rab]of the remainig housemates I am pleased that Cameroon won as he is so unlike any other winner and tomorrow will be a bad day for the bookies who had backed Ray and Scott. No doubt there will be post mortems. I disagree with those in the Sun and the Beeb who say the series only saviour is sex to spice things up, and the public overwhelmingly voted for Cameron 'no sex before marriage'. I would like to see the telephone vote inceased to the top four nominations up for eviction to give the public a wider choice, and for the BB warnings to have an effect on the whole group.
The Celebdaq has gone through a couple of very strange weeks and it has been hard to keep the interest up whilst the rules changed. Hopefully we are over the worst and the game will improve again. Speaking of which this weeks table welcomes Doris_Newbold and the waves a sad to ISayPorter, and if Chalky or evil_edna think I'm going to let them antwhere near the No 1 post, all I can say is ... pah

[Inkspot] Aha! You have reckoned without my cunning plan. Seriously though, I haven't a clue what has occurred regarding rule changes over the last couple of weeks. I enjoyed the scramble to the top to achieve a knee-capping and a green boxy thing, and I am currently attempting to do it again, although there doesn't seem to be much in the way of ruthless and opportunist trading options. By the way, the MCLeague table attached to my portfolio tells a somewhat different story to yours. As the administrator, do you have insider information? teehee

Cameron was no surprise at all - the bookies had him at 1/9 to win for most of the week. He was the biggest favourite the 4 series have ever had. I think the main reason was, like last year, the two good-looking young men in the house split the 14-year-old girly vote, leaving the outsider with a fighting chance. They also have entirely contrasting personalities, just like Alex and Jonny. I too disagree that only sex can spice things up. Au contraire - only arguments can. The producers tried too hard for a sexy bunch this year, with the result that the only good task was painting the horse costumes, so we could watch it dry.
Last year, Graham Norton commented: "The public have played a great game this yeat, as they've kept all the interesting people in." Did the public collectively think "Right, we'll do the exact opposite this time for a laugh" or something? If it were up to me, I'd have knocked off Cameron in Week 1. And left in Anouska, Fed, Sissy and Justine for Week 9. If Lisa were in at the start, things would've been different too. And I was secretly hoping that last night, BB might say "As a final surprise for the housemates, we're going to let Jon win regardless of how many votes anyone else gets." Now that would've been a great TV moment!
BTW, has anyone ever observed what a racist programme BB is? As soon as any black housemate's up for eviction it's a lead pipe cinch they're going. EG. Anouska, Gos, Lee, Adele, Narinder, Amma, Dean. It's almost as bad as how sexist it is.

[Dunx re "Griddle"] I've got an idea too, "Collective Consciousness Cryptics" where we all post a word at a time, make up a cryptic clue and then solve it, before fitting it into the grid. Won't that be great?!

Can I just remark how absolutely fabulous relaxing into a hot bath after a day walking in the hills is? Normal service will be resumed after a collective sign of pleasure.

[Inkspot] Cheers for the charming announcement of Doris' arrival. Sorry to hear that I Say Porter has left. Was this voluntarily, or has he disappeared again? I hadn't noticed his name missing from the table, although I was puzzling over how Doris could move in but there were still seventeen of us...

I can go to bed happy in the knowledge that I have brightened Breadmaster's day with ...so help me God.

What's all this bollocks about?

Just in case you can't figure it out, try something a little more intellectually challenging.

[Bob the dog] OOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOOOOOh!

[Btd] Um ... Didn't you actually just insult all of us, rather than John? *scratches head in puzzlement*

Just venting spleen - no insult intended. Sarcasm does not travel well on the internet - I should know this by now.

Actually I've been thoroughly enjoying the virtual poppy plastic!

I have to say, I'm seriously impressed by the rapid conversion of a soupçon of an idea in 'So Help Me God . . ' into a full-blown smorgasBoardgame of delights. Bravo all.

I've hidden all the answers and explanations in the source, for those who want guidance on crypticity.

Paying guest loses a fringe (6)
Vermin back in best Armenian families (4)
Mates in turmoil giving off vapour (5)
Tune on the radio ? (3)
WHERE THE EXECUTIONER'S AXE FALLS ? (5,7)
Food comes back as American time period (7)
Born in Little Rock, Arkansas - grew up in Colorado ! (7)
Darn fire is rubbish - more heat than light ! (5-3)

Cheers Blob. The mystery of No 7 is revealed at last.

I'm not convinced about the soundness of either no 5 or 7 - unless I'm being really dense. Is the second word of 5 clued by anything other than the orthography? Also the 5th word of 7 is not just redundant but destroys the clue.

[rab] By orthography I take it you are referring to the capitalization, in which case, yep, that is the main clue - and is pretty much an accepted method of cluing - as is using punctuation in non-standard ways. The wording of the clue of course refers to the thing that the axeman's victim's head rests upon.
Arkansas ? What's wrong with that - that's where Little Rock is.

[Blob] Well... the executioner is probably a matter of taste - I take the view that you notionally downcase and depunctuate the clue so that what's left tells you what to do. Others disagree, suggesting that if you use 'Bath' in the middle of a clue, it would have to refer to the city as opposed to 'bath' which is a tub. The only way to properly introduce ambiguity is to use it at the start of a sentence. But I'm not that extreme.

On the other hand the Arkansas clue breaks at least two rules. Firstly the definition is not "Little Rock, Arkansas grew up" but simply "Little Rock grew up". And then, if we're being pedantic (which we are), it really ought to be "Little Rock grown up". The second rule is that the definition should never come in the middle of the clue, always at the start or the end.

Everyone has their own stance on what is acceptable and what is not. I consider myself a moderate compared to Ximineans like Don Manley (whose Crossword Manual is well worth a read). However, you might consider me onerously fascist for these opinions.

I entirely agree that the definition must be either at the beginning or the end, not in the middle - but I was referring to the place Boulder, in Colorado ... so "in Colorado" is at the end as required. The Little Rock growing up was the cryptic clue, and the Arkansas for completeness, suggesting a place to be looked for. Even if you objected to this inclusion, spurious words are allowed if they do not fundamentally change the meaning, and I don't think it does.