arrow_circle_left arrow_circle_up arrow_circle_right
King AVMA the III
help
Finally inheriting the title after 70 years.
arrow_circle_up
Train fanning?
Train enthusiasts?
Train geeking?
Train buffs?
Train mavens?
[Raak] No, no, no, no, no.
How about looking at it from the train's point of view?
A train museum?
Train Livery?
Model trains?
Can trains be supermodels? I am trying not to picture a 4-4-2 Atlantic strutting down a catwalk
What a surprise, it's 8:06. Different day, same time, but you can't step in the same stream twice unless you run quickly. Now an interview with an elephant that has forgotten! In this case to turn up for the interview. Hello, Nelly, are you there? [Silence.]
I'm going to hand this over to VAR owing to the closeness of 'trainspotting' before, if someone doesn't get this soon.
[Raak] No, we had that one.
[Chalky] No.
[Simons Mith] Not model trains.
Train drivers?
Is it to do with filming or photographing trains?
Or simulating them?
[Raak] Not really.
[Projoy] Yes, there is a link.
[Projoy] Not intentionally but by extension, possibly
A footplate video?
And that's it folks, this program is now closed owing to further notice.
[Rosie] Nope.
Anyway the entity known as Raak is declared the winner for getting "Trainspotting", whether or not it has a 'p' in it. The AO(T)C was "Closely Observed Trains", but the direction you were coming from, allied to how close "trainspotting" actually was, as well as the usual quantity of lines drawn and etceteras, means that VAR has forced my hand. Take this telescopic baton and go on to better things.

Ok, well then...
MINERAL with ABSTRACT and ANIMAL connections.
Does it begin with P?
No faffing.
[Tuj] Does not begin with P.
Is it unique?
Tis better to bounce than flounce.
[Tuj] The less misleading answer is no, not unique. (A pedant in the audience gets to his feet and begins, "Actually..." The chair cuts him off with, "We've read that Wikipedia article too, and yes, you have a point, but the answer stands.")
The fossil of a conodont tooth?
[Bismarck] Not that Wikipedia article.
(Addendum to previous) But on the other hand it is a definite specific thing.
Is it entirely metal?
A prosthetic device?
[Tuj] Entirely non-metal.
[Rosie] Not a prosthetic.
Is it a building?
[Chalky] Not a building.
Would it float?
The very original of it that the pedant above tried to bring up might indeed float. But the thing is otherwise not something that can float or sink.
I am also thinking that "yes" and "no" are both misleading answers to the uniqueness question.
Recap
So far we know that it doesn't begin with 'P', isn't metallic and not a building.
Does this represent an animal?
Is it made out of wood?
Is it smaller than a toaster?
And, if Bismarck is declaring this a double round: Are you regretting your selection yet?
[B] Yes! Partly, it does represent an animal.
[B] No! It is not made of wood.
[T] It could be smaller or larger than a toaster.
[T] Not yet. Maybe if we're still on this by Christmas.
Is it a heraldic device?
[SM] Not an heraldic device.
Is it associated with a particular nation?
[T] Yes, associated with a particular nation.
Is there more than one animal connected?
[SM] Just one animal.
The animal might be the Great Seal of the Pres of the US of A, maybe?
[RtG] Not the Great Seal.
Are there statues of it?
[T] No statues.
Does it make a sound?
[P] It does not make a sound.
Was it invented/first created in a particular known year?
[T] Yes, the original object was created in a known year.
Is the animal human?
[R] The animal is human.
Is it a flag or crest?
[T] Not a flag or a crest.
To get past the awkwardness of the uniqueness thing, I retroactively declare that we are looking for the unambiguously unique, physical, original object, which indeed in part represents a human, was created in a known year, etc. Clue: not many people have seen the original, and I can find no information about whether it even still exists.
Related to money?
[SM] Not related to money (except insofar as everything is).
Is the person famous?
Yes, they are somewhat famous. (Audience goes hmm.)
Was the original made within the last 200 years?
[SM] Yes, made in the last 200 years.
Is it an item of clothing?
The original Oscar?
[T] Not clothing.
[RtG] Not the Oscar.
But is it art?
[T] Is not everything art, rightly considered? No, not art, although much artifice went into making it.
Is this object medically aligned?
[SM] Not medical.
Is it a photograph?
[RtG] applause!! It is a photograph!
Is it the photograph of the Tiananmen Square protestor and tanks?
Hail Radox! I note that the aforementioned Wikipedia has a "List of photographs considered the most important", though I'd think we're a few weeks away from recourse to that.
[T] Not Tiananmen.
[all] Not on Wikipedia's "List of photographs considered the most important".
Does the Mineral part of the AOTC refer to the photograph itself, or is there something mineral in the photograph we should identify?
[S] The MINERAL refers to the photograph itself, although there are things in it that are also mineral.
Has it featured in memes?
[P] Having googled this, I think it’s fair to say that it has featured in memes.
I am sure it will be instantly recognisable to everyone here.
What springs to mind is either the photo of the Montparnasse train crash, although it doesn't have anybody on it, and the Conan Doyle 'fairies at the bottom of the garden' photo, but that has a whole person, not part of one, so I'm going to ask if the photo was taken before 1930?
[S] Not taken before 1930.
Hint:this thing is not for the purpose of being a record of anything.
Roentgen's first X-ray?
[RtG] Not Roentgen's first X-ray.
Taken this century?
I for one was in shocked silence at that last hint!
[T] Not taken this century.
Is it a photo made with normal light?
[B] Yes, made with normal light.
The "Napalm Girl"?
"Not a 'record' of anything" - is this a record sleeve?
[P] Not Miss Napalm 1972. Remember, this was not created to be a record of something.
[RtG] Not a record sleeve, or anything else to do with "records" in that sense.
A stamp?
[S] Not a stamp.
Is the profession of the human in the photo pertinent?
[SM] Their profession (if any) is not pertinent.
Hint: not even their identity is pertinent.
Was the human alive when the photo was taken?
[S] Alive when the photo was taken. Still is, in fact.
Is there a link to Mornington Crescent?
[B] No link to Mornington Crescent.
Any connect to a sport?
[B] No connection to any sport.
Is this an accidental capture of some kind?
[SM] Not accidental. Very deliberately composed.
Is the face of the human visible?
If not medical, how about scientific?
Very deliberately composed, but not art, and not a record of anything... Yet well-known and memeworthy. That combination's a stumper.
The first AI generated human face?
Doh, no, because human is alive. Forget that.
Is it a deepfake?
[P] Not a deepfake. (Made before this century, it wouldn't be.)
Is the photograph in/of an easily identifiable location?
[C] No identifiable location.
Sorry, I missed Boolbar and Simons:
[B] The person's face is visible. (Knowing murmurs from the audience.)
[SM] Not scientific (but approving murmurs from the audience).
[SM] Your summary is spot on.
Is it Test Card F, featuring Carole Hersee and Bubbles the Clown?
Fanfares! Streamers! Orgies in the aisles! It is indeed Test Card F. Have this chalkboard and stuffed clown to make your very own!
Oh, well, that's embarrassing. Okay. What I have here seems to be mostly MINERAL.
Liquid?
[P] Extremely not liquid.
Gas?
[b] Even less so, I'd say.
Hmm.. tricky. Solid?
[B] As a rock.
A rock?
Unique?
Wow! Congrats both to goldfinch and Raak on that last one
Terrestrial?
A unique terrestrial rock!
[T] v. kind
A valuable mineral?
[R] Its value, while arguably immense, is not primarily monetary in nature.
It is valued for being a site of natural beauty?
[R] It is indeed a site, and sight, of natural beauty.
In North America?
[T] Not in North America
A mountain?
[R] Mindful of pedantry, I’m inclined to say “in the mountain family”.
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord