**Ultimate Babe 2011** - Discussion, suggestions, opinions...

So that lets Ashleigh in as well as Tammy Oldham, as Tammy did nightshows with both Storm and TVX at the start of the year

Any girl that's done a tv nightshow this year should be included, any that's only done webshows shouldn't be included, cause if you're gonna include girls that have done just sexstation you'll have to add girls from MFC etc

By the way I noticed Alex Adams wasn't on the list

(03-11-2011 22:49 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  Er..I agree snookered147, are you Stephen Hawking by any chance ?

(04-11-2011 14:46 )Scotsman Wrote:  Well if they've done night shows this year, whether they're still on a channel or not, then they should be eligible, regardless of whether they also work on a web show or not. I'd say due to the difference in restrictions and audience that the web show only girls should be omitted but if one of those girls has also done TV work, then I don't see why not.

Yep that seems fair to me

(04-11-2011 16:45 )gazfc Wrote:  Any girl that's done a tv nightshow this year should be included, any that's only done webshows shouldn't be included, cause if you're gonna include girls that have done just sexstation you'll have to add girls from MFC etc

Pretty much exactly what I said on the previous page.

I'll probably scrap the list of babes anyway with the new top 16 format, there's not much need for it so any list in the first round will be there just as a suggestion to help people pick.

(02-11-2011 17:58 )Regenerated Wrote:  No matter the format, wether seeded groups or random groups, I suspect Chilly is correct and that everyone will vote for their favourites, regardless of how many appearances they've made or how imaginative the sets have been.

Not quite sure what the problem is there. Surely 'ultimate babe 2011' = 'overall popular favourite 2011'. The basis for your choice of favourite is up to you, whether looks, performance, filthy chat, dancing, toenail colour, whatever.

To quote David Hume: "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them."

Moving from one Scotsman to another, many thanks dude for the work put into this.

One more question, the answer to which will have a big influence on my votes. When you say "any girl who's done a nightshow this year" does that include girls who currently appear on "The Channel We Can't Name" but appeared elsewhere earlier in the year?

Question about number to select. You'll have a headache counting up through 16 picks each, and no need to pick that many anyways as all you need is enough to populate the top 16 seeded ones. But three is too short a number of picks as well as most of us have a larger handful we follow than that.

I would agree with eagle si earlier in the thread on around 10 picks.

It seems we're not even allowed to discuss the babes from said channel by name so it's probably going to cause problems if a lot of them are brought up in the competition. I think the safe option is just to avoid all the girls from 'they who shall not be named' entirely.

I suppose it isn't entirely necessary to pick 16 babes each since yeah, I could just pick the top 16 points wise. I do quite like the consistency of it though, everyone picks their own 16 and then can compare and contrast that to the final 16 that emerges from the voting. Counting it up will be a bit more of a pain with 16 I suppose but I don't mind it too much.

Any other opinions on this?

I certainly wouldn't be able to pick 16 night girls, as I mostly watch during the day and 99% of the time I watch Elite. So the lower placings would just be token votes which probably wouldn't have much effect anyway.
So I think we should be able to vote for a maximum of 16. The number of points would stay the same at the top, regardless of how many girls a poster picks: 16 for a first choice, 15 for second, and so on.