Banker - I'm not angry sorry if the post sounded it I just felt it was a really stupid thing to do given the state of the board and I just get angry when other people interfere like that woman on the west wing - think of your family STAY OUT OF IT. I just get irritated when people interfere or deal because of someone else in their family when the board is strong and theres plenty of back up.

Just watched it. I despair.

Well after weeks and weeks of spouting 'positivitey' bullsh*t that takes the cake. That was beyond cautious and almost as spineless as Steven's deal. In fact I think it was more cowardly!!! 3 of the power 5 in play including the £250k and he deals. I don't think anybody can dispute that was pathetic.

He was lucky it turned out he only went one round too soon. I would quite liked to have seen his nosed rubbed in it but alas it wasn't to be.

I'm sick of hearing bullsh*tters.

I agree. More unsolicited interference. He didn't ask for her opinion so why did she have to pipe up and give all that 'family' stuff.

People should keep their traps shut unless the player asks for their advice.

You're understandably angry, and that mistake shows it! Agreed with all you say though.

Well done Philip you played a good game.....I also loved you and Noel's hats both were cute Enjoy £26,000

basicasic - that was completely unnessecary.

I think it was very good of Kath to remind Philip of his family and how he should be careful. The rest of the stuff you put is true, but there's no need to go that far.

"Bullsh*tting" is all part of the game. It helps to make the Banker think you're a gambler even if you're not (as long as you don't take it too far, eg someone like Craig, and end up getting swap/joke offers all the way...)

i thought he was rewarded big offers for being a character on the wing

fair play to him taking adavantage of big offers

I didn't think that was a stupid decision as everyone said it was. There were only 3 out of 11 numbers higher than the offer and only 2 were substantially higher. The proveout offer was slightly *beep* as Joyce had a slightly stronger board and only got 30k. 26k is a lot of money so well done phil! I also don't think it was like Steven's game. He had the top 4 and 15k so should have gone on due to much better odds.

NO! They WERE NOT NASTY they were realistic.

What would you call someone who is wider than they are tall?

That was clinical obesity - Sorry if you can't face any form of reality but that what it is.



If more people actually faced the reality of clinical obesity then they wouldn't be in that position in the first place.

If prefer not to go around with my head stuck in the sand.

Because it is covered up, nothing is every done about it and that is an extra strain on the NHS that I am paying for.

Comes to something when all forms of reality get taken out of life - care to fully explain your ever increasing random editing moderator? - What parts of reality are we to not face?

By your refusal to allow reality you are stopping people seeing obesity for what it is unacceptable!

It is this granny moderation on here that unacceptable not correctly calling clinical obesity as unacceptable.

Truly ridiculous! (The moderation on here goes from sublime to the ridiculous!)

< Should be about 10,000 rollyeyes for this latest stupidity.

I think there should be a test of moderation skills before you can start a board as stupidity shown here is way beyond ridiculous!

Let's pretend that someone is not obese, let's remove all traces of reality from our lives.

Whilst I'm paying for clinically obese people to get treatment, I have a say! - Get used to it.

Face reality. This was not "nasty comments about Phils apperance" this is stating the FACT that he is clinically obese. FACT!

Face it!

Anyway, back to reality and away from this latest stupidity above and beyond the last stupidity. (Hard to know where this moderation is going next - no foundation on any reality)

Remember: Stating FACT is not against any law, but then sadly, neither is stupidity.

Well...this is a forum about Deal or No Deal. If you want to have a debate about health or obesity or anything like that then I'm sure there are plenty of forums where you can, but it doesn't really have any place in a thread devoted to a TV gameshow. I didn't see the posts that were deleted but it sounds perfectly reasonable to me...

If I had made my mind up and someone tried to interfere telling me to think id respectfully tell them to shut up and ask noel for the question quickly before any thoughts can come in. And we all know Noel will dive in to ask the question fast .

Whoever dissed Phils appearence should clear off its illrellavent to this discuss it in another thread.

I think you'll find the majority of people would find them nasty and unnecessary.



I think the Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 would be a better place to discuss such matters - they have a health slot every so often - try ringing them.



The fact is that the comments were unnecessary. What was the design of the comments? People can make their own mind up on the appearance of Philip - positive comments will be received much better than negative, destructive comments!

I was not the one who deleted your posts, but having seen them I can quite see why they were removed and would've done so myself had I not been out when the show was on today.

If you were writing a review of today's show for a Deal or No Deal newsletter, I doubt very much the editor would allow you to write rude comments about the contestant - I know the internet is a place of free speech - but it can only go so far - hence why these forums have moderators.



I think you will find that debates and discussions flow freely on this forum and are very rarely stopped, unless pointless comments or insults to other forum members / contestants etc. are made. I doubt very much you would get away with going on to another forum and making such comments.

Anyway, back on topic - and whilst Philip's deal did surprise me, I certainly do not criticise him for dealing when he did! It was a very healthy offer and a huge sum of money - well over what the average salary in this country is - so very well done to Philip!

I'd probably have dealt at the same point actually *dons bullet proof vest* as the board was unstable and could have very easily collapsed - surely Theresa's game yesterday proved that?!

As for the involvement about the family being mentioned - whilst I don't like partners / other influences getting in the way too much (prime example being Teary Donna's game) - it is important to remember family in Philip's case - I think I'd rather see Philip deal early and secure a healthy sum of his money for his family, than see John G talk about his family... then turn down £25,000, taking a huge gamble and win £10!

As for the thing at the beginning where Noel introduced us to who is on the wings - I think it's very good actually! I have a reputation for being Mr. No Gimmicks, but it adds some variety to Noel's intro - it gets very boring hearing him saying pretty much the same stuff for his intro every day, so a bit of variety before the game has started is fine in my opinion as it doesn't detract from the game itself.

It also helps us to get to know the current 22 better, and I have to say that DOND at the moment is much more enjoyable than it was this time a month ago (especially as this time a month ago was Nigel's game and Noel's tedious "Don't be like Steven and deal early" rants - as well as Noel banging his head on the table... that was a really low point of the show for me as it made a mockery of the show! ).

I was expecting Phil to have a whole different game but there you go...He walked in and took £26,000. Not a bad days work!

This month seems to be 'Banker telling Noel lots of rude jokes to give him a laughing fit' month

And there endeth today's lesson on how to dig your own hole...

Well done Philip on £26,000. If a contestant comes to the table with a target of say £25,000 then it must be difficult to no deal especially when their partner and children are not in the audience. I wonder if Philip's caution was based upon what happened in Sunday's game.

I deemed the way the thread was heading to be inappropriate discussion for what is a thread about a gameshow, and not about the personal appearance of someone, and I therefore moved the posts to the deleted section.


And your constant moaning and whining is an extra strain on this site that I am paying for.


<And these should be about 100,000 for this latest bout of incessant moaning



And whilst I pay for this site, I have a say in what is posted and how it is run - Get used to that.

It's quite simple really, if you don't like the way the site is run, then go elsewhere. As the description of the site says at the top of the webpage, this is a FANSITE, this implies that people who enjoy the show visit to chat about a show they enjoy. I don't think the title of the site is "let's constantly waffle about the lack of 'hunks', and moan because Noel decides to deviate from opening a box for more than 10secs!"

I await your next bout of legal action that you will now no doubt say you will be trying to impose on the site.

Wow... just - wow.

The thing I find amazing is how two comments about one's appearance can provoke such a lengthy argument. I found Phil's appearance disgusting, but there is a time and a place for everything. Bearing in mind there are probably Phil fans and even Phil himself visiting the site, it was best to see those posts deleted. They could have possibly fitted into the General Discussion board, after all that has nothing to do with DOND.

Legal action for the removal of two posts? Get real.

There were some pretty nasty comments posted yesterday that were out of order, I think someone even posted a ' ' which is a really nasty thing to post about someone.

You know the I have a theory that the root of this problem is jealousy that Phil had a 'Best Friend'.....