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
To do with religion?
The environment?
[Raak] to do with religion -- NO

To clarify: Religion, or things to do with religion, can be related in a particular way to The Answer On The Card, but is The Answer to do with religion (or its things) more than to do with other things? NO. This is what I meant in my answer to "to do with art" and "to do with mathematics". Keep going, though.

[Dandalf] is it the environment? -- NO.

Is this an emotion?
[Chalky] an emotion -- NO.
Is it a hobby or pastime?
[Chalky] a hobby or pastime -- NO.
Is a human element required?
If it's not something you can do, is it something you can be?
Science?
[Inkspot] a human element required -- fundamentally YES
[Projoy] if it's not something you can do, is it something you can be -- NO... *audience wakes up and makes encouraging murmurs*
[Dandalf] Science -- NO.
Thought?
[Raak] Thought -- NO... thought is more closely related to this than most of the previous answers, but it's still a fair way off.
Two further clarifications: I have come across this in a work of fiction, but it is not really from fiction. And some people may involve this in a hobby or pastime, but I wouldn't classify the words on the card as a hobby or pastime. I'm not being intentionally vague, honest...
Is this something spiritual?
[Tuj] something spiritual -- NO
A family?
(beats me what the mineral connection would be, in that case, but since we're floundering, it's probably worth a shot or two in the dark!)
[Projoy] a family -- NO.
Wanna hint?
It's definitely not something you do?
(i.e. one does)
[Projoy] It is definitely not something one does, in the way that one does not "do" a door, or one does not "knitting" or "biology textbook". The answer is still abstract, however.
Ethics?
Would this be considered a skill?
Looking at it, knitting, even if in the sense of a noun, is not a great example. Apologies if I've been too pedantic. I hope you get the idea.
[Tuj] Ethics - NO
[Chalky] a skill - NO, although a measure of skill is certainly related to its existance.
(a measure of = an amount of some kind of)
Is it something the brain can do?
Is the vegetable a plant?
Is this anything to do with being funny/having a sense of humour?
Is the mineral water?
[Tuj] something the brain can do -- NOt strictly, although activity of the brain is usually required. *a smattering of claps from the audience*
[Inkspot] is the vegetable a plant -- NO would be least misleading.
[Chalky] to with being funny/a sense of humour -- NO. Hmmm, there is a humour component in the work of fiction I mentioned earlier. But in the main, NO.
[Irouléguy] is the mineral water -- NO would be most helpful here.
hoookay...
To summarise:

This abstract with animal, vegetable and mineral connections is more common in some places than others but is not primarily connected to geography. It involves a human element in some way, more specifically some activity of the brain and even more specifically thought, but is not actually any of these. There is some relationship with a group of people. Only humans construct it (although this may be debated).

Religion, mathematics, art, and non-human animals can have something to do with it but only in a certain sense, and it can be found in at least one fictional work (but not only there) and some people may involve it in a hobby or pastime. It is not in itself an action, process or activity but a certain amount of skill is related to its existance.

It is not: this game, a genie, a degree in woodland conservation, from fiction, an activity, a process, agriculture, evolution, a settlement, the environment, an emotion, a hobby, something you can do or be, science, thought, something spiritual, a family (or group of people), ethics, a skill, a plant, water, to do with death or to do with humour.

I could also say that it should probably be considered to have abstract connections as well, but although strictly accurate, that may not be helpful. I think this summary should be very helpful indeed.

Is it something to do with the visual sense?
more questions, less explanation!
[CdM] something to do with the visual sense -- YES and NO. *several "ooooh"s from the audience, quickly shushed*
Something to do with imagination?
[Raak] something to do with imagination -- NO (except where in agreement with details in paragraph 2, above ("Religion, mathematics...")).

Oh, and apologies for spelling "existence" wrong. Oops.

Something to do with hearing, taste, touch, or smell?
[CdM] to do with hearing, taste, touch or smell -- NO.
Does it have an entry in wikipedia?
Is the answer more than one word [apart from the in/definite article]?
[Phil] Does it have an entry in wikipedia -- NO... *audience starts to take more notice*
[Chalky] more than one word -- YES!
Is it a concept?
[Phil] a concept? YES and NO. *more oooooohs*
Do all of these "YES and NO" answers reflect distinct different meanings of the words on the card?
To do with money?
I think I've chosen a stupid topic.
[CdM] NO. If I understand your meaning correctly, then the words on the card are together a whole entity, and I am not looking at each word in isolation, and the answer does not have two different meanings (so, for example, it is not like the expression "knock off").

The yesnoyesno is because

    (a) there are the properties of the thing on the card -- the "thing" that the words on the card are about, and the way(s) in which it can exist.

    (b) there are things to which the answer/words on the card can be to do with, because of the nature of the answer/words on the card. Thus I have problems saying "no" to "to do with xyz" because yes, it can have something to do with xyz.


To say much more without other questions to answer would be to give it away completely.

[Projoy] to do with money -- NO. (I am giving up on the broader meaning of "to do with" from here on, since it's causing too much trouble.)

How about some good old questions like many of the ones from the first topic in this game, which was also an abstract? Start with "did it exist in ...".

Was this an invention?
Is this some type of human relationship?
OK, did it exist in 1800?
(actually, slight rephrase: "Did it exist by 1800)
[Tuj] an invention -- YES if you mean something made up by people
[Irouléguy] a type of human relationship -- NO
[Projoy] did it exist by 1800 -- YES!
Did it exist by 1000?
[CdM] did it exist by 1000 -- YES
did it exist almost since the dawn of mankind?
[irach] did it exist almost since the dawn of mankind -- NO!
Did it exist by 1CE?
(at least we can get into the right millennium)
Is it a social system?
*feels very old* I had to look up "CE".
To do with language?
[Projoy] Did it exist by 1CE -- YES. One place definitely had examples of this before 1CE, and another had examples of it by 20CE but I can't be more exact than that.
[Tuj] a social system -- NO.
[Raak] To do with language -- YES! *audience bursts into loud and sustained applause*
to do with codes/cyphers?
Did it first appear in the Middle East?
[Phil] to do with codes/cyphers -- NO
[Projoy] first appear in the Middle East -- NO
To do with one particular language?
[Raak] to do with one particular language -- NO.
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord