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
Mythical?
A well-known phrase?
Pinitial? No.
Anubis? No, but *a tiny smattering of applause*
Mythical? No, but *some audience murmuring and consultation of dictionaries*
Well-known phrase? In a sense, yes, although that's not the best way to think of what you are looking for.
Fictional?
Fictional? In part, Yes; in part, No.
extinct?
Extinct? Er. I think the only reasonable answer is No.
Legendary?
Legendary? Yes, but *some audience murmuring and consultation of dictionaries*
A single, named creature?
Single, named creature? Yes. *applause*
An object of worship?
Object of worship? No (except perhaps in the exaggerated metaphorical sense)
An object of fear?
Object of fear? No.
In place of my rather convoluted introduction, it is probably better to describe this simply as ABSTRACT and ANIMAL.
But does it begin with P?
Pinitial? Still No.
Is its existence controversial?
Controversial existence? Not in the slightest. (I confirmed its existence a few days ago, as a matter of fact.)
Does it have a physical existence?
The MerLion?
Connected with a particular country?
[CdM] I'll believe you this time.
The answers to several of these questions differ depending on whether I am focusing on the abstract or animal component of the answer. My answers to date have been primarily directed at the abstract component (although I don't think any of them would be badly misleading when thought of as applying to the animal component as well.* With that in mind

Physical Existence? The abstract component has various physical manifestations (so I could also add MINERAL connections to the definition). As for the animal component, the best answer is probably No, (or perhaps Yes, of a sort), but had the question been phrased slightly differently I could have much more easily just answered Yes.
Connected with a particular country? Not exactly, but *applause*.
Merlion? No.

*Though I have never confirmed the existence of the animal component.
Does the animal represent in any way a particular human?
Particular human? The animal is a particular human, yes. *applause*
Is the human the holder of a certain position or title?
Connected with a particular religion?
Holder of position or title? Not exactly, but *applause*
Religious connection? No.
The Statue of Liberty?
Long shot.
Lady Liberty? Nope.
So is the animal fictional and the abstract nonfictional?
Fictional status of animal and abstract: The animal is non-fictional. The abstract is partly fictional and partly non-fictional.
Something like "Tom Thumb"?
Like Tom Thumb? Not at all. I would call that totally fictional.
Tom Thumb fictional? Perhaps not.
[Software] Ah. Well, that's what I get for taking Wikipedia as the last word on something. But, in any case, I think the answer is No.
{Software] By the way, I love the picture at top right in your link. "Tom Thumb's Waistcoat," it is labeled. But since there is nothing else in the picture to indicate scale, the waistcoat in question might just as easily be too big for Kobe Bryant....
Male?
Male? Yes.
This is proving harder than I expected, so I'll offer a clarification/clue with regard to the mythical/legendary questions. The answer on the card does not refer (in either the abstract or animal sense) to something mythical or legendary in a narrow, literal myth-or-fable sense of those terms. The answer (in both senses) is legendary in the broader celebrated-renowned sense of that term, and possibly even mythical in the very broad sense of that word ("idealized").
Is the human the holder of a particular record or accomplishment?
Holder of record or accomplishment? The human is known for certain accomplishments.
Dead?
Sporting accomplishments?
Dead? Yes.
Sporting? No.
A war leader?
A war leader? Sort of, yes. *applause*
Well, this is starting to get silly.
Did the human die within the last 100 years?
Alive sometime after1908? Yes.
Notorious rather than universally celebrated?
The Unknown Soldier?
Notorious? The human in question is perhaps not universally celebrated, but certainly "celebrated" is a better term than "notorious". The abstract sense is pretty much universally celebrated.
Unknown soldier? Hardly. *some laughter*
Born after 1908?
Born after 1908? The human in question was not born after 1908. The abstract sense cae into being after 1908 though.
Because you will probably have forgotten most of this when you resume this game in a post-Christmas alcoholic haze, here is a review.

The words on the card are sort of a well-known phrase that does not begin with P. The words have both an ANIMAL sense and an ABSTRACT sense. There is no controversy about the existence of either.

The ANIMAL sense is a particular male human, who was born before 1908 and died after 1908. He is known for certain non-sporting accomplishments and was sort of a war leader. He is celebrated rather than notorious, though not universally celebrated. He is legendary in the sense of being celebrated and renowned, and possibly mythical in the sense of being idealized, but he is not legendary or mythical in the more literal senses of those terms. He is not exactly connected to a particular country, but the question earned applause. He is not exactly the holder of a position or title, but that question also earned applause. He has no religious connection. He is not Anubis, the Merlion, Tom Thumb, Lady Liberty, or the Unknown Soldier.

The ABSTRACT sense came into being after 1908, and does have physical (mineral) manifestations. It is partly fictional and partly non-fictional, and it is likewise legendary in the broad senses of the words, but not in the narrow senses. I recently confirmed its existence.
T. E. Lawrence?
T.E. Lawrence? The human is T.E. Lawrence, yes. *sustained applause*. But, though this one is now clearly there for the taking, I cannot declare Raak the winner.
Come on, Raak, get a wriggle on.   ;-)
Lawrence of Arabia?
Lawrence of Arabia is indeed the correct answer. One Aqabaton delivered from the Turks to Raak.
The next is ABSTRACT.
The Riemann ζ-function?
n=∞
Not
Σ
1/ns
n=1
Cognitive dysfunction?
Could be regarded as a symptom of one.
"Happy New Year"?
Oh, and Happy New Year to all.
Not a happy new year.
A human characteristic?
E.g. numeracy :-)
Not a human characteristic.
An organisation?
Not an organisation.
Anything to do with religion?
According to Wikipedia, no connection with religion.
Christmas?
Not Christmas.
A well-known phrase or saying?
Not a phrase or saying. Well, there's a phrase on the card, of course, but the mystery object is what it refers to, not the words themselves.
Is the mystery object Animal?
No, it's ABSTRACT.
Connection with science or scientific endeavour?
No connection with sciency things.
A human construct?
'cos somebody had to ask it.
Yes, a human construct.
Does the mystery object instil fear?
Any connection with the arts?
[Rosie] (laughter) Does not instil fear.
[INJ] No connection with the arts.
Does the mystery object represent an achievement?
Is this a sporting accolade?
[Rosie] No, but there could be an achievement involved.
[Dujon] Not sporting.
Related to Politics?
[INJ] Not related to politics.
Is it an activity?
[Kim] Not in itself, but activity could be involved.
Does it normally involve more than one person?
[INJ] Generally involves just one person.
Could it be considered enjoyable?
Might or might not be enjoyable.
An attitude or state of mind?
Not an attitude or state of mind.
Scientific/technical connection?
No scientific/technical connection.

I expected this one to be really easy..

Related to humour?
Not related to humour.
Anything to do with employment?
Nothing to do with employment. (The audience devolve into cockroaches and scuttle away between the floorboards.)
Any connection to sleep?
Zzzzzz....
How about a hint?
Seasonal relevance
New Year Resolution?
I resolve to hand the baton over to Chalky!
Have we taken a resolution to terminate old games?
No, I don't think we have.
It's been slowing down recently - but I still look at it and try to contribute at least once a day when I'm able to get online (though I try not to ask successive questions). Maybe we need fewer ABSTRACTs in order to get the thing moving along. After all, it's not as if other games are flying along.
Chalky appears to be fairly abstract at the moment ;o)
I'm sure she's here in spirit.
Absent friends
I don't get the feeling we are going to see Chalky soon.
EEEK!
sorrysorry. Have been away for a few days - had completely forgotten I'd posted that. Thanks for your patience ....

Next one: ANIMAL/MINERAL/VEGETABLE with ABSTRACT connections

I should be around for mornings and evenings for a few days so pile 'em up ....
Life, the Universe and Everything?
Animal is human?
One step at a time ...
Is it manufactured?
Is it a place or geographical location?
Is it you?
Is it Animal AND Vegetable AND Mineral in one instance?
[INJ] Life etc? NO
[Softers] Animal a Human Beeng? NO
[Raak] Manufactured? mmmm ... erm ... sometimes.
[INJ] Place or Location? NO
[Kim] Moi? NON :-)
[Phil] AVM in one instance? Good question - YES, it can be, but then, can, as likely, not be.
Objects that bear a miracluous resemblance to Jesus/Mother Teresa/Tony Blair/etc.?
[Raak] Incredulous Looky-likes? NO - but I suppose one could discern a resemblance given a vivid imagination :)
Would the animal be mythical?
foody?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord