Nick Viall & Vanessa Grimaldi - Bachelor 21 - Discussion

GuardianAngel wrote:@mindless

crunchycheeto wrote: That, and the fact that he repeatedly mentioned that if he and Nick were in the same room, he wouldn't go up to him and say anything because he has nothing to say. Like, dude, you've spent the last four(?) years talking about Nick! Talking about how he knows things that will make him look bad, but he won't reveal them because he can't prove them (like that's ever stopped him before). LOL, he basically admitted he's a coward.
snipped

Funny that you mention that. I just posted yesterday that LiarBoy reminds me of a SM troll who bullies online but if he was face to face he'd cower in fright.

My take is this. For someone who follows a contestant regularily, for a long time, they will know a lot more about that person/couple. This results in good conversation IMO because often times there is info I had no idea about couples or contestants if it weren't for a member who knows more about them than I ever would.

For somone like LiarBoy who picks and chooses what he wants to believe, he'll never get it, not just about Nick but as proven fact over the years due to his ability to trash people before they are even on our screen.

I know I'd have plenty to say if I was face to face with Liarboy.  

mindless wrote:

notarose wrote:

GuardianAngel wrote:

That's what she's saying. Although some found it awkward, the fact that Nick and Vanessa posted it themselves commenting that it was a lot of fun, then it must have been fun IMHO.

IMO square pegs don't, and never will, fit into round holes.  
IMO neither Nick or Vanessa are status quo people therefore what they say/do as a couple isn't about the norm so as long as tabloids measure their interactions by normative standards there will be a disconnect.
 V saying it was a great day yet tabloids discounting V's first hand view is an example of what commonly occurs with both V & N.  On several occasions what either say is discounted, instead replaced by rag mag third party opinion.  Oh, and then there are "a source says"  pieces that contradict what Nick directly says but somehow "the source" is to be believed to be more knowledgeable about the inner working of Nick & Vanessa's love affair. It is truly fascinating
I'm not being sarcastic here  I think it's all fodder for an anthropological study.

Haha, your talk about sources made me remember Sharleen's discussion with RS about Nick. He was basically like "you're his friend, so of course you'll defend him, but I've heard things, which I can't prove but know to be true and which Nick doesn't even know I know, so I disagree". I was like, let's just back up for a minute. So Sharleen's first-hand account can't be trusted, because she's his actual friend and thus "biased", but the random second/third/fourth-hand stuff you've heard from "sources" that you can't prove (which means there's no proof of it) and haven't tested in any way, since you've never revealed it to the wider public including Nick, is for sure legit? I wonder who really suffers from confirmation bias in this scenario? You can't even make that sh*t up.

GuardianAngel wrote:@notarose So true, this goes for all of them. Often times we watch vids and see the words come out of their mouth. Only later to read a tab that says the source claims opposite of what they themselves said.