arrow_circle_left arrow_circle_up arrow_circle_right
AVMA Take 2
help
Yes, it's another round of that classic guessing game - Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract [or any combination thereof]. This effort - '03/'04 should address any queries, but then again, may just serve to confuse and baffle which some might say is the point of the game. Patience, integrity and a decent search engine may be useful ....
arrow_circle_up
Fans of something?
Royalty?
[Fans, royals] Nope, everyone's still dead cold.
So alive on the 15th Feb but dead now? Or are we barking up the wrong tree?
Looking at previous answers. Woof Woof!
Any political connection?
The Illuminati?
Following Boolbar's logic! And Rosie, why bother with Watford when you can buy Chelsea?
Is being a member of this group something that an individual can choose?
[alive and yet not] Treating that as a question, I think it highly probable that some AOTCs have met their end in the last few weeks, so, Yes.
[political] No.
[Illuminatuses] No
[a matter of choice] Tricky. A hesitant Yes.
Centenarians?
(Bis) I think that nice Mr Abramovich may be asking a little more than my current budget. Chelsea fan since 1957, BTW.
Connected with space travel?
[Rosie] age-related question - see above.
[Aaaaaaaage] Nope.
[Spaaaaaaace] Negatory, Houston
Connected with hair?
Stunt-men?
crime-related?
[hair-related] No
[stunt-related] Nay
[crime-related] Yes (Claps from the audience)
People on death row?
People let out on parole?
The Kray gang?
UK crime?
[Death row] No
[Parolees] No
[Krays] No
[UK] Nope.
Is the crime organized?
Related to transport?
[organized] No
[transport] No
Kleptomania?
Cannibalism?
Did the crime exist in the 19th century?
[Kleptomania] No
[Cannibalism] No
[19th Century] Not sure how to answer. I did start with a firm no but then changed my mind to yes.
Related to financial fraud?
[Frodulence] Nay
Treason?
[Treason] No, not especially associated with that either.
Are we looking for victims of a crime?
[victoms] Nope.
British?
[British] No, not really.
Does it end with a Y?
[-y?] No, they don't.
Does it begin with ... (*rolls 26-sided die*) ... P?
Trespassers?
[Trespassers] No. (Half a clap from the audience)
[Begins with P] No.
Anything to do with war?
Anti-vaxers?
[warlike] Not really
[antiva] Nope
Do they steal something physical?
[Forth from his den to steal he stole,
His bag full of clink he clunk
And many a wicked smile he smole
And many a wink he wunk.
—How the Thief Thove] No.
(this space intentionally left blank)
Your poem led me to this curious issue of an old magazine. I cannot be sure if it is genuine or a complete invention. There are many places on the web where the poem can be found in various versions, but "How the Thief Thove" gets just this one hit.
Those thivin' thieves
My version was from a comic miscellany (Presto!) collected by Peter Dickinson, pub. 1975, Hutchinson. An old book I'm very fond of.
Thovery
A Google search for "smole wunk" turns up a bunch of variants, including in the Transcript of Proceedings of the National Railway Labour Panel Emergency Board.
Identity theft?
That all seems like a promising idea for the next V Difficult Poems on the other side.
[identity], No, they not thivs
Do these people enjoy political power?
[power] Nope.
Squatters?
[Squatters] No, more likely to be slouchers
Transportation?
[Transportation] No.
Hackers?
[Hackers] A clever guess, but no.
Julian Assange?
[Assange] Nuh uh.
Gizza Clue?
Do they cheat in some game or competition?
[Cheaters] No
[Clue] Hm, well, as I said, the AOTC refers to a singular generic specimen. And it's never been illegal to be one - there'd be no way to enforce it
Is employment a factor?
[Employment] No, it's isn't.
Does wealth come into it?
[Wealth] Nope.
Cloning?
Apologies if we've asked already. Can't be bothered to scroll back
[Clones] No. That's super cold.
Is there something you have to wear to become one of these?
[Wearables] No. Ordinary clothes are fine
Is sitting down a requirement to be this?
[Sitting] No, you don't need to be sat.
Profiteering?
[Profiteers] No. Warmer than cloning, but no.
Communism?
Identity Thief?
Talking to myself now :-)
[ID Teef] No. In terms of warmness that's between cloning and profiteering, but all three are dead cold.
[Commies] No.
Does this apply to a particular country or region?
Bismarck did Identity theft some weeks ago, too.
[National or regional?] No, either way.
Not UK was identified some time ago. Is this 'thing' American?
Queue jumpers?
[USAnian] No, not very American either
[Queue jumpers] No.
Ghosts?
In order to be the AOTC, do they create something?
[Ghosts] No.
[Creators] No.
Recrap
We seek a single word that describes a human, with a link to crime, but no specific crime we have yet been able to come up with - indeed these people, of whom a few are alive at the moment, cannot be accused of a crime themselves as there is no enforcing it. Whatever it is they are engaged in, it was more prevalent after 1900, and it has a psychological side to it. Not linked to a country, doesn't begin with P, and the type of person sought is less delectable than Mith himself.
on balance, this gets the score "1/10. See me after class with your parents, guardians, house pets and anybody else I can shout at and blame."
Yeah, pretty good summary
I think "I give up" should be the 'winning' move, and maybe we should give this game a rest. This thing is nowhere near as obscure as some of the stuff the community has solved without even breaking sweat. We successfully got 'whatnot' for one.

Do you give up?

Is it people who give up rather than persevering?
[Givers-up] No... but they are rarely among life's winners.
Toffs?
Chavs?
[Toffs] No
[Chavs] No – but that's worth some applause
Welfare scroungers?
Spivs? Barflies?
[Scroungers] No, but a few more claps
[Spivs] No
[Barflies] No
Black marketeers?
[black marketeers] No - spivs basically are black marketeers, aren't they?
Oiks
Does this word begin with the letter G?
The underclass?
[Oiks] Yes, another smattering
['G-'] Nope
[Underclass] No
Do these people have the vote (if of age)?
Are they mostly male?
Beggars?
Zombies?
Dwarfs?
[Voters, Male] Yes and yes
[Beggars, Zombies, Dwarves] No
Eunuchs?
Do they usually have a fixed abode?
[Eunuchs?!] No. That's a real left-field guess. As cold as clones.
[Of fixed abode] Yes, usually.
Kings?
Are they recognisable at sight?
[Kings] No
[On sight] No. It's a bit like burglars. They might be supposed to wear a black and white stripey top and a mask, and carry a big sack with SWAG written on it, but uniform standards are dreadfully lax these days.
Incels?
[Incels] No, not that lame. [Audience consider clapping, then decide not]
Lottery winners? Does religion come into it?
People who don’t pay their library fines?
[Lottery] no
[Religion] no
[Non-payment] No, as if they'd ever read a book
Is this to do with them being unedicated?
Or uneducated?
[Non-edicated] Yes. A bit stereotypical, but yes.
Another summary. They are: human, linked to crime in a general way, some (more than five) alive today and some not, disreputable, generally male, uneducated, usually of fixed abode, unlikely to read a book, eligible to vote, oiks, a one-word answer in the singular, linked by a psychological characteristic, more numerous after 1900.

They are not (as a defining characteristic): flat-earthers, musical, honest politicians, a sports team, all having the same name, competition winners, Prime Ministers, US Presidents, members of a profession, connected to TV or radio, to do with hats, inhabitants of a small remote place, members of a group one must apply to, linked to a country, linked by a physical characteristic, age-related, sport-related, fans of something, royalty, the Illuminati, Centenarians, astronauts, related to hair, stunt-men, on death row, on parole, the Krays, organised crime, transport-related, kleptomaniacs, cannibals, related to fraud, related to treason, victims of crime, trespassers, to do with war, anti-vaxxers, beginning with P, beginning with G, hackers, Julian Assange, clones, wearers of a uniform, identity thieves, toffs, chavs (applause), welfare scroungers (applause), spivs, barflies, black marketeers, oiks, the underclass, beggars, zombies, dwarves, eunuchs, kings, ghosts, queue jumpers, creators of anything, recognisable at sight, lottery winners, related to religion, derelict about library fines.

Bouncers?
Excellent summary, worth a clap
Yes! However I see 'oiks' in both the am and the isn't sections. They're oikish individuals. But 'oik' is not the AOTC.
[Bouncers] No. But that's also worth a clap. And I suppose some of them might be bouncers.
The unemployed?
A pejorative term?
[Unemployed] Generally yes. Not always officially employed, that's for sure.
[Prejorative] Yes, I suppose. Milder even than oik though.
If there is a term for the Trotters out of Only Fools and Horses, would that be close?
'Cos I'm sure there is one but I can't put my finger on it.
['Entrepreneurs', of course] And no. [Audience titters].
Class-based?
Wide boys?
(Although "according to the Oxford English Dictionary it is synonymous with spiv".)
Charlatans?
Troll?
[Classy] Yes. But not classy.
[Wide] No.
[Charlatanny] No.
[Trolley] No. [A small ripple]
Yob?
[Yob] No. But getting warm at last
Hooligans (a.k.a. hoolies, hooks, or hoods)?
[Hooligans] No. Maybe a smidge warmer?
Oafs?
The only other words I can think of are all rather sweary - so it's probably best I withdraw from the chase ;^)
Would members of this class deny their membership of it?
[Oafs] No. A bit colder with oafs.
[Sweary] No, it's not sweary. After all, this is a family show. :-)
[Denial] Yes, I think most would. Some probably revel in it, but even then self-awareness is not high on the list for these types.
Is some sort of bigotry involved?
Conected wth the military?
Working class?
Do they go around in gangs?
Any connection to public schools?
[Bigots] No, not particularly
[Military] No, not especially
[Working class] Yes, for a very broad definition of 'working'
[Gangs] No, not 'gangs'
[Public schools] No. Well, almost never.
Often under the influence of some drug or other?
The riff-raff?
The Hoi-Poloi?
[druggies] No.
[riff-raff] No. That's one of the closest guesses yet though. [Audience sniggers]
[hoi-poloi] No.
Pikies?
Migrant workers?
Muggers?
[pikies] No
[migrants] no
[muggers] no, but a stronger ripple for that one
Does it begin with R,S or T?
[R,S,T] Yes. :-)
Reprobates?
Travelling folk?
[Reprobates] Yes.
[Travellers] No.
Recidivists?
Teenage herberts?
Drop-outs? Hippies?
[Recidiv] No. Well, a few might be
[Herberts] No.
[Dropouts] No. Again, a few might be.
[Hippies] Pah! No.
Blackmailers?
Forget blackmailers, that doesn't pass the no-apparent crime test.
Ruffian?
Urchins?
[Rrrrruff!] Yes! Boolbar wins. Audience sensation - oh wait, most of them have died of old age. I did say plural, but honestly, I'll assume that was just a typo.
Wait - checking back, no I didn't, I chose a singular generic specimen. Boolbar wins double points for being righter than the wally who set this one.
Oh blimey! I'd better quickly think of something. How about ANIMAL (with a vague link to vegetable and mineral for some parts of the world and for that matter vegetable and abstract as well, but let's ignore all that and stick with the basic ANIMAL or we'll be here all day year.)
Is it found on a coat of arms anywhere?
[Arms] Yes, I've swiftly found one on Google.
Popularly thought to represent a country?
Living in the sea?
Four-legged?
This should be quick...
[Country] I would suspect a lot people would think of this animal if one country was mentioned.
[Sea] Mainly.
[Four] No.
dolphin?
Does it have a shell?
The Galápagos tortoise?
A capillary-challenged eagle?
A whale?
Just Say No.
[Dolphin] No
[Shell] No
[That Tortoise] No
[That Eagle] No
[Whale] No
Is it a bird?
Could you lift one of these?
[Birdy] Yes!
[Lifty] Personally I could lift most of them, but I'd draw the line at the larger ones.
A grouse?
A penguin?
[Grouse] The bird rather than a grumbly person? No.
[Penguin] Yes! That's the one. I said it would be quick.

Do p-p-pick up this baton made out of chocolate covered biscuit and I can go and have a nice nap.

We apologise for the temporary interruption to transmission. Normal service has now been resumed.

I need to pay more attention!

This is ABSTRACT, although under another interpretation it is MINERAL
Hidden textconceivably with some non-mineral elements, but these would be negligible
A mountain (mythical or real)?
Mountain? No. *a tiny smattering of applause from the most generous members of the audience*
A geological concept?
A precious metal?
Geological? No.
Precious metal? No.
Is it an effect of animal work?
A figurative phrase or saying?
Effect of animal work? Yes.
Figurative phrase? No.
Made by mammal(s)?
A route or path of some kind?
Made by mammals? Yes.
Route or path? No.
I should perhaps clarify that my answer to Superman's question took "animal" in the AVMA sense of the term.
Made by people?
Reading between the line of CdM's clarification.
A butter mountain?
Made by people? Yes
Butter mountain? No.
An object of veneration?
A sculpture?
Object of veneration? No (except maybe in a narrow and almost certainly misleading sense... so forget I said anything).
Sculpture? No.
An award?
An artefact of modern civilisation?
Does it begin with P?
The Anthropocene?
Now it starts to get interesting…
Award? No.
Artefact of modern civilisation. *applause* In the abstract sense, the best answer is No (though a case can be made for Yes; it’s a question of perspective). In the mineral sense, most definitely Yes.
Begin with P? No—at least not any more.
Anthropocene? No.
The scrap-heap of history?
The Statue of Liberty?
Is it rubbish?
A painting of Mount Fuji?
Scrap-heap of history? No.
Statue of Liberty? No.
Rubbish? No.
A painting of Mount Fuji? No.
Did it have a western name which is no longer used?
Ayers Rock/Uluru, for example.
The Piltdown Man?
Obsolete western nomenclature? No.
Piltdown Man? No.
Forget about the mountain. The audience were too enthusiastic.
Is there just one of it?
Another interesting question.
Unique? Yes is clearly the best answer. In the mineral sense, definitely. In the abstract sense, also Yes—except, from a certain perspective, No.
Is it associated with a particular nation?
Is it an unintentional creation of some kind?
Does it have a flag?
Associated with a particular nation? In the mineral sense, Yes. In the abstract sense, No.
Unintentional creation? (*audience laughter*) No.
Does it have a flag? No.
Is the mineral gold?
A newly-formed island?
Gold? No. (It’s conceivable there’s some small amount involved, I suppose, but even if so, it wouldn’t be a helpful line of enquiry.)
New island? No.
Did the abstract sense exist before the mineral sense?
Metal?
Transuranic?
Abstract sense prior to Mineral? Yes.
Metal? In part, Yes.
Transuranic? No.
Is it wearable?
Does the abstract sense have to do with a work of fiction?
Wearable? *much mirth in the audience* No.
Connected to work of fiction? No.
Anything to do with the hydrocarbon industry?
To do with hydrocarbon industry? No. (There are surely some connections of some sort in the mineral sense (“anything to do with” is a vague phrase), but there’s no connection I am aware of that would be helpful or useful.)
Is there just one of the mineral thing?
Just one of mineral thing? You already asked that! Yes.
Is the physical thing some kind of token that represents the abstract thing?
Some kind of tokeny representation? No. Because I'm feeling really generous, I will tell you that the physical thing is the current instantiation of the abstract thing.
Is it, by definition, the X-est Y in the world, for some X and Y?
X-est Y? Yes *sustained applause*
The biggest pile of crap the world has ever seen?
The US Republican Party? No.
Is it the tallest Y?
Tallest Y? Y! *applause*
The tallest building?
Yes! The AOTC is “The tallest building in the world” which of course has had, and will have many specific instantiations.

I don’t seem to have a baton, but here’s a lightning conductor instead.
The next is a straightforward MINERAL.
Is the material modified by man?
Yes, it is modified by man.
Is it unique?
But is it art?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord