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
Would the average person regard this as a Good Thing?
[rab] No.
[Tuj] No.
[Rosie] Average person....hmmm...difficult. Probably. Can you be more specific?
Santa?
A carol?
Radio 3's Bach Christmas?
[Irouéguy] Yes! If my one was still running.
[Raak]No.
[rab] No.
[Irouleguy] No.
Is it a condition, either mental or physical?
[Rosie] No.
No room at the inn?
Raak] I've never been so pleased to be off work before Xmas.
[Irouleguy] No.
Shopping?
[Rosie] No.
Is it s human construct?
[Kim] Yes.
Is it connected with the media?
Is it connected with the biblical Christmas story?
[Raak] No.
[Irouleguy] Yes. *Some applause*
Rising from the dead after three days?
[Irouleguy] No.
There are clues in my opening remarks.
A Happy New Year?
The Salvation Army?
A New Year resolution?
A Silent Night?
12 Days of Christmas?
[All of the above] No, but CdM and Phil are in the right ball park.
New Year's Eve?
"I saw mommy kissing Santa Claus"?
Christmas Day?
Bingo!
Raak gets it on the nose. The "little number" in question was 25. *Hands baton to Raak*.
Ok, this had better be a non-seasonal something. Or perhaps not. VEGETABLE, possibly including MINERAL and ANIMAL as well.
Something you can eat?
[Rosie] No.
Is it some form of habitat?
An object made largely of wood?
I don't know how that happened - but that last one was me. A preview would've helped, of course. :-(
[Kim] No.
[Rosie] No.
Man-made?
[Rosie] Yes.
Is there just one of these?
Happy New Year, everyone
An item of clothing?
[I] No.
[Rosie] No.
Found in most hoseholds?
Getting sloppy. That's households, of course. Of course.
Anyone else playing?
[Rosie] Found in many, perhaps even in most, but I can't be sure.
Would it generally be regarded as welcome in the households in which it is found?
[Kim] Sort of, though it's not like these things just show up by chance and get welcomed.
Xmas tree?
[Projoy] No.
Does it weigh more than 3lbs (1.3608 kg)?
Groping about in the dark here.
[Rosie] No.
Is the mineral element metal?
[INJ] Yes.
Is it alive?
[jim] No.
Does it have a handle?
[irach] No.
Is it decorative?
-Is it flammable?
Does it have moving parts?
[Jim] The usual protocol in this game is that questions are put into the "a propos" box.
[I] Generally not.
[jim] Yes.
[Kim] I suppose yes, though that's rather misleading.
Is it a tool?
Is it usually to be found in the kitchen?
Is it a container?
[Saxon] No.
[Kim] No.
[Inkspot] No.
At least, narrowly speaking. It is used for a purpose, might as easily be in the kitchen as anywhere else, and does, in a sense, contain things. But it lacks the toolness of a hammer, the coquiniosity of a sink, and the envelopaciousness of a bottle.
Is the animal bit hair?
[I] No.
Is it a standard geometric shape?
[jim] Yes.
That's about twenty questions so far, and the audience is still asleep. A hint: there is a slight seasonal relevance, although the relevant season is not Christmas.
Does it have an effect on the temperature around it?
[Kim] No.
Another hint: the standard geometric shape that it is, is rectangular.
A calendar?
An Advent calendar?
Is it a box of something?
[CdM] (APPLAUSE!) No.
[I] No.
[Kim] No.
A diary?
[Kim] YES!
Didn't think that would take so long. Is interest waning?
Nah - just the time of year.
Me again? Shucks...OK, ABSTRACT with plenty of ANIMAL and MINERAL associations and probably some VEGETABLE ones to boot.
Is the animal, human?
A human construct?
A dream about a panda sitting on a rock?
- just a stab in the dark.
Manchester United?
speaking of booting vegetables...
Is there only one of this?
[Inkspot] Predominantly.
[INJ] Yes.*Some applause and a little laughter*
[Wol]< irony> Oooh! So close! < /irony>
[Irouleguy] No.
[INJ] No.
Paleontology?
An activity of some kind?
[Raak] No.
[Rosie] No.
Is it a cultural production?
[Irouleguy] Not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?
Is it an event?
[Irouleguy] No.
Is it a belief system?
Kim] Apologies for posting ambiguously and then buggering off for the weekend. I was trying to ask a number of questions at once - cultural production meaning book/film/play/musical/song/whatever else - hence the awkward wording.
The sport of building huge rows of dominoes and then making them fall over?
Is it competitive?
[Irouleguy] No, not a cultural event.
[Inkspot] No, not an event.
[Irouleguy] No, not a belief system.
[Raak] *Some laughter and a little applause* No, but....
[Tuj] No, not competitive.
Is it a pastime?
Is this an emotion?
[Raak] No a pastime.
[Chalky] No, not an emotion :-(
Gravity?
Is this a place?
[Raak] No.
[Chalky] Yes.
A single, specific place?
Is it a ruin?
Kim
[Raak] Yes.
[Projoy] *Some laughter and applause* No. At least, not in the conventional sense (it's not Lullingstone Villa, or some such.)
Is it a controversial work of architecture?
[Raak] No.
Stonehenge?
I have to admit to being a little bit puzzled by the fact that this is 'A single, specific place' but that there isn't 'only one of this'
A work of art?
Is it in Britain?
Given it's abstract, is it a fictional archaic site?
Could I replace that question with "is it a fictional geographical site, like Hy Brasil?"
My back yard, as in "Not in my back yard"?
[INJ] No. You're right and I think I may come in for some criticism. By answering Chalky's question "Is this a place?" with a Yes and not directing her and following questioners to the fact that there is more than one of these, I think I have unwittingly misled people into thinking that there is, in fact, only one. Even as I think about it, I am beginning to doubt whether this is really abstract at all, but merely animal, mineral and (to a lesser extent) vegetable, but I will stick to my guns and take the flak if it comes.
In the light of this, the answer to each of the five questions following yours is No.
Raak and Projoy are currently the strongest links and, moreover, have already used the words that are on the card here in separate questions.
Questioners may get more benefit focusing on the non-abstract qualities.
Are these tourist attractions?
So the answer is somewhere in:
is a abstract and archaic architecture art Brasil building controversial Could dominoes fall fictional geographical Given Gravity huge Hy I is it it's like making of over Paleontology pastime place question replace rows ruin single site specific sport that the them then with work
Oh Raak - you DO make me laugh sometimes :-) Spot on.
Now I shall ask a question ...
Is this a place that might be visited by tourists?
Might have helped if I'd actually read your question aswell ... sorry Kim, I'll do another one
Would people pay to see this?
Sporting venue(s)?
[Raak] Tourist attractions? Unlikely, but then some tourists would go to see a hole in the ground.
[Raak] Yes! Now, perm any three from forty-four in alpha order.
[Chalky] Unlikely, but then some people would pay to see a hole in the ground.
[Irouleguy] No.
A building site?
A type of public building?
A burial site/graveyard/gravesite?
The site of an archaeological dig?
Whew!
Chalky wins! The answer on the card is, indeed, "A building site". Well done, Chalky. Now, was I right or wrong?
[Kim] I agree it's reasonable to call it abstract. As for one or more: I see your problem, but I think you needed to answer Raak's 'single specific place' differently - otherwise it is no longer abstract.
the incredible rightness of being ..
[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]
The incredible siteness of building
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.
Let's draw a line under it and move on.
Now? Yes?

A N I M A L

Four-legged?
A single, individual creature?
Alive?
Winged?
Human?
[Kim] I think all of us who have set AVMAs have grappled with this problem -- you pick some subject that seems quite straightforward, and the next thing you know someone asks a question that also seems quite straightforward, and yet you find you have no idea how to answer it. And, usually, the more you think about it, the worse it gets...
Food?
Mammal?
grappling
[Raak] Four-legged? No
[Wol] single individual creature? After much thought - No
[Phil] Alive? In this instance, Yes
[Puckoon] Winged? No
[Rosie] Food? Not in the sense you may mean
[CdM] Human? Do you mean A Human? Yes and No
[Iroule] Mammal? Do you mean A Mammal? as above

[CdM] How right you are - a couple of my replies above took considerable thought. I should know by the next batch of questions whether I have misled ... and reserve the right to review :-)
Is it a category of person (eg, left-handed people)?
[Kim] Category of person? No
A part of a creature?
Three, yet one?
Is it a role? (e.g. Leader of Conservative Party)
Is it a part of a human?
The Dalai Lama?
The current Crystal Palace goalkeeper?
I only put that up to say I think we're getting warm.
significantly warmer
[INJ] A part of a creature? Yes *applause*
[Raak] Three, yet one? No
[Phil] Role? No
[Kim] Part of a human? Yes *more applause*
[iroule] Dalai Lama? No
[Rosie] The goalkeeper? No :-)
Do all humans have this part?
[Iroule] Do all humans have this part? At birth, Yes, I suppose they do.
Placenta?
The umbilical cord?
[irach] Placenta? No
[Raak] Umbilicus? No
Do most adults have this part?
[Raak] Most adults? Yes
Would it's absence be visible to another person (assuming no clothes)?
AAAAAAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!! *Climbs to the top of nearest greengrocer and throws himself off*
*breaks INJ's fall*
[IN'J] Naked Absence Of Body Part - probably not.
Is it an internal body part?
Is it an appendix?
Spleen?
Do both men and women have this part?
Would the absence of this part be a serious medical condition?
.. today we have naming of parts ..
[irach] Internal? Yes, but nothing as obvious as the appendix :-)
[CdM] Spleen? No
[Raak] Men & Women? Yes
[Rosers] Absence causing serious medical condition? No, not on its own.
Is it something that all humans are born with, but lose after being born?
[Kim] Born with, yes, but lose after birth, as a matter of course, No.
A secretion of some kind?
A secretion of some kind?
Preview, you silly boy!
[Rosie] Not a secretion, No [was trying to avoid mineral/vegetable connections] although your guess gets a *smattering of applause*
Tonsils?
[Iroule] Tonsils? No
Hair?
[Raak] Not hair - [see my last reply to irach]
The organ of Zuckerkandl?
Appendix?
Gall bladder?
[Raak] Zuckerkandl's thingy? No
[Kim] Appendix? Ni [see my last reply to irach]
[Rosie] Gall Bladder? No, but very very close!
Pancreas?
Surely its removal would lead to serious medical problems, such as instant diabetes?
[Rosie] Indeed it would, which is why the pancreas isn't the correct answer :-)
Prostate?
(if I can intrude) Bile duct?
[Kim] Prostate? No
[Dandalf] Bile duct? No. (intrude more! It's good to have new players in this game)
Duodenum?
[Kim] Duodenum? No
Am thinking about Rosie's remark re: Serious medical condition. I know of people without this part who have what could be termed a medical condition but wouldn't label it serious. S'pose it's a matter of opinion.
Large bowel?
left kidney?
[Raak] Large Bowel? Close - location-wise - but No. * audience frantically points to one of Rosie's guesses*
[INJ] Left kidney? No
Urethra
The navel?
Bladder?
Haven't had the gall to guess that one previously.
[Inks] Urethra? No - but SO close
[Raak] Navel? No
[INJ] Bladder? Cheeky but CORRECT! *relieved cheers from audience*
Over to you ....
That's a relief
OK in that case we'll have an ABSTRACT with ANIMAL connections
A work of art?
[Raak] - work of art? - NO
Character from fiction?
[Kim] Character from fiction? - YES (some hesitant applause)
Any religious connothingies at all?
Human?
Character from a novel?
A character in a film?
A character from mythology?
Is the character human?
(intruding more) From science fiction?
Robin Hood
This is going well
[Néa] - religious - NO
[Tuj] - human - YES
[Iroul] - from novel - NO
[Raak] - in film - Has been depicted on film, but originally NO
[Inks] - from mythology - NO
[Kim] - see above
[Dandalf] - SF - NO
[Inks] - Robin Hood - NO - *Huge round of applause*
Someone else who figures in the Robin Hood stories?
Soon be there
[Raak] in the Robin Hood stories? - YES
Maid Marian?
Sheriff of Nottingham?
Friar Tuck?
Little John?
Obviously not you, squire.:-)
BUGGER!, done it again. That last one was me. These drop-down lists are a pain in the posterior passage.
Will Scarlett?
[now firmly intruded) A merry man?
Well, there you go
[Rosie/Rock] Little John it is.
That wasn't very hard then, was it. Just as well, given my infrequent appearance on here in the last few days.
[ImNotLittleJohn] It was good to have a nice short one for a change.
agree .. although Inkspot landing on the precise area of fiction was inspired. How did he know that?
oooh
Maybe Inkspot is INJ's evil twin?
The clue was in how INJ answered Kim's first question it' a middle age thing.
Inkspot] You being middle-aged, or the historical Middle Ages?
[Irouléguy]It was just a poor cross server play on words type joke.
[Inkspot] I don't see how "(some hesitant applause)" would lead you to "Robin Hood", but I can see how INJ's answer to Raak's second question would help.
[Kim] I took the reply to your question to be a fiction based on someone, it was a toss up between 'mythology' or legend. When almost a day had passed I took a shot at the fella in green tights.
Sorry for the delay.
This one is MINERAL. Nothing whatsoever to do with steam engines.
Anthracite?
Diesel?
A manufactured object?
Are there more than one of these?
Is more than one mineral substance involved?
Anything to do with the weather?
(irach) - No
(Irouléguy) - No
(INJ) - Yes
(CdM) - Oh yes.
(Kim) - Yes
(Raak) - Not even a teensy little bit.
Clarification
(Kim) The object itself is one mineral substance in the way that the term is used in this game.
Is it made of plastic?
Is it used inside the house?
Small enough to pick up with one hand?
Inkspot - No
(Irouléguy) - No - *chuckles from a few members of the audience*
Raak - Yes
Is it made of metal?
Chalky - Indeed it is.
Could it be a component of other things (like a ball-bearing)?
Does it explode?
Is it a dream deferred?
InNotJohn - No
Raak - No
CdM - No, nothing as fancy.
does it always have a defined shape that is chaarcteristic to it, e.g. circular, square...?
Is it a weapon of some sort?
A boule?
A tool of some sort?
A sporting implement?
irach - Yes, a shape but not a simple geometrical one.
Chalky - No
Raak - Non
(ImNotJohn) - Only in an extremely broad sense. The answer really is No.
Kim - No.
Does it have moving parts?
A sculpture by Bathsheba Grossman?
As seen at http://www.bathsheba.com/.
Inkspot - No
Raak - No; functional rather than artistic.
Mobile Phone?
Phil - No (metal only)
Housekey?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord