had gullible Esther convinced he was in need of protection.  Joe was just the last in line to fall for his act hook line & sinker and by that time everyone had had enough.  He deserved all he got imo.  But then it's all just panto anyway so what the hell?! 

The point was that they acted as a bullying gang against David, which was typified in the cake incident.  Do you really think it was OK to leave him out when sharing the chocolate brownie?  This action, like drinking Timmy's beer, was lead by Nicola and the others just went along with it in typical bullying style.

Esther was not gullible, she stood up against bullying actions, no matter what the cause and I applaud her for it.  I think for her the final straw was the way that Nicola lampooned her and the others laughed when she put out the fire, they did not appreciate her concern for everyone's safety.

No I don't think it was right to leave him out when sharing the cake and I didn't like the way Nicola grassed him up to Joe but on reflection maybe it was right that he should know what David was really like.  Wind-ups may seem like just a bit of fun" to the perpetrator but often the victim doesn't see the "joke" when they realise they're being laughed at.  Wind-ups aren't just a bit of harmless fun - they are a form of juvenile humour which relies on someone being the butt of the joke - much like racist or sexist jokes.  

btw I don't think David & Timmy were bullied from the outset as he claimed they were just because they weren't offered a bed as soon as they arrived.  The bullying only started when David started winding people up by his constant whingeing and although he did have a point about the rotation system for the cave maybe he should have left it a few days until he'd had a taste of camp life for himself.  There there was no need for Esther to defend him just because he had to sleep in the cave.  Her pandering to him from the outset served to inspire him to continue to act the victim.  Maybe it wasn't very nice of them not to give up a luxury item to give them a meal  or help release them when they first arrived but as everyone in camp said neither David or Timmy were starving whereas those in the camp had spent 6 days on rations. Had he been more placid like Timmy there would have been no ill feeling at all.  Having said that I thought DVD was the star of the show.  Had I not caught a glimpse of him with that flyswat and that attitude I'm sure I wouldn't have continued to watch. 

I think we will have to agree to disagree over this as I still think both DVD and Timmy were bullied from the outset.  They were meant to be joining a Team but were treated like outsiders immediately and until the end when Martina said she hoped it was her 'team' of Jo, George and herself in the final.

As you may have guessed from my other posts I am not a complete Joe fan as I disliked the way he behaved by touching himself, making sexist remarks and groping and kissing the others.

I think this programme could give schools a way of getting children to discuss bullying issues.