mc5 - AVMA Take 2

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

Is it a sphere more than 50mm diameter?

Is it associated with a particular country or culture?

Used at home? Indoors?

Would it be somthing to be used "at the weekend"?

Persisting with Raak's line of enquiry :-)

Was this 'round' thing around before 1950?

[CdM] Used with other things - not specifically: It can be utilised alone without any problem though you might get more out of it if you involve other items [Inkspot] Sphere - it is not a sphere, [Irouleguy] Associated with a country/culture - no [ISP] Used indoors - usually yes, but it could be used outside, and I am sure has been, [Phil] Weekend use - this little beauty can be used at any time and is, [Chalky] Did it exist prior to 1950? - not according to my sources...

Is it likely that I own one?

Round, but neither a disk nor a sphere. Hmmmm.

Prismatic?

A whoopee cushion?

Does one inflate it?

Used in conjunction with water?

Is it toroidal? A rubber ring?

(fnar)

Tubular?

Cut to the Chase....

With a Greek Chorus chanting "More Tea, Vicar?" in the background, I am happy to declare that ImNotJohn is entirely on the button with a whoopee cushion. *Applause*. Actually, I thought Chalky was playing games with me (so to speak) when she actually picked the year that they were actually invented! *bows towards INJ and scarpers....*

Whoopee!!

A fine bit of lurking, though I say so myself.
We're off again with ABSTRACT with ANIMAL connections

BTW would it be taken as an insult to say that having met Thos made it easier to guess?

Getting it out of the way

Does it have to do with anarcho-syndicalism?

The key question

[Néa] - anarcho-syndicalism? - NO (but one of these days...)

Be it verily the construct of humanity?

[Projoy] human construct - Yea verily

[INJ] I wouldn't take it as an insult, at all. Now would you like to look through this telescope (ignore the wetness of the eyepiece)...?

Re: Human Construct - yes. OH BOLLOCKS.

[IS,P] Yes. You will note I'm still in hiding after the last one.

Is it a fictional human?

An emotional response?

[Kim] fictional human? - NO
[IS,P] Emotional response? - NO

Does it begin with a P?

Is it fictional? (trad)

An organisation?

To do with religion?

We apologise for the break in transmission

[IS,P] P.... - NO
[Projoy] fictional - YES
[Rosie] organisation - NO
[IS,P] religious - NO

Detective fiction?

[IS,P] Sam Spade etc - NO

Quiet in here, isn't it? Cartoon or animation related?

I'm getting quite lonely

[IS,P] Cartoon/Animation? - The answer has to be YES (some applause), but that wasn't my original inspiration.
BTW I think this is already quite close to a resolution.

Related to a myth or fairy tale?

[Néa] myth/fairy tale - NO

Super powers?

[IS,P] I thought you didn't do abstract human construct stuff!

[IS,P] Super-powered? - NO (a few chuckles in the audience)

A particular genre of fiction?

(meaning is The Answer a word describing a particular genre, rather than The Answer being categorisable under one).

[Projoy] a genre? - NO

A fictional story that was originally textual but which has since become an animated or cartoon representation of such?

[UK] Generally not, but INJ was rather lonely, I thought, and I wanted to give the game a shove.

Well, thank you.

[IS,P] book later animated - YES (applause)

Just to clarify my last response. I could strictly have answered NO in that the answer is not a fictional story that etc. as such, but I gave the more helpful and leading answer. As ever, you may need to make sure you aren't making any unjustified assumptions.

Idéfix?

Is The Answer the title of a book?

[CdM] Idéfix - NO
[Projoy] book title - NO (that was the point I was trying to hint at)

Is the answer on the card the name of a character? (I know Fiction-YES and Human-NO)

Getting warm

[IS,P] character's name? - YES (applause - some members of the audience start to put jackets on)

Lewis Carroll?

Bambi?

A.A. Milne?

Something From Rudyard Kipling?

And his exceedingly good pies?

[UK] Shurely "cakes"

As the sands of time draw inexorably towards a close

[IS,P] A.A. Milne - YES (further loud applause)
The other answers are therefore superfluous

As 'Pooh' has been ruled out, how about "Tigger"

Wol?

Keep Going

[IS,P] Tigger - NO (I had been thinking of 'Paddington' originally, but remembered the 'P' question.)
[Phil] - Wol - NO

Last chance for today

I'll be leaving this laptop behind in about 15 mins and not connecting again until tomorrow.

Piglet?

Wait, don't think of an elephant - is it a Heffalump?

Eeyore?

And we have a winner.It is Eeyore.
So I'll pass this baton to CdM, but I don't suppose it'll do him any good.

Rats! I thought I'd done enough to win it - indeed I was going to add Eeyore after Phil's Wol but thought others should be given a chance to chip in - at least it wasn't a lurker.

Game stalled

I think it's the phrase "And we have a winner. It is Eeyore". Everyone's waiting for Eeyore to post a new topic.

I can't post a clue. I have this terrible pain in all the diodes down my left hand side.

*runs in*

Sorry I'm late. All right, this is
ABSTRACT with ANIMAL, VEGETABLE, MINERAL and ABSTRACT connections.
I should warn you that I am traveling for most of the next 48 hours, so my connections will be intermittent.
Oh, and [IS,P] -- thanks for doing all the heavy lifting on that last one. :-)

Is it constructed humanly?

Is the answer "something"?

[Projoy] YES. The words on the card are a human construct. However in another sense the answer is YES AND NO.
[Raak] YES. The words on the card are a thing. However in another sense the answer is NO.

Any religion/spirituality connection?

Goddity? I can think of several. However, the least misleading answer is NO.

[Raak] By the way, if you meant "is the word(s) on the card 'something'?", the answer is NO.

Is it fictional?

Fictional? NO, the words on the card are not fictional. However, in another sense the answer is YES AND NO.

When you talk about "another sense", is it the same "other sense" for each question?

Is the animal connection one particular species?

Is the answer a well-known or 'set' phrase?

Is it connected with a sport or game?

Is it a filament of our imagination?

figment obviously. Pardon me.

Is another sense always the same sense? YES.
One particular species? NO.
Is the answer a well-known phrase? NO.
Is the answer a 'set' phrase? YES. *laughter*
Connected with a sport or game? NO. (But in another sense YES AND NO.)
A figment of our imagination? I think the best answer is NO.

Sorry about the absence. I was hellishly busy for the last two days. Normal service should be resumed shortly.

Connected with mathematics?

Connected with mathematics? Fundamentally I would say NO, although you are (I think) drawing the right conclusion from the earlier laughter. In another sense, of course, the answer is YES AND NO.

Is this a form of reproduction?

A form of communication?

Reproduction? NO. (or YES and NO)
Communication? NO. (or YES and NO)

Six of one and half a dozen of the other?

6 and 6? NO. (and in another sense, NO.)

Is it anything to do with sorting?

To do with sorting? To be honest, I am not exactly sure what you mean. It is not to do with sorting in the sense of, say, computer code, but it is to do with sorting in some sense, I suppose. Of course, in another sense the answer is YES AND NO.

Is the answer self-referential?

Schroedinger's cat?

Does the word "everything" appear on the card?

Is it a matter of opinion?

Self-referential? NO. *applause*
Superpussition? NO.
'Everything' on the card. *applause* As I have worded the card, NO. But it would be badly misleading to give that answer, so I will tell you that the phrase "all things" does appear on the card.
Matter of opinion. 100% of those polled say NO.

The phrase "Man is the measure of all things"?

No, it's not a well-known phrase, and it's not a matter of opinion...

How about Are there more than four words on the card?

More than four words? YES.

All things come to those who wait?

Patience is its own reward? NO. (Not a well-known phrase, remember)

(Incidentally, I'm rather surprised to find that 'superpussition' only has two googlehits. It's more original than I thought.)

Looking back, I saw that I answered "connected with a sport or a game?" as NO (as well as YES AND NO). While that is still probably the least misleading answer, it occurs to me that the answer does have some connection to a game.

The end of all things?

All things fall into one or more of the categories: Abstract, Animal, Vegetable or Mineral

End of all things? NO.
Everything AVMA? NO. *a tiny smattering of applause*

This game, of all things?

This game? NO.

The universe?

What's left after you take away life and everything? NO.

More than six words on the card?

Is it All Things That Fall Into This Category as per the famous Chinese Encyclopaedia?

Mm. Or "Those That Fall Into the Present Classification". Altho, perhaps unsurprisingly, Borges may have made it up.

More than six words? YES.
All things that fall into this category? NO. Not self-referential, remember. But you are on the right track and so, to speed things along, I will tell you that the first six words on the card are "The set of all things that".

The set of all things that have not been played in this game?

Are you still sane?

The set of all things that can be classified?

The set of all things that may be classified under the headings Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract?

Except that would be self-referential again.

The set of all things that do not exist?

[Raak] I suspect you had it with your previous question.

Tsoatt !played? NO.
Am I still sane? ARTICHOKE.
Tsoatt can be classified? NO. (see self-referential=NO)
Tsoatt can be classified as AVMA? NO. (see this comment)
Tsoatt aren't? NO.

Perhaps it's time to start asking some questions again?

Is this set finite? i.e. could you, at least in theory, count the items in it?

Are there any chihuahuas in this set?

Finite? I know enough mathematics to know I need to be careful around infinities, but I am pretty confident that this set is neither finite nor countably infinite.
Chihuahuas? *applause for the question* There almost certainly are chihuahuas in this set. However, a much more helpful observation is that a chihuahua is not in this set.

<fastshow>What are the schools like in your area?</fastshow>

Do all the chihuahuas in the set exist, or have they existed?

Chihuahuas in the set (Shurely "badgers in the sett")

Is this chihuahuas nonsense related to the famous Beyond the Fringe monologue:
... I opened the door accordingly and went in, and there was Moore seated by the fire with a basket upon his knees. ‘Moore’, I said, ‘do you have any apples in that basket?’ ‘No’, he replied, and smiled seraphically, as was his wont. I decided to try a different logical tack. ‘Moore’, I said, ‘do you then have some apples in that basket?’ ‘No’, he replied, leaving me in a logical cleft stick from which I had but one way out. ‘Moore’, I said, ‘do you then have apples in that basket?’ ‘Yes’, he replied. And from that day forth, we remained the very closest of friends.

All things that on earth do dwell?

*thinks he needs to google fastshow*
Have all chihuahuas in set existed? NO.
Badgers? For free, I will tell you that a badger is also not in the set or the sett.
All earth-dwellers? NO.

Is it connected with color?

Why avoid the obvious?

Tsoat plural?

Connected to color? I can think of several connections to color. However, color is not in this set.
Tsoatt are plural? NO. However, plurals are in this set.

TSOATT - is the next word 'can'?

Can? NO. Also, cans are not in this set.

Do the contents of the set change over time?

Are any non-plurals in this set?

I'm having fun here

Contents change over time? I suppose they do, yes, but I don't think that is very helpful. The contents of the set are not in the set, by the way.
Any non-plurals in the set? YES. Non-plurals are not in the set, though.

The set of all things beginning with P?

The set of all things that have not been mentioned in this game

We have a winner!

The set of all things that begin with P is indeed the answer. Raak is now in possession of a passed baton

This reminded of me of the time I chose 'Human Construct' as an AVMA subject -- then, as now, everyone oddly failed to ask the standard question, making the quest much more difficult than I expected.

The next one is MINERAL.

Metal?

[CdM] Doooh! Brilliant.

Ceramic?

stone?

Man-made?

[Projoy] Not metal.
[Phil] Not ceramic.
[INJ] Not stone.
[Rosie] Can be man made.

A substance?

[Phil] Not a substance. (Substance is involved, but the answer is not some substance.)

Plastic?

[Projoy] Not plastic.

Glass?

reflective?

[Néa] Not glass.
[Projoy] Yes, reflective.

liquid?

[INJ] *applause* Liquid.

Mercury?

Set of all things beginning with P

The problem with 'does it begin with a P' is that it is really Lib's question and she hasn't been around for a while, so sometimes we forget to ask it...
Meanwhile, in this game ... wonders how Mercury is not 'metal' and also how it 'can be man-made', then wonders about the varying definitions of 'man-made' and gives up.

Does it begin with a P

[Projoy] Not mercury (not a metal, remember?)
[ISP] These things can be created deliberately, and (more usually) they can arise by themselves.
[ISP] Does not begin with a P.

Is a water surface involved?

[Rosie] *cheering* A water surface is involved.

Oil on the water?

Smoke on the water? On the Waterfront? Watership Down? The Water Margin?

[ISP] None of the above.

A flood?

Mrs INJ's old school is closed because there are several hundred people sleeping in it at the moment, waiting for the water to go down enough to go home.

moving water?

[ISP] The "P" question is Tuj's, shurely?

[Projoy] Might or might not be moving, since...
INJ has it: a flood. One slowly turning Poohstick handed on.

Well, that was quick

Having wadwd out to collect the baton, may I propose:
Vegetable

Barry Took? (oblig.)

[Projoy] Yes, but see above.

A Pea?

[IS,P] The P question has been asked more often than not in recent rounds.

[IS,P] Barrington Took? - NO
[CdM] - Petit, marrowfat, snow, etc. - NO (though it did cross my mind)

Is it teh edible?

Is size important?

[Pj] re: Tuj/Lib - oops, yes, I meant Tuj. Tuj hasn't been around much either.

[PJ] comestible - YES
[IS,P] the big question - NO is probably the best answer, but I'm not sure what you're asking

Normally eaten raw?

A fictional vegetable?

Can it be grown in Britain?

[Irg] - Normally eaten raw? - NO
[IS,P]Pomegrapeberry - NO
[Rosie] Can be grown in Britain? - YES

A particular dish/recipe?

[Irg] particular dish - NO (but worth asking)

Im away from my desk until Thursday, so connectivity may have to depend on finding a friendly wifi.

Is it widely cultivated in Britain?

Does it grow on trees, you know?

[CdM] widely cultivated in Britain - Not very
[Projoy] Like spaghetti? - NO
I could have answered several questions as 'Not Applicable'

Is it typically eaten?

Grows on a bush?

[CdM] eaten - YES
[Pj] bushy - NO

Is this a group of vegetables?

Grows in the dark, dark soil?

[Chalky] group of veggies - No
[Pj] Grows in the dark? - NO
needs dark soil - NO
grows underground - NO
Have I covered every meaning of the question? As ever, the watchword is check your assumptions.

Checking assumptions:

An edible vegetable, typically eaten cooked, doesn't grow on a tree or bush or underground, cultivated (though not widely in Britain), not a group of veg.
So we are looking at vegetable as in "a plant, root, seed, or pod that is used as food"? how about 'rice'.

Nope

[IS,P] rice - NO
Several mistaken assumptions there. The main one is that it is 'a' vegetable.
I may have been unhelpful in trying to be too helpful. So, the answer on the card is not cultivated as such. Try to sort that out and you'll be closer.

Is it leafy?

is it a class of vegetables (eg, brassicas)?

[Rosie] leafy? - NO
[K(l)] a class of vegetables - NO (although Mrs INJ is far more familiar with classes of vegetables than I am, since she is a teacher.)

clarification

Had I been pedantic, instead of trying to be helpful, I could have answered NO to the questions 'Can it be grown in Britain? and 'Is it widely cultivated in Britain?'

Does it contain mind-altering substances?

[Rosie] Does it contain mind-altering substances? - Not usually, though it's not unknown for it to do so. (some laughter and applause)

Is this something that you put something else inside?

[Raak] something that you put something else inside? - NO

Can contain alcohol?

[Projoy] can contain alcohol? - depending on your definition of 'contain' (also true for Rosie's question), but YES, it can, although it normally doesn't

Is chocolate involved?

[Raak] chocolatey? - NO

A trifle, or similar?

A mere bagatelle.

Has it been processed?

[Rosie] trifling - NO
[Phil] Processed - YES (some applause)

Does it taste sweet?

[Projoy] sweet? - YES (loud applause)

Is this something you put into something else?

Sugar

?

Licorice?

... Pontefract Cakes?

Nearly there

[Raak] something you put into something else? - YES
[Chalky] Sugar? - YES - The word 'sugar' is on the card but that is not the full answer (sorry if you couldn't hear that above the applause)
[IS,P] - NO & NO (obviously)

A sugar cube?

Caster Sugar?

Scrub that... how about icing sugar, apropos MCiOS chat game as of now?

Alan Sugar?

A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down?

[Raak] - YES, it is A Sugar Cube. One baton with the name 'Raak' down the middle handed on.

The next object is MINERAL, with ANIMAL connections. (A ripple of laughter goes through the audience at the answer is revealed on the laser display board.)

A milking machine?

[Projoy] Not a milking machine.

Some sort of fossil?

[Projoy] I'm still giggling.

A secretion?

[Dujon] Not a fossil.
[Rosie] Not a secretion.

Red Bull?

[CdM] Not Red Bull.

Manufactured?

A fake dog poo?

[CdM] Made, yes, but you wouldn't say it was manufactured.
[Phil] Ick? No.

An example of a craft?

Is it potable or edible?

[Projoy] Not a craft (in any sense of the word).
[Rosie] You can't eat it or drink it.

Is it shaped like an animal?

[Phil] Not shaped like an animal. *the audience start falling asleep*

Is the mineral metal?

[Phil] Some of the mineral is quite likely metal. *the audience snore gently*

Bigger than a toaster

*nudges audience*

If the mineral is only "quite likely" metal would it be true to say that the composition of parts of this object is mostly unknown?

[Phil] Bigger than a toaster. *the audence open one eye and close it again*
[Rosie] Not unknown to the people who made it.

Has it a function?

Is there one in the Raak household

Is it used outdoors?

[Projoy] It has a function.
[Phil] I don't have one.
[Rosie] YES and NO would both be both accurate and misleading.

Does it have *one* function?

[Projoy] One function? It depends on how you subdivide things. One more or less broad class of functions, yes.

Have these/has this been around for more than a couple of centuries?

{Projoy] 200 years old? No.

A building?

Is this 'thing' fictional'?

Is it a single unique thing?

Have these/has this been around less than a hundred years?

[ISP] *the audience awakens from its dogmatic slumber and cheers* Yes, a building.
[Dujon] Non-fictional.
[CdM] Yes, a unique thing.
[Projoy] In one sense, definitely not, in another, I expect not. (Ditto for 200 years.)

A place of worship?

[Phil] Not a place of worship.

In Britain?

Does anyone live in it?

[CdM] Not in Britain.
[Projoy] Quite possibly, but it's not usual.

In Europe?

A place of worship? Sacrifice? Macchu Picchu?

[Projoy] Yes, in Europe.
[ISP] I refer you to my last answer to Phil.

The Ice Hotel?

[INJ] *Applause* Not the Ice Hotel.

Is its nature dependent on the climate of where it is?

[Projoy] Not dependent on climate.

The European Parliament Building?

In Western Europe?

The Louvre Pyramid?

[Phil] Not the EU Parliament.
[Projoy] In Western Europe.
[Dujon] Not the Louvre Pyramid.

In Germany?

Does the building have a political purpose / significance?

[Projoy] Not in Germany.
[UK] No political purpose.

In France?

[Projoy] Yes, in France.

So, it's between 100 and 200 years old, yes?

(since you ruled out >200 and <100)

Old age

[Projoy] How do you work that out? You asked:
more than a couple of centuries? ANSWER NO
less than a hundred years? ANSWER In one sense, definitely NOT, in another, I expect NOT. (ditto for 200)

I make that = non-existent, despite its non-fictional nature.

Is the animal connection human?

Sports connections?

Sorry, I misread the 100 years question. This thing is, in one sense definitely less than 100 years old, and in another sense I don't know. Or to be more explicit, as it's been established to be a building, its present use is less than 100 years old, but I don't know when it was constructed.

[Phil] Yes, the animal connection is human.
[ISP] No connection with sports.

Ever used for a military purpose?

[Projoy] Military? Not that I know of.

Is it in Paris?

Is it a cave? note to self: Is a cave a building as such...

"Discovered" less than 100 years ago? A settlement of some kind? Archeological ruins?

[Projoy] *cheering* It is in Paris.
[ISP] Not a cave.
[ISP] Not discovered.

Having found a picture of it, I can say that the building itself is definitely less than 100 years old.

A government building?

Bibliothéque nationale de France?

+ è - é

[Projoy] Not a government building, nor the Bibliotheque.

A hint: the animal connection is not merely that it is a building that people use.

Named after somebody?

(I thought about guessing Centre Pompidou, but I would doubt that Raak would ever have thought that might have been old.)

[CdM] Er...sort of named after someone.

Marche aux Puces?

[Chalky] Not the flea market.

A museum?

A station on the Paris Metro?

Aeroport Charles de Gaulle?

[CdM] Not a museum.
[ISP] Not a station.
[ISP] Not an airport. (Close attention to the audience's reactions may suggest a less random direction to explore.)

A park or public open space?

[Raak] Re: reactions - I get that to be cheers at Builiding in Paris, and applause at the Ice Hotel.

[ISP] Not a park or open space.
(The audience murmurs approvingly at ISP's perspicacious summary.)

A hotel or guest house?

Somewhere at EuroDisney (although that's not paris per se)

[ISP] Yes, a hotel.
[ISP] Not at EuroDisney.

Hotel George V?

No, is it The Paris Hilton?

The Ritz - named after the famous cracker.

simmed by Projoy - serves me right for lurking.

[Irg] Still in with a chance - there are five Paris Hiltons not counting the slapper.

I think we can hand the baton to Projoy now; there is no need to wait for Raak.

(In other words, the George V is clearly the right answer.)

[ISP] There are indeed five Hilton hotels in Paris, but only one is...
[Projoy] ...The Paris Hilton Hotel. One nth-generation videotape passed under the counter to Projoy.

An apostrophe?

[CdM] Curses! So predictable! It is, indeed, an apostrophe. *hands over curly baton to Cd'M*

Rapture?

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent?

I'm assuming that Projoy is going to come back and set a real one.

Ah, then I've managed to be unpredictable for once, since I'm not. Must repeat this. Over to you. :)

Very well.
ABSTRACT with ANIMAL connections (and to a lesser extent mineral and vegetable connections also)

Rapture? No.
Witt and wisdom? No.

Is the animal human?

Human? Yes, the animal connections are human.

It is an activity?

It is/Is it

Is it a contrivance of homo sapiens?

An activity? No, although I suppose you could say it is connected to an activity.
Done by folks? Yes.

Connected to a sport or game?

A childhood thing?

Connected to sport or game? No. I don't think the "activity" route will help.
Childhood thing? No.

Fictional?

Describes a relationship?

Is it a good thing?

Is money involved?

Fictional? No.
Describes a relationship? No (if I understand the question correctly)
A Good Thing? That is a matter of opinion, but I think most people would be more inclined to answer yes rather than no.
Money involved? Yes is I think the best answer. *a little applause*

Is it an occupation?

An occupation? No. *a little applause*

Connected with art?

Connected with art? No (except tangentially).

Connected with social activity?

Connected with social activity? Hmmm. I'm really not sure how to answer that -- it depends what you mean by 'social activity'. I will say that the animal connection involves a number of humans, all of whom are broadly engaged in some kind of activity.

...some kind of common activity...

Watching the Eurovision Song Contest?

Has this happened throughout human history (AFAYK)?

Eurovisioauraling? No.
Happened throughout history? Well, it is something that exists, rather than happens. And the answer is No.

I guess Raak actually asked about Eurovisiovisioing. The answer is still No.

Do people need to meet to carry out this activity?

Need to meet? In the case of the thing mentioned on the card people certainly do, but one could imagine the activity being carried out with minimal face-to-face contact. Even in the case of the thing mentioned on the card, some of the people involved probably never meet.

Do these people have a political or religious belief in common?

Politics or God? No.

Is it The Morniverse, or similar community?

Morniverse? No.
Similar community? No, but it is in some ways a community (although that isn't the word one would usually use), in that involves a group of people engaged (as I said before) in some kind of common activity.
As INJ would say, examine your assumptions.

Is this some sort of 'fan' group (e.g. Trekkies)

For most of its participants is this activity basically a hobby?

Fan group? No.
Hobby? No. *applause for the question*

Is there a language connection?

Do people get paid for doing this?

Is it an academic activity?

Language connection? Sort of, but I think that would be a red herring.
Do people get paid for doing this? *some applause* People do get paid for the activity, yes. Note that the answer on the card is not the activity, though.
Academic activity? No.

Is it something that happens online?

Does the payment for this activity come from some Government department?

Is writing involved in this activity?

Online? Not exclusively, although there is a substantial online component these days.
Government funded? No.
Writing involved? Yes. *applause*

A type of journalism?

Journalism? The activity is journalism, yes. *applause*

A newspaper?

Journalistic Licence?

Paparazzi? Paparazzi? Ya no quieres caminar...

sings... porque no tienes, porque le falta, marijuana que fumar...

Poetic Licence?

A gossip column?

The fourth estate?

TV critic?

Newspaper? No. *smattering of applause*
Journalistic License? No.
~~Pappa~~ ~~Paparra~~ ~~Papparra~~ Obnoxious photojournalists? No.
Poetic License? No.
Gossip column? No.
Fourth Estate? No.
TV Critic? No.
The audience has gone very quiet.

A diary?

OK, I'm reduce to guessing at the moment, sorry.

Crossword compilers?

Diary? No.
Crossword compilers? No.
"Fourth Estate" should perhaps also have had a smattering of applause.
Perhaps a brief summary would help. This thing is abstract with animal connections. It is a non-fictional human construct that has not always existed. The animal connection involves a number of humans, all of whom are broadly engaged in the common activity of paid journalism.

Cookery columns?

A prize of some sort?

Cookery columns? No.
A prize of some sort? No.

A press conference?

A press conference? No.

Does the connection involve a particular area of expertise (such as economics, sport, fashion)?

City columnist?

Is this exclusively in the area of newspaper journalism?

Has it been around more than two hundred years?

Tony Blair's 'feral beast'?

Making some progress

Involve particular area of expertise? No (that is, not beyond what is already implied by the fact that you know that there is a connection to journalism). *some applause for the question*
City columnist? No.
Exclusively newspaper journalism? No. *applause*
More than 200 years? No (but I will give you a hint and tell you that I did have to check).
Blair the wild things are? No.
As one clarification, I want to stress that I have said that the animal connection involves people "broadly" engaged in journalism, but a pedant (not that there are any around here) might claim that the activity is not journalism per se.

Letters to the Editor?

Ignore that question - your comment "engaged in the common activity of paid journalism" just nudged the penny.

An interview?

Yours sincerely, Disgusted of Katoomba? No.
An interview? No.

The parliamentary lobby?

Obituaries?

Parliamentary Lobby? No.
Obituaries? No.

The Groucho Club?

Groucho Club? No. *the audience is asleep*

I think you need more questions.

I hope I haven't misled with the "not journalism per se". Journalism is definitely involved.

I'm about to travel to France and so may be away from the internets for 24 hours or so.

Is it a system?

Does it involve writing for a specific section of a newspaper?

Leaders/Editorials?

A system? Not sure what you mean, but I am pretty sure the answer is No.
Specific section? No.
Editorials? No.

diarising

... am disinclined to suggest 'blogging' as that is an exclusively internetty experience

Reporting?

Diarising? No.
Reporting? No. *substantial applause from their audience, although their enthusiasm should not be overrated, stemming as it does partly from relief that they finally have an excuse to do something other than sit there mutely*
Remember the answer on the card is not the activity itself.

Is the answer an adjective describing a person who may be journalistically inclined?

Current affairs?

Are the mineral and vegetable connections just ink and paper respectively?

Adjectivally descriptive answer? No. The answer is not an adjective, and does not describe someone journalistically inclined.
Electric adultery? No.
Mineral and vegetable = ink and paper? Basically, yes. You could add computers, buildings, and so on, but I don't think these connections tell you anything you don't already know.

so-called "Fleet Street"?

Fast Track? No.

Sub-editors?

Subeditors? No.

International/'foreign' coverage?

Reviews of some kind?

Small earthquake in Chile? No. *smattering of applause*
Reviews? No.

Travel writing?

Travel writing? No. You all need to think bigger. Also, there has only been one guess that has even approximated the kind of entity that is on the card.

The Murdoch Media Juggernaut?

News?

Rupert the Bear? No. *audience applause that, by means of subtly shifting cadences, conveys the message that they are applauding not so much for the name Murdoch as for the fact that there have now been two guesses that approximate the entity on the card*
News? OK, you don't need to think quite that big. Nevertheless *applause, tinged with relief that we may finally be getting somewhere*

Is it a specific organisation?

Specific organisation? Yes. *applause*

Reuters?

The Rothermere press?

Reuters? No. *sustained applause*
Rothermere Press? No. *sustained silence*

A specific news agency?

A specific news agency? Yes.

AP?

AHN?

Really, what else could it have been?

A P is indeed what is on the card. This just in from our correspondent: a baton has been delivered to East Anglia.

A N I M A L

H U M A N?

[CdM] Not human.

Mammalian?

[Projoy] Yes, mammalian.

A specific species?

Topical?

[Projoy] To be very nitpickingly precise, not a specific species.
[Rosie] Not topical.

Feline?

[[I] Not a cat.

A specific, individual animal?

[CdM] Not an individual.

Does it live in the water?

[I] Not alive.
[I] Not in water.

An extinct creature?

[CdM] Not extinct.

Animal byproduct?

[Inkspot] Yes, an animal product.

Food for humans?

[Rosie] Yum? Bleah.

A stuffed animal (taxidermist wise)?

Is it from the male and female?

[Dujon] (applause)Taxidermy is involved.
[Inkspot] Could be from either.

Is the answer of the form "an <animal><part of animal>" (e.g., a moose head)?

[CdM] *applause*! That is included in the answer.

A stuffed moose head?

An elephant's foot umbrella stand?

[Projoy] Not a moose.
[CdM] *wild cheering* The very words on the card! One Victorian sword-stick passed on.

eeeek! Sorry. My internets access is intermittent right now. Let me set an easy one.
MINERAL with ANIMAL connections
*audience laughter, with a second wave of laughter as the first one is dying down*

Is the mineral man-made?

Is the mineral physically connected to the animal?

Something to do with sex?

A parrot-handle umbrella?

A cast-iron elephant's foot umbrella stand?

Man-made? Could be. *audience laughter*
Physically connected to the animal? Well, yes. But then again, no. *audience laughter*
To do with sex? Well, er, it could be, though it is probably fair to say, not normally. *audience laughter* Not that I am passing any judgment on what is normal, you understand. *audience laughter*
Parrot-handle umbrella? No.
Cast-iron efus? No.

Is it bigger than a shoe box?

Bigger than a shoebox? The question is not really meaningful.

I mean, *chastity* belt?

Very strange, I posted with a misprint, hence the correction, which seems to have overwritten the original.

Probably just clicked Preview by mistake.

Chestity belt? Charity belt? Elastity belt? No.

Is this a substance, or substances, as opposed to an object?

Substance? Yes. *applause*

My God, it's not a turd, is it?

Looks like ... smells like ... tastes like ... thank god I didn't step in it...? No, but *sustained audience applause and laughter*

You're not taking the piss, are you?

Bogies?

And I don't mean those four-wheel assemblages you find under railway carriages.

Does it begin with...?

Urine is the word on the card. One Andres Serrano representation of a baton returned to Raak.

Let me try to raise the tone with this M I N E R A L and A B S T R A C T.

Ancient Greek sculpture?

A work of art?

Bigger than a toaster?

[Raak] Shurely your winning question last round should have been "Does it begin with pee"

[I] The audience applauds, but only for your good taste. Not ancient Greek sculpture.
[R] In a sense, yes.
[ISP] Bigger than a toaster.

On reflection, I think the ABSTRACT is inaccurate, and this should be classified simply as MINERAL.

A natural geographical feature?

[Inkspot] Not natural.

A building?

A bridge?

[Rosie] Yes! A building.
[I] Not a bridge.

In Europe?

[Néa] In Europe.

Built after 1900?

[I] Not built after 1900.

In Britain?

[I] Yes, in Britain.

Open to the public?

[Rosie] Partly open to the public.

Prehistoric?

[Néa] Not prehistoric.

A religious place?

In narrow sense, excludes banks, sports grounds,....

The Houses of Parliament?

[Inkspot] Not a religious place.
[Irouléguy] Not the H of P.

In England?

[Néa] In England.

St Pancras Station?

Would this edifice be a tourist attraction?

[Rosie] Not St. Pancras.
[Dujon] Quite possibly, I'm not sure.

Is it a residence?

In southern England?

Using the 'south of a line drawn between the Wash and the Severn' definition.

[Inkspot] Not a residence.
[Irouléguy] In southern England.

arrow_circle_down

Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord