Re: Guinea pigs = preexisting relation****p

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:19:03 -0700, "BQ" <ldhorvath@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>
>"Brian Smith" <dcg_brian@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:ykANj.195996$pM4.165768@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "BQ" <ldhorvath@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fu6anf$v8t$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "Are you kidding" <noone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:3TxNj.656$n63.403@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>> "Robert Langlois" <robertlanglois99@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>>
news:c796deed-e177-4628-a342-6bbaba79241b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Apr 16, 8:56 pm, ri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>>>> Give me a break!
>>>>
>>>> that was pathetic.  Sharon should be HOH now.  They stole it from
her.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed she should be.
>>>
>>> Sour grapes - it was fair all the way on this competition.
>>
>> No way was that fair. Who in their right mind would think to include
the 
>> GPs as a preexisting relation****p? No one! This has to go down as one
of 
>> the stupidest HOH questions ever. I'm surprised they didn't use a bit
more 
>> creativity and say some of the staff are related and that they are in
the 
>> house because at least that could be technically correct. Still stupid
but 
>> not as stupid as using the GPs.
>>
>
>It was too fair.  They all had the same question, ok the same stupid 
>question, but they all had it!  What's unfair about that?  What you are 
>outraged about is the question itself - .....


Unless I am misinterpreting, the discussion is about the "correct
answer", which could have gone either way depending on who stepped
where and who the producers wanted to win...