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
[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?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord