[Kim] Thanks M'dear :-)
hmmm - I wonder if you had answered Raak's question "A single, specific place?" with a No and a Yes - it might have been obvious that, although having a singular purpose, this type of place was not unique. As for the 'Abstract' label, I can understand your misgivings. Probably not, I'd say.
I'll post a new one a bit later - give others a chance to comment ..
[simul'd with INJ]

Kim] Nice one, first of all. I tend to think of 'abstract' as meaning fictional or unreal, so I would have labelled this as MINERAL (with qualifications) rather than ABSTRACT, but I do think it's a fine distinction. I agree with Chalky about your answer to Raak's question, but I don't think it led us too far astray. And I thoroughly enjoyed it, which is what really matters.

Thanks for the comments. I think you're all being far too nice. The fact is that I intuitively chose to describe it as ABSTRACT without really considering the issue. During the course of the game I had to start considering first of all whether a building site really is more than the sum of the materials and people that fill it up; then I agonised over whether "a building site" meant "that building site, there", or "some building site, somewhere" or "any building site anywhere". Also, is a building site a place, or is it in a place? So, I still think that my problem started with my answer to Chalky's question "Is this a place", rather than Raak's "A single specific place?". Even questions such as "A human construct" (INJ) "The sport of making huge rows of dominoes and then making them fall over" (Raak) and "Is it a ruin" (Projoy) I found difficult and thought-provoking, but, hey, it was fun to wrestle with and I hope you all found it as entertaining as Irouleguy did.