arrow_circle_left arrow_circle_up arrow_circle_right
King AVMA the III
help
Finally inheriting the title after 70 years.
arrow_circle_up
Is the AOTC defined by who it excludes rather than includes?
Is this a human characteristic?
[T] That could be considered a political matter these days.
[R] Yes, that's a reasonable description. The few who do not have it might kick up a storm about the AOTC being ableist, hence previous answer.
Is the AOTC linked to one of the senses?
[CdM] The thing itself is linked to one of the senses, but that link plays no part in the AOTC.
A person with two legs?
[R] Legs not involved.
Is the AOTC a single word (articles aside)?
[T] Not a single word.

I think the ABSTRACT connection has been neglected.

Is the abstract connection something that philosophers have a particular interest in?
[CdM] Not philosophical.
Is the abstract connection health-related?
[CdM] Not health-related.
Are you aware of any Crescenters who *aren't* part of the AOTC?
[Tuj] No-one is literally part of the AOTC. Audience murmurs in amused suspense.
The chair would like to remind the panel that the ANIMAL category need not mean that the answer is an animal, or a set of animals.
Is the AOTC a set of parts of (human) animals?
[CdM] (The audience is relieved of their suspense.) The AOTC is a part of an animal.
Uniquely human?
(I think we need to clarify this)
[CdM] The ANIMAL aspect, no. The ABSTRACT connection, yes.
Is the abstract connection a metaphor?
[Everyone] Feel free to join in. :)
(Applause from the handful of people still in the room.) [CdM] It is a metaphor.
Too many cooks?
Does it involve one or more organs?
[SM] Not too many cooks.
[Tuj] It does involve one or more organs.
A brick shit-house?
Is the AOTC election-related?
[R] Not a brick shit-house.
[CdM] Not election-related.
Something to do with ears?
[Tuj] Not ears.
Are the organs in question internal?
(The audience is alert to see how the chair handles this tricky question.) [CdM] Yes.
Something to do with tongues?
[Tuj] (applause) It is to do with tongues.
Tongue in cheek?
[CdM] Not tongue in cheek.
Bilingualism?
Dwyieithrwydd for those not blessed with this facility.
Holding your tongue?
Sorry for not participating, the cat had got my tongue. Is that it?
Circling in for the kill...
[CdM] Not holding your tongue.
[B] The cat does not have hold of it.
Is the answer on the tip of my tongue?
Parler en langues?
[B] No, because...
[CdM] Yes, "the tip of the tongue" is the AOTC. Have this, er, whatchamacallit, thing sort of thing.
OK. Next we have a MINERAL with an ABSTRACT connection
Water?
A pearl of great price?
Water? No. (Not sure what the abstract connection would be there)
Pricey pearl? No.
Is it a song?
Song? No. Not even the abstract connection.
Man-made?
A gemstone mineral?
Human-made? No.
Gemstone? No.
Is it a gas?
Gas? No.
Does the Abstract connection have to do with a work of fiction?
Abstract connection to work of fiction? Yes. *applause*
Is the abstract connection a direction?
One Direction? No.
The Philosopher's Stone?
Philosopher’s stone? No.
A ring?
Is the fiction it's connected to sci-fi?
I'm totally thinking of the beryllium spheres from Galaxy Quest
Is it valuable?
A ring? No.
Sci-fi? No.
Valuable? Yes is probably the best answer, but I’ll warn you that it may be misleading.
Is it unique?
Unique? Yes.
Does it exist now?
Currently existing? Yes.
Is it in a fixed location?
Is it a monument?
Fixed location? Yes.
Monument? No.
Is it in a museum?
Is the abstract link to mythology?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord