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
A collar?
they could be made of string? Not necessarily good hand-cuffs, but hand-cuffs all the same.
Graham III - A collar? No
Hand-cuffs] Touché

A dressing gown cord?
Is it elastic?
When you made this thing, did you also make the larger item?
I think it is INJ who is wont to want you to examine your assumptions.
Graham III] A dressing gown cord? No
ImNotJohn] Is it elastic? No (hypothetically, I suppose it could be)
CdM - When you made this thing, did you also make the larger item? *murmurs of 'Good question' from the audience* No. If you made the larger item, you would also make this (or these) in the process, but people will also make (or remake) this (or these) having bought (or otherwise acquired) the larger item.

Apologies for any false attribution - it's good advice, whoever said it.
Is it decorative?
Graham III - Is it decorative? It can be, but it's primarily functional.
A saddle?
Is it used to carry something?
OK – let’s try to see what we know:
It is a belt but it is not worn as such and is not an item of clothing. It is a part of a larger whole, but can be made separately (a replaceable part?) It may be made of A, V or M and is always ‘sort of’ the same shape although the size can vary. If Animal this could be leather. Manufactured although not necessarily by machine. Irg has made one. It is functional rather than decorative. It has some 'sort of' connection with 'attaching' but not of one thing to another (still slightly confused by that). The answer is one word plus the indefinite article, but this could exist in the plural. It is not normally elastic (although that is not impossible). It does not normally contain or hold other things (bandolier, tool belt)
It is not: a buckle or fastener (applause), garters, dog tag or leash, safety harness, seat belt, handcuffs or other bondage gear, a conveyor belt or a number of other things excluded by the things we know.
Is it a drive belt?
Raak] Is it a drive-belt? YES! (Specifically a fanbelt, but that's good enough).Apologies for the 'connecting one thing to another' answer, which I think was wrong now - I was trying to get at the idea of it being internal. And the answer to Dujon's tool-belts question was misleading, as I didn't read it properly. Not one of my better ones. One baton improvised from tights handed over to Raak.
That was unexpected. Hmm... MINERAL and ANIMAL, with ABSTRACT connections.
Is it manmade?
By the by, the answer "Would it normally be worn by a person? Person rather than an animal, yes - but it's not 'worn' as such." rather threw me. Did you mean "NO"?
[G III] Man-made? Something man-made is involved.
Is the mineral metal?
But is it art?
[Software] Partly metal.
[G III] Not art.
Is the animal portion canine?
An everyday object?
Begins with a P?
[Irouléguy] Can I ask about the "it was Tuj who gave me the idea"?
[irach] Not canine.
[Rosie] Not an everyday object. Not in the sense you mean, that is. *laughter*
[Tuj] Yes! It does indeed begin with a P! Is that a first?
P-research
[Raak] No, it is a seventh, though I have asked the question 59 times.
People who aren't me have an improved success rate of 3 out of 12.
Meanwhile Raak has asked if the word has ended in P, and CdM set the answer "the set of all words beginning with P".
Does this relate to time?
[Dujon] Relates to time? In a way.
Is the animal part living?
Are the abstract connections to a work of art?
[Tuj] Also related: around the same time I also set "A P" in the sense of the Associated Press, and "urine".
[Tuj] The animal part is living.
[CdM] Not related to a work of art.
A horse and cart?
[Rosie] Not a horse and cart.
A cage?
[Rosie] Not a cage.
"Pig in a poke" ?
[irach] Not a pig in a poke.
Is the animal a source of energy to be used as, for example, motive power?
[Rosie] The animal makes it happen? Yes.
A Pony and Trap?
[Software] Not a pony and trap. The "motive power" thing may be misleading.
Is it the animal part that begins with the "P"?
[irach] The animal part is not the part beginning with P.
A rat-race?
[Rosie] Not a rat-race.
Is there an agricultural connection?
[Kim] Nothing to do with agriculture. *snoring from the audience*
Is the animal a mammal?
[Rosie] The animal is a mammal.
Is the animal normally associated with human contact (e.g. pet or livestock)?
[G III] Not a pet, not livestock. Associated with human contact? Well...you're thinking on the wrong lines. Hint: a frequently asked question has not yet been asked.
Animal human?
Why the FAQ didn't I ask that earlier?
Is the abstract connection a metaphor?
Fictional?
[Rosie] At last! The animal is himan.
[CdM] The abstract connection is a metaphor.
[Tuj] Not fictional. (Knowledgeable members of the audience and those who have just googled it murmur.) Not intended as fictional.
Is it "Manpower"?
[Kim] Not "Manpower".
Related to the bible?
Is the mineral part a specific object?
[G III] Not related to the bible.
[Rosie] Yes, a specific mineral object.
Is the human currently living?
[Kim] Not applicable. Not a specific human.
"People Power"
Is the mineral object implied rather than specified?
[Rosie] Yes to both.
Is this a phrase?
[Tuj] It is a phrase.
Is the word that begins with P "Power"?
[irach, sorry I overlooked this] Not "People Power".
[Kim] P is not for "power".
Summary: the phrase describes a specified mineral object, an implied one, and some human activity, and the whole is also a metaphor. Not biblical, artistic, or any of the specific guesses so far. It begins with a P.
The Press?
[Rosie] Not The Press. The very first word of this begins with a P.
Is the animal human part a plural noun?
[irach] The animal human is not mentioned.
Is the mineral partly glass?
Platinum artist?
[CdM] No glass.
[staniel] Not a platinum artist. (Not an artistic thing.)
*the audience sign up for cryonic suspension*
Is the metaphor assoicated with human endeavour (eg, nose to the grindstone, shoulder to the wheel, that kind of thing)?
[Kim] Yes! Exactly that sort of thing!
Are the second and third letters U and T?
[CdM] Putting? No.
Is it also the title of a film?
First word a present participle?
Are the second and third letters U and L?
[Kim] Not the title of a film, according to IMDB. I think it ought to be, though. It would be rather a long one.
[Rosie] The first word is a present participle.
[Tuj] PULl the other one, it's got bells on.
Is there a mythical connection?
[Kim] No mything links.
Pulling your weight?
[Rosie] Not pulling your weight.
Are the second and third letters of the first word "U" and "S"?
[Kim] Pushy? No.
Any links to a game?
[INJ] Nothing to do with a game.
There are four words on the card.
I see my summary left out the information that this thing has a connection with time.
Painting the Forth bridge?
Aha!
[INJ] We have a winner! One bottomless bucket and a paintbrush handed over.
semi-lurking
I didn't think anyone would object, given how long this one has been going.
Rather more quickly, I hope, you will get to:
Abstract with Animal Connections - (Actually I could claim it as Abstract with Animal connections on 2 counts and Animal with Abstract connections on 1 - but don't let that confuse you)
Leaving now
Won't be looking at this until tomorrow morning now, I'm afraid.
Is the animal part human?
An activity?
[Kim] Human? - NO
[Rosie] Activity? - NO
An expression?
[Software] Expression? - NO
Is the animal of a species that exists in the world today?
Good question
[Kim] Animal species exists today? - NO (however, I am just a little wary of the exact form in which the question was asked)
Is the animal mythical?
[Raak] Mythical animal? - Hmm - NO, unless you mean 'is it fictional?', in which case, the answer is YES
A specific fictional animal?
(i.e., an individual animal like "White Fang")
Animal common in fantasy literature?
[CdM] Specific animal - YES
[G3] Common in Fantasy Literature? - NO
Begins with a P?
Does the animal appear predominantly in books?
[Tuj] THE question? - NO
[Kim] booky animal? - NO
From a children's movie?
[CdM] From children's film? - NO (and he claims he doesn't speak American)
Is the animal a human construction?
[Kim] Human Construction? - YES (in the sense that I think you mean)
Also YES in another sense *a few chuckles from the audience* and NO in a very obscure sense.
Confused enough now?
An animal bred for some purpose?
Is it an animal of legend (as distinct from myth)?
[G3] bred for some purpose? - NO
[Kim] Legend rather than myth? - NO - If anything the reverse, but neither is a good description
Is the animal a member of a real species (dog rather than hipporhinocecow, for example)
trying to hone in based on some previous answers...
And I never claimed any such thing. I speak American almost fluently.
[CdM] Member of real species? - YES
[CdM] "hone in"? **bang!!**
[Raak] ooops...
An animal of folklore?
[Raak] Although... maybe I was just demonstrating my command of fluent American for INJ. According to the M-W Dictionary of English Usage
The phrase [hone in] seems to have become established in American English, and is apparently beginning to be used in British English (Garner has a British example). If you use it, you should be aware that some people will think you have made a mistake.
Not surprisingly, the folks at Language Log have have also discussed it quite a bit. One of the interesting things is that though the verb to home has been around a long time, home in and hone in are both recent coinages. None of which is meant as a serious defense in my particular case, by the way; had I noticed it, I would have certainly chosen home in in preference.
Not well-honed
[Kim] Folklore? - NO
Is this animal primarily known for some artistic representation of it?
[CdM] artiswtically represented - NO (except for fairly wide definitions of 'artistic' and 'representation')
Is it a species of animal, rather than a single example?
[Kim] Species? - The answer would technically be a species, but it is known by a single example
From an adult film?
Not an "adult" film, you understand. Just an adult film.

(We now know that this animal is fictional, but not from a book, children's film, or known from an artistic representation...)
Would the aminal/species be known conventionally as a "dinosaur"?
[CdM] Film for adults - NO
[Kim] Dino? - NO
So, by a process of elimination....
From a teenage film?
Is the animal the subject of a poem?
Building on CdM's summary, if I have this right, the individual animal has never actually existed but is a human construction, represented not in books or artistic representation (which I take to mean painting, drawing, sculpture, etc) and not in any film made for children, adults or teenagers but in some other artistic form; moreover, the species to which the animal belongs is a real species, but the species does not exist in the world today, nor is it what we would call a "dinosaur".
Trojan horse?
From TV?
At last
[Kim] Subject of poem? - NO *some chuckles in the audience*
[G3] Trojan Horse? - NO
[CdM] TV - YES *sighs of relief*
The summary is correct, except around the 'species' (and this is my fault). It's probably best to say that the genus is real and current, but this particular creature isn't. After all, it doesn't exist, so has never been classified, so I'm extrapolating here - is it a species or a sub-species - search me. However, I suspect that you would probably think of it as part of an existing species.
Is/was there a real animal or animals who played the part of this fictional animal on TV?
(e.g., Flipper the wonder horse, Lassie the bush kangaroo) (I'm assuming not, because otherwise I think INJ would have led with Animal rather than Abstract ... but INJ's original definition did seem to leave the door open for lots of things.)
Mister Ed?
Was it a TV cartoon?
Associated with a particular actor?
Is the TV show named after the animal?
[CdM] Real Animal played part? NO (or I certainly hope not)
[Phil] Mr Ed? - NO
[Raak] Cartoon? - NO
[Projoy] Particular actor? - NO, not as such *Some muttering in the audience*[Kim] Named after animal? - NO
Mr. Blobby?
Is the animal a puppet?
Was the audience muttering because a known actor voiced this character?
Is our elusive friend a puppet?
Whoops! Sorry, Kim.
I'm also going to request a clarification on the classification. Though you have classified this primarily as abstract, does (or did) it still have some physical (presumably vegetable or mineral) existence? (Although maybe that is just a very roundabout way of asking Kim's question for the third time!)
[Raak] Mr Blobby? - NO
[Kim] Puppet? - NO
[CdM] Voiced by well-known actor - NO
[Dujon] - still no
CdM - Some physical existence? - YES *some applause* (but the classification is still correct)
Was this animal played by an actor in costume?
Not a real animal, not a puppet, and not a cartoon. Not many possibilities left.
Was the animal invisible?
Do we take your earlier rejection of "cartoon" to include all forms of amination?
Is it a logo or mascot?
I am thinking along the lines of something like Pudsey the bear (though not him of course as he begins with P).
One of the Playschool toys?
Just as an observation, we have nothing indicating that this is a children's show, though I think we are all tending to assume that it is.
[CdM] Gorilla-suited? - N)
[Raak] Invisible? - NO
[Kim] animated? - NO (I don't split hairs in this game)
[Bigsmith] Logo/Mascot - NO
Playschool? - NO
[CdM] Good point, well made.
Pantomime horse?
Well this is proving harder than I had ever imagined
[Software] Panto pony? - NO (precluded by answer to CdM's previous question)
Not a real animal, not a puppet, not a costumed actor, not invisible, not a cartoon or other animation. We are obviously missing something here but I am drawing a blank.
Was this animal ever seen (in some form or another) by the TV viewers?
Avian?
getting warmer
[CdM] Was the animal seen? - YES (it will become clear)
[irach] birdy? - YES *relieved applause*
"Phoenix rising from the ashes"?
[irach] Phoenix? - NO
Did the animal have an individual name?
"Eagle eye"?
Did the TV show feature a representation of this bird (e.g., a picture) rather than the bird itself?
[Raak] Named? - NO *a few murmurs in the audience*
[irach] Eagle eye? - Never heard of it, so NO
[CdM] Representation? YES(ish), a picture? - NO
There are 3 words on the card, including the indefinite article.
Is this from a comedy show?
[CdM] comedy show? - YES Loud and relieved applause*
Is it visible during the show?
[Phil] Visible? - YES
A Liver Bird?
[CdM] Liver Bird - Good guess, but NO
Was this seen in a pet shop?
"Dead Parrot" a la Monty Python?
Close enough for jazz
I don't want to draw this out so I declare irach the winner! The answer on the card was A Norwegian Blue
[CdM] The category that had not been suggested was 'a prop/model'
(To explain the convoluted intro 'a Norwegian Blue' can also be an orienteering course or the nickname of the earliest fossil proto-psittacoid, which was found in Scandinavia.)
One baton totally bereft of life handed on to irach.
Simulposted with:

That must be it, though I am guessing that "A Norwegian Blue" are the actual words on the card. (That's irach's win, not mine, if correct.)
Well, that one was put to rest at last. The psittacoid in question pining for the fjords is now in birdie Valhalla.... The next one is ANIMAL with an ABSTRACT Connotation.
Human?
A single individual animal?
Is the answer a phrase?
[CdM] Non-human.
[IMJ] More than one.
[Rosie] Sort of a phrase.
Lemmings?
A single species of animal?
A team or pack?
[Tuj] Not lemmings.
[CdM] Not a single species.
[Rosie] A team of sorts, not a pack.
Domesticated animals?
Likely to be seen in the wild?
(in counterpoint to INJ)
[INJ] Not domesticated.
[CdM] Yes, and no.
Fictional?
Dickybirds?
Land animal?
[Tuj] Fictional in part.
[Rosie] Not dickybirds.
[Software] Yes. Land animal
Does it begin with P?
To business.
[Tuj] 'Pologies, but no "P" whatsover, in either the beginning, middle, or end.
The Circle of Life?
Ouch.
[Tuj] Not the circle of life.
An animal of which there are both domesticated and wild examples?
[Kim] Only wild or presumed wild.
Does the name of an animal (or several) appear on the card?
[INJ] Yes, the animals are named.
Indigenous to the UK?
"Wild? I was absolutely livid!"
Do they form an heraldic or symbolic group?
[Bigsmith] Not indigenous to the US individually, but togeter, yes, very British.
[INJ] Yes, they form a heraldic or symbolic group.
Lion and Unicorn?
[Software] The Lion and the Unicorn it is. The baton is passed
Bu**er! That means I'll have to think of something. Right, after 30 seconds deep thought here it is:

VEGETABLE with ANIMAL and ABSTRACT connections.

Terry Schiavo?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Is the vegetable wood?
Smaller than a toaster?
[Raak] Yowzer!
[Raak] Terry? No
[INJ] Wood? Yes.
[CdM] er.. No.
[Tuj] Toaster? Difficult one, probably Yes.
Are the animal connections human?
Is there only one of these?
A board game?
[Raak] Human? Yes.
[Kim] Unique? No.
[Tuj] Boardo? No.
A tool?
Found in a kitchen?
Long and thin?
[INJ] tool? some may say so, but a sensible answer is probably No.
[irach] kitchen? some would say Yes.
[Rosie] phalic? No.
Edible?
Chopsticks?
*wonders about the short fat approximately toaster-sized chopsticks that irach eats with*
[CdM] edible? theoretically, Yes.
[irach] ching-chang-chew? No.
Part of a foodstuff that is not normally eaten? (eg fish bones)
[Rosie] Fishy? No.
A container of some kind?
Specific to a particular culture or country?
[Tuj] Container? No.
[CdM]Specific country/culture? No.
Serves a decorative purpose?
I'm struggling with the edible wood.
Heart of palm?
[INJ] Decorative? No.
[Raak]Swamp cabbage? Had to Google that! No.
Advent calendar?
About the size of a toaster in all three dimensions, two dimensions, or one?
Found in most homes?*
* for a definition of home based on the Western European model
[G III] Chocolatey date thing? No.
[irach] Toaster sized? In one dimension maybe. Yes.
[INJ] Domestic? Yes. (random claps from audience)
Used in the preparation or serving of food?
Is the abstract connection something to do with the arts?
[INJ] Jamie Oliverish? Nah.
[CdM] Arty-farty? No.
Associated with apparel?
[INJ] wear it? No.
Clue?
Is the abstract connection a phrase or saying?
Does it begin with a 'P'?
Sorry Tuj, but we can only wait so long for you.
[Tuj] Clue? OK. This is a give away: almost everyone has used one of these.
[CdM] Abstract? Not a phrase or saying as such, but a familiar term.
[INJ] P? Not in the answer itself. * audience murmurs.*
Paper of some sort?
Toilet paper?
[Chalks] Paper? Yes. *audience claps*
[GIII] Bog roll? No.
Advent Calendar?
ooops - CANCEL THAT
Box of Tissues
Newspaper?
[Chalks] Advent calendar? You wish! And not paper hankies either. No.
[irach] The fourth estate? No.
Paper Towels?
[irach] Towels? No. Hint: it is paper, approximately toaster sized in one dimension.
Is is typically written on, e..g. foolscap paper?
[irach] Written? Not by hand, but Yes. * audience claps * Foolscap? Are you a lawyer?
A Telephone Directory?
A fortune cookie?
[CdM] Directory? The exact words on the Card!!!

Well done and over to you!! I'm glad that its gone because I'm away from a computer for the next 5 days and there would have been a big gap!

That was unexpected
OK. I am going to designate this as ABSTRACT with ANIMAL connections, while acknowledging that many of you might have deemed this ANIMAL with ABSTRACT connections.
Begins with P?
Anubis?
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?
Sorry for delay
[Software] Mythical? NO
[CdM] foody-y? YES!
A dish?
Food, not ceramic
[INJ] A dish? NO - not a dish
Some sort of convenience snack?
Mmm, salted crisps cooked in lard....
Pork Scratchings?
[Raak] Salty snack? Yes - could be
[Software] Pig scabs? Yes - could be

[INJ] I have cast off my pedant's hat to amend my reply to your recent question: Yes - could be
Normally eaten in a pub?
[Rosie] Pub Grub? Yes - could be
Is the occasion on which it is eaten significant?
Cost under a quid? (£1 Sterling, whatever that's worth today?)
[Raak] Eaten on significant occasion? Yes - could be
[Bigsmith] Low Cost? Yes - could be
Food in general?
A generic description of a meal?
(like 'a square meal' or 'breakfast')
A Tasty Snack?
[Raak] Food in general? YES! *audience cheers because the Animal/Vegetable/Mineral boxes have been ticked*
[INJ] Generic description of a meal? Not exactly 'generic' - but you're heading in the right direction..
[Softers] Tasty Snack? Yes - could be
A snack?
The "Mediterranean Diet"?
[Rosie] A snack? Yes - could be
[Raak] The Mediterranean Diet? Yes - could be

It may be more useful if I change the definition to ANIMAL/MINERAL/VEGETABLE/ABSTRACT [rather than 'with Abstract connections']. We can discuss the rights and wrongs of such a move when this has been guessed :)
Is it to do with dieting in general?
Consumed at a single sitting?
(I know - 'Yes - could be')
[Kim] Dieting? NO *audience chuckles*
[INJ] Single sitting? Funny you should say that/ Yes - it could well be consumed at a single sitting :-)
Overeating?
Munchies?
[Raak] Overeating? Not exactly - but * the audience applauds your attempt to explore the Abstract nature of this little puzzle*
[irach] Munchies? well - having the Munchies certainly links neatly with the words on the card.
Brunch?
Does the card include the word "traditional"?
{Raak] Brunch? Yes - could be
[Dujon] The card does NOT include the word 'traditional'
Cocktail party?
Does it have to do with the enjoyment of good food, but not necessarily to excess?
Who ate all the pies?
[irach] Cocktail party? Yes - could be
[Kim] Non - excessive enjoyment of good food? Yes - could be
[Software] Who Ate The Pies? No - but *audience applauds another attempt to explore the Abstract element*

[Aside to Softers - Are you in Jersey or Guernsey? My memory fails me]
Eating in general?
[Raak] Eating in general? The AotC certainly suggests eating in general *< mode:clue > however, it isn't an action < /clue >*
A square meal?
[Chalky] Guernsey? Wash your mouth out!
[Software] A square meal? Yes - it could include one of those
What I (you? someone?) ate last night?
Entertaining in general?
[CdM] What we ate last night? Yes - it could include this
[Kim] Entertaining in general? Remember - The AotC is not an action. However, it IS entertaining :) <<<<< points to another clue
Finger foods?
A TV Dinner?
Food groups, nutrition triangles, or some such thing?
[irach] Finger foods? Yes - it could include these
[Sierra Mike] TV Dinner? Yes - it could include this
[CdM] Food groups, nutrition triangles, or such-like? OK - it could include these 'though such dour terminology sits uneasily with the AotC.

Hint: It may be helpful to approach this puzzle from the ABSTRACT angle as it's clear that the A/V/M part is 'food'.
Cookery programmes?
Junk food?
[Raak] Cookery progs? NO
[IruleOK] Junk? NO
Related to any grading system, e.g. Michelin stars?
A banquet?
[Raak] Michelins? NON
[Rosie] Banquet? NO

The negative replies only indicate that the guesses are not the Answer on the Card. How can something so tangible as food become an Abstract?
Fictional?
*applauds Raak*
[Raak] Fictional? Ooh - good question. YES - but I reply with some hesitation.
A work of fiction containing embedded recipes?
"Like Water for Chocolate", etc.
[Raak] fiction - embedded? NO
Food for Thought?
[Softers] Food for Thought? NO - but you and Raak are moving in the right direction.

Summary: The Animal/Vegetable/Mineral part is FOOD [any food in any guise]. The Abstract part originates from a work of fiction - but many things do! There is a key question that hasn't been asked yet. Oh - and it IS a well-known phrase or saying.
The Food of the Gods?
Does it begin with one of the letters A-O or Q-Z (inclusive)?
[Rosie] The Food of the Gods? NO - but *audience applauds with gusto!*
[CdM] At last! Not P? YES :)
The Staff of Life?
[Raak] The Staff of Life? Not the AotC, NO.

My response to Kim's question may provide a clue to the 'key question'
A Bun Fight?
getting desperate
[Softers] A Bun Fight? NO :)
Iron Chef?
The food of love / An aphrodisiac?
sneaking in two related guesses for the price of one.
Clarification please
AotC????????
[Raak] Iron Chef? [Who is this person?] NO
[CdM] Aphrodis/Lovin'food? NO
[Sierra Mike] Answer on the Card [as per the original ISIHAC game :)

There is still a key question that should bridge the gap between 'originates from a work of fiction' and the answer. There is an intermediate level. Please keep asking Abstract-type questions and forget about guessing random food-related phrases.
Supping with The Devil?
Use a long spoon, they say.
tum te tum te tum
[Rosie] Suppin with Devil? NO
Is the work of fiction (primarily) a book
i.e. best known as a book rather than say, the film of a book
Was the phrase coined in the 20th century?
[INJ] Book/Film? Good question. Originally a BOOK - which is very well-known by a very well-known author. The book has been adapted [I use the term deliberately] to make a FILM - which is well-known in a different way. The AotC comes from the FILM.
[Graham III] Coined in C20? Absolutely YES - the second half of the century.
*hints that the Book has been mentioned in 'Ex Libri Bardus'*
Wuthering Heights
In my own defense I Googled it before I asked.
AOTC Attack of the Clones (Star Wars Episode Two)
AOTC Australian Overseas Telecommunications Corporation
AotC Ark of the Covenant (gaming)
AOTC Ahead of the Curve
AotC Aspect of the Cheetah (gaming, World of Warcraft)
AOTC Associated Offices Technical Committee (UK)
AOTC Ahead of Time Crew (band)
AOTC Autodesk Official Training Courseware
A.O.T.C. - Association of Orthopaedic Technologists California
AOTC - Amarillo Obedience Training Club
AotC Army of the Cumberland
AOTC Atlantic OSHA Training Center
AOTC Administrative Office of the Trial Court
I also swept back in the game itself, though obviously not far enough.
The Naked Lunch?
Eats, Shoots and Leaves?
la la lala la la lala
[INJ] The Naked Lunch? NO
[Kim] Eats Stuff? NO *audience sighs and seeks alternative entertainment*
I might well have missed something or other in this rather drawn out seeking: Given that - is this (at least) something like 'Manna from Heaven' ?
[Duj] Manna from Heaven? Yes - it could be - but it's not the AotC
*attempting to entertain the audience*
In addition to the BOOK and the FILM there is also a STAGE production.
Food of the Gods?
[Softers] Food of the Gods? I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous reply to Rosie. ^^^^

...and while you're up there - you may spot all the clues I've been giving. [Where's Projoy when you need him?]
food, glorious food?
Damn! How did I miss that?
Answer, Glorious Answer!
At last dear CdM - the very Words on the Card *audience applauds, cheers and generally goes wild*

The SONG from the FILM and the STAGE production which is an adaptation of the BOOK. A well-known phrase all about FOOD which is very entertaining.
Thanks for letting me off the hook.
[INJ] shame on you :)

* hands over a stuffed baguette to CdM*
[Chalky] Please miss, can I have another?
[CdM] um ... only if I can guess yours :)
All right. This is ABSTRACT with ANIMAL and MINERAL connections.
Is the answer an Abstract Noun?
Abstract noun? No. The answer is a noun phrase that refers to something abstract.
A saying?
A Place?
A human construction?
Mineral metal?
Fictional?
A saying? No.
A place? No
Human construction? Yes.
Metal? No.
Fictional? Yes.
Would this abstractness be . . . well . . . revelationary?
revelationary? I'm really not sure I understand the question. But I can say that it would be useful to learn what kind of abstraction this is. Also, some claim that this abstraction is something some claim to be very revelatory or revelationary or something.
A book?
Book? No.
Anything to do with the internets?
Does it begin with P?
Internetty? No.
P-begun? No.
Science Fictiony?
Sciffy? No.
Mineral stone?
Mineral stone? Yes.
Related to the arts?
Arty? Yes, for a reasonably broad definition of "arts".
A statue?
Statue? No. (abstract, remember)
A pillar of some kind?
A monument?
Pillar? No. (abstract, remember)
Monument? No. (abstract, remember)
Between a Rock and a Hard Place?
Is the animal connection human?
Hard rock? No.
Human animal? Yes.
Is it a painting?
A specific human?
e.g. The Iron Chancellor
Specific human? Yes, but be careful how you interpret that answer.
Err....is it a painting?
Oops
Repainting? No. (abstract, remember)
The Theory of Evolution?
Talking about an evolution? No.
Related to a craft?
Crafty? No.
The Man in the Moon?
Mr. Moonlight? No.
Is it a title (e.g president of blahland)?
Religiousy, faithy ?
Is the human a single named real person
(Now, how many questions is that?)
Lady? No.
Madonna? No.
Single named real person? Yes, yes, yes and no.
Perhaps I should punctuate that less ambiguously as: yes; yes; yes and no.
A fictionalised representation based on a real person?
A character in literature?
Fictionalised representation based on real person? Yes.
Based on a novel? No.
Political?
You say you'll change the constitution? No.
Is it associated wih a specific country?
Know where land? No.
I should qualify that last answer. It is probably associated with a particular country but I don't think those associations are particularly relevant or useful.
Give us a clue
A little help
It was getting lonely in this game without you; I thought you were all leaving. I've already peppered clues throughout my last few answers, being for the benefit of you all. Really, I thought you were all getting better at these, but now I don't think you are going to work it out for another fifteen years.
John Bull?
Is 2024 significant?
Some connection with popular beat combo The Beatles?
John, Paul, George and Ringo
Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds?
Such a lovely audience
John Bull? Er, no.
Is 2024 significant? I dunno, Projoy. Will you still be sending me a valentine?
Beatly? The audience would applaud this preternatural leap of deductive logic, but they are all too distracted by something shiny.
LitSwD? Yes! Phil gets the psychedelic baton.
A hint of lurking, but I think I did ask a question earlier.

Let us proceed with ANIMAL

The obvious:
Human?
[Dujon] Human? YES
Male?
[Rosie] Male? YES
A male human. That reduces the chances so:
Is this a male human who lives or lived?
[Dujon] Extant or extinct? YES
Alive?
[Rosie] Alive? NO
Was he alive some time in the 20th century?
[Raak] Alive during 20th century? YES
A political figure?
[Rosie] Political figure? NO
Your answer to Rosie's and Raak's questions does indeed raise other buts and ifs:
Was this man a scientist?
[Dujon] A scientist? NO
A writer?
Alive in the year 2001?
[Software] A writer? NO
[CdM] Alive in 2001? NO
A celebrity?
[Software] A celebrity? Hmmmm....if you mean "a famous person" then YES. But if you mean someone who seeks fame then NO.
A performer of any kind?
Alive in 1900?
[Rosie] Performer? NO
[GIII] Alive in 1900? NO
Famous largely for a single thing (is a single event rather than a whole career)?
[CdM] Famous for a single event? NO
A novelist or playwright (either)?
[Rosie] Novelist/Playwright? Neither
Someone who became accidentally famous?
[Software] Became famous accidentally? Tricky...probably YES *some interest from an intelligent audience*
Someone who was naturally reclusive?
Is there a sporting connection?
An academic?
Corpuschristitrimble.
[GIII] Naturally reclusive? I think I'll go for YES, although there could be some debate on "naturally".
[CdM] Sporting? NO
[Rosie] Academic? NO
A songwriter?
A Nobel Laureate?
[Rosie] A songwriter? NO
[Dujon] A Nobel Laureate? NO
A public servant?
[Rosie] Public servant? NO
An actor?
[GIII] An actor? NO
Some who makes things?
[Rosie] Makes things? NO
Did he live to more than fifty years old?
[CdM] Lived > 50yrs? NO
A soldier?
Were cyanide and an apple involved in this man's death?
[Rosie] A soldier? NO
[Dujon] Cyanide and an apple? NO

I'm tempted to give a clue, but I don't think it's needed just yet.

Did he give his name to something known by people of all ages?
[Rosie] Gave his name to something? NO
Eddie "the Eagle" Edwards?
grasping at straws
Notorious?
[Software] The Eagle? NO (no sporting connection)
[CdM] Notorious? YES *hearty applause*
Did he disappear?
A serial killer?
Criminal?
[GIII] Disappear? NO
[CdM] Serial Killer? YES *Even heartier applause*
[Projoy] Criminal? YES
British?
Hannibal the Cannibal?
[GIII] British? NO
[irach] Hannibal? NO
Did this man 'operate' from a shack somewhere in the U.S. of A.?
Mack the Knife?
[Dujon] Various questions asked, but I'm guessing that what you want to know is that the person in question is from the USA.
[Rosie] Mack the Knife? NO, it's a real person, as previously established.
The Boston Strangler?
[Software] Boston Strangler? NO
This shouldn't really take long, now that we've established that it's a real American serial killer, who lived in died in under 50 years, some time between 1901 and 2000.
A curious aside: no-one was ever arrested, charged or convicted of the "Boston Strangler" murders, and criminal theorists now believe that more than one person was involved.
Thanks Phil. That narrows it down to a hundred or so.
Fried?
That should narrow it down considerably.
Son of Sam?
Aka David Berkowitz
[IS,P!] Fried? If you mean did he fry his victims, then NO. If you mean was he executed on the electric chair, then also NO.
[INJ] Son of Sam? NO
Died of natural causes?
[Phil] Bollocks. I was sure it was Ted Bundy.
[IS,P!] Natural causes? NO
Was this 'gentleman's' fate (read death) brought about by a fellow prison inmate?
[Dujon] Done in by a fellow lag? YES *Intense applause*
Jeffrey Dahmer?
who I looked up last night on google, and have since been regretting ever reading about.
[Projoy] J. Dahmer? CORRECT! I thought that would go quicker, as he was the first serial killer that sprung to my mind. Not a terribly nice chap, but I do find the US police's attitude to their inept, racist, homophobic officers rather disgraceful and distasteful. Anyway, I hand over a baton made of nothing ghastly, thankfully.
So, Jeffrey Dahmer, then. Not exactly a name on everyone's lips. What proportion of the people in this country have ever 'eard of the bugger? The square root of a mouse's ear'ole, at a generous estimate. What on earth is the point of all this? There are better things to do than ferret around websites looking for the name, amongs hundreds, of American serial killers. The answer should be in one's head, if the spirit of the original game is to be followed. This game is a waste of time.
Yes but
As often happens, I find myself broadly in agreement with Rosie’s viewpoint, though not with his way of expressing it or conclusion. I lose interest in this game the moment it becomes evident that I’m going to have to start searching the web for the answer. I know others take the view that doing so is not unreasonable given the fact that this is an online game, so I won’t stop playing. However, if I get in again, I won’t select answers that I wouldn’t expect a good proportion of participants to know about.
Having said all that, I had heard of Jeffrey Dahmer, although it was only passive knowledge and I doubt if I would ever have dragged the name up without googling.
Over to Projoy
[INJ/Rosie] I apologise. I thought Jeffrey Dahmer was as well known as, say, Peter Sutcliffe, Myra Hindley, Harold Shipman et al. I didn't expect anyone to need to search the web to find the answer. It appears that I know a dangerously disproportionate amount about serial killers, and I did not intend that one to be so hard. My thought process was "Umm...what to do? I think I'll make it simple by just doing a person. Who shall I do? How about someone infamous rather than famous. Oh, I know...Jeffrey Dahmer." I even had a mental image of his photo in my head. Soz!
[Phil] You are obviously the person to have on one's pub quiz team - or are you the one who sets them?
Magnanimity
(Phil) A generous apology. The thing is that it is very frustrating, having scratched one's head throughout over what the answer could be, to find that you could never have got it in the first place. It's not as if I lack general knowledge, or was born, er, yesterday. On with the show, then.
Hm.
Well, I certainly had heard of Jeffrey Dahmer. I only resorted to google to get the fact about his being killed by another prisoner (which I didn't know). I certainly think of him as sufficiently infamous to be on the tip of people's tongues.

That said, I'm one of those who's happy to google and isn't disappointed to discover the answer was something I couldn't have guessed. For then I learn something new I did not know before and my life is just that bit brighter... and sometimes I still get to win the round despite only pretending to have known all along about the obscure answer. :-)

Anyway, my turn. This is something players may or may not have in mind already. ABSTRACT
Murder? ;-)
[Software] Both, actually - I write a quiz every week for the pub, so I tend to have a scant knowledge of a wide range of not terribly useful subjects.
Spring?
[Phil] And when dey met, it wuz... NO
[Rosie] Grass is riz? NO
To do with endings?
[Raak] Terminates here? NO
Homophobia?
Just a thought.
[Dujon] Filthy Prancing Shirtlifters? NO
A phrase or saying?
Connected with the arts?
[Phil] No apology required - my comment read as more critical than I intended. I was trying to agree with Rosie's general point rather than criticising your choice of subject, which may well have met my criteria for reasonableness. Casting my mind back, some of my subjects were probably not justifiable by those criteria anyway.
[Software] Linguistic trope? NO
[INJ] Artful? NO (only very tangentially and unhelpfully)
Scientific?
I know we keep having the same discussions over and over again in the morniverse. It may be one of its defining features. Still, this one is a more than a bit tiresome, because the discussion really is identical each time. Someone (usually Rosie, to be honest) complains that the chosen subject was unsuitable because they hadn't heard of it, and they conjecture that most others have not heard of it either. Someone else (often me, to be honest :-) ) observes that there is no requirement for this game to follow the "spirit of the original game", because this game is on the internets, where we have search engines. Can we just agree to disagree on this one, and accept that people have different standards for what makes a reasonable/good subject?

I'd add two points. First, I think Rosie may have actually misjudged Dahmer's notoriety. I certainly knew of him, and I suspect the majority here have heard of him as well (which probably says something good about Rosie and bad about the rest of us, come to think of it). Second, this is an international community, so I don't think the trivia of "this country" should be privileged: in the global scheme of things, I expect that Dahmer is much better known than Sutcliffe, Shipman or Hindley.
Specific to a single culture?
[CdM] Point taken - and I think my lack of knowledge about Dahmer probably reflects on me (I do tend to avoid that sort of story). That said; to me, googling to get the answer feels like cheating.
A human concept?
I'd never heard of him but I did Google-up 5 US serial killers wiped out in jail. I do, however, suspect that Shipman and Hindley are much better known this side of the pond.
[CdM] Scientific? IN BROAD TERMS
[INJ] Specific to a single culture? NO
[Software] A human concept? YES *some discontented muttering from epistemologists*
Mathematical?
[INJ] To be clear, if something can't be guessed with good questioning and a little googling, then I too would judge it a bad subject. I gave up on my experiment of using randomly generated topics from Wikipedia because they too often failed that test (an Estonian province comes to mind...).
[Software] Well, for some definitions of "this side" and "pond", yes. Very possibly not for my current definitions of those terms. Which was my point.
[CdM] Numbery? NO
Learning?
Could we please cease to comment on the previous challenge? Thanks.
Connectivity?
[Dujon] Learning? NO *a ripple of interest in the audience*
[Rosie] Connectivity? NO
Medical?
[Chalky] Medical? KIND OF *a couple of claps from the audience*
An idea?
[SW] An idea? YES, a sort of idea.
Related somehow to the discussions raised by the previous topic?
Sorry Dujon!
[Biggsy] Related to the Internet vs. Rosie's general knowledge, and which is better debate? Thankfully, NO.
Hm. Rosie's General Knowledge and The Internet. They're both rather marvellous bases for games... but which is better? There's only one way to find out!
Something to do with mental processes?
[Rosie] Mental processes? YES! *applause*
Would this have a direct relationship to the lore of the Australian Aborigine?
Risk aversion?
[Dujon] Dreamtime? NO
[Rosie] Risk aversion? NO
Is the answer a term for the analysis of certain mental processes?
A Freudian slip?
Memory?
[Rosie] Term for Analysis? NO
[irach] Saying one thing but meaning a mother? NO
[Phil] Memory? YES! But that's not the whole answer *muchos applausos*
Genetic memory?
[Dujon] Twisted to fit? NO
Nostalgia?
Projoy, you know perfectly well that my stockings are always seamless or straight. ;-)
[Dujon] Nostalgia? CLOSE! *"ooooh" from audience, and collective intake of breath, causing momentary decompression and fainting spells*
Long-term memory?
[Phil] Long-term? NO a couple of applaus.
Collective memory?
[Software] Collective? NO.
Folk memory?
[CdM] Recollections of The Seekers? NO
Is this a one-word answer?
[Chalky] Monolexical? NO. The word "memory" is on the card with one other word + an article.
A Recovered Memory?
Distant memory?
...Should have read "A Distant Memory?
A false memory
IIRC
[Rosie] A recovered memory? NOT QUITE, but you're practically treading on its tail now.
[irach] Distant memory? NO.
[Software] A false memory? YES! That is the exact answer I started with on the card... or at least... I think it was.
You know, I could have sworn I put a line under that last move.
I find myself winning again. That's a bummer, now I'll have to think of something. Wait there, I'll be back in a jiffy.
[Projoy] I was awake all last night trying to remember the proper word for memory loss...I ended up with insomnia...
I am obviously completely out of kilter with you lot, having never heard of the phrase 'false memory'...
;-)
[Chalky] Don't worry, you're in kilter with me...I'd never heard of it before either. Actually, you might want to worry, on reflection.
[Phil] Not even in the phrase "false memory syndrome" (a frequently occuring concept in crime stories!)
I'm fairly sure I've heard of false memory....fairly sure....
I knew it at one time - or did I?
[Projoy] No. Not until I looked it up - I don't read much any more, alas :-(
Got it!
Abstract with Animal, Vegetable and Mineral connections.
"An Iron hand in a velvet glove"?
A religious icon of some sort or other?
Software, you really must realize that this is a family friendly site and that the word 'vegetable' should never have any less prominence than the words 'meat' and 'three'. I bet you hate Brussels sprouts, cabbage and cauliflower too. ;-)
Animal human?
(Duj) And so do I. I'd rather chew on a baby toad.
This game?
[Irach] Saw? NO
[Duj] Iconic? NO
[Rosie] Manly? YES
[Phil] Morniverse? NO
An invention?
Related to athletic pursuits?
[Rosie] I love vegies, Brussels Sprouts in particular.
[Rosie] Genius? NOish
[Duj] Humping? NO
An activity?
IT-related?
Including software.
[INJ] moving? NO
[Rosie] Me related? NO - audience mermers
Someone involved in the theoritcal construction of what we now know as a computer?
[Duj] Virtual Babbage? NO.
Does the animal lend its name to this?
Related to the Arts?
(defined as widely as you like)
Does what some animals do lend its name to this?
Does it begin with a P?
** Back from London conference **
[Rosie] Animal cracker? NO
[Duj] Beastly habits? In a loose kind of way, YES
[ISP] P? NO, not a one.
Is this a physical process?
[Rosie] A process? NO
[ISP] a slight update, there is actually a word beginning with P in the phrase
Is it a single specific mineral?
And my previous question as well please - (Arty?)
[INJ] Arty? NO; Specific mineral? NO
Would this be a mariner's term?
[Duj] A term? YES! but not a mariners
specific to a profession or trade?
[INJ] Trade or Profession oriented? Well, in a way, YES!
Would this be a verancular expression - such as 'taking the piss'?
[Duj] Mickey? NO. Hint: This is a 3 word phrase very much in the news at present.
Pigs might swim?
The Credit Crunch
Someone had to say it
[INJ] Cash shortage? NO. Not the words on the card but on the right track.
It's terribly, terribly quiet in here, Software. Perhaps all are awaiting the answer to my last?
[Duj] Swine fever? NO. [I've been on holiday :o)]
Popeye Eats Spinach?
This one was 'set' on 24th March - 7 flippin weeks ago!
[Softers] Bearing the above in mind - is your clue/hint still valid?
Is it related to the world financial situation?
[Chalks] Bluto? NO! (Welcome back, Chalky. Yes, it is still valid)
[INJ] Money, money, money? YES!
To do with MPs' expenses?
Simply gotta be.
sub-prime mortgages?
[Rosie] I think this clue pre-dates the breaking of that scandal.
[Rosie] Parliamentary rip-offs? NO. INJ has it in a nutshell, this game has been like the Mouse Trap.
[INJ] Toxic debt? NO. much less specific to the current times
Is the word "recession" on the card?
[Projoy]Lack of business confidence? NO.
To do with a healthy economy?
[Projoy] Boyancy? YES! actually can cut both ways but essentially correct
Inflation?
(it probably says something about my age that I associate inflation with economic health)
[Projoy] Bulging cost? YES Remember 3 words on the card !! have we made this a private game? ;o)
Any reference to bubbles?
Retail Price Index?
The housing boom?
Ding!

Passes the baton over to Chalks. Nice to see you back and in fine form!

[Softers] Thanks mate :-) Delighted and all that.
However, is this a poisoned chalice/baton I be picking up? I really don't want to set a new one unless I know for sure that all interested parties are going to play nicely and in a regular manner. [In otherwords: I'm not sure if I can sustain a chairpersonship for 9+ weeks - which is what you had to do]
Patience is a virtue ...
or so it's oft said. Just dive in the deep end and let it flow. I'm sure some people will play.
Oka-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-ay. I shall keep it simple

A N I M A L
Alive?
[Projoy] Alive? YES
Human?
[Graham III] Human? YES
Man?
An entertainer?
Promises to play nicely.
British?
That's m'girl :o)
[Kim] Man? YES
[Rosie] Entertainer? YES
[Software] British? YES
Does he work mainly on television?
[Raak] Television? YES
Involved in panel games?
6 consecutive YES's must be near a record.
[Rosie] Panel gamer? YES
7 yes's!
On "Have I Got News For You"?
Does he speak fluent Khosa?
[Raak] HIGNFY? At some point - YES
[CdM] Fluent Khosa [Xhosa?] That's two questions. Please re-submit your question and play nicely from here on in.

:)
Has he been chairman of HIGNFY?
very well -- Does he speak?
And, yes, Xhosa seems to be the much more common spelling, though both are in use
keeping it simple
[Rosie] Chairman of HIGNFY? NO
[CdM] Does he speak? YES
A comedian?
(CdM) But can you speak it without causing yourself grave injury? If so, you should have no problem with Machynlleth.
[Rosie] A comedian? YES - amongst other things
A chat show host?
Paul Merton?
Stephen Fry?
He does everything else, so why shouldn't he be the answer to this as well?
Richard E Grant?
Alistair McGowan?
Begins with a P?
"...all interested parties are going to play nicely and in a regular manner..." check
keeping it very simple
INJ is correct!
So I don't have to reply to all the other attempts. Even yours, Tuj :)

It gives me enormous oodles of delicious pleasure to hand the baton over to a deserving winner - ImNotJohn
That's more like it
Has the blessed Mr F never been a guest chairman of HIGNFY? Seems unlikely.
Anyway, the next one is Mineral
FeS2?
Because it begins with P
[Rosie] I can make a passably good attempt at Macheelinneth. Remember, I am half-Welsh. :-)
[CdM] Fool's gold? - NO
A manufactured object?
[Raak] Manufactured? - YES
Mineral = metal?
Well done Chalky! It must be your female wiles that can encourage such a swift result ;o)
A portable device?
(CdM) Nice one. :-) I believe you, BTW.
Rock?
[INJ - Unlikely but true. In this forum, I would never post a reply without checking the facts first -- you are all way too canny :)
Here is a Wiki quote: "In April 2003, three-time guest panellist Stephen Fry announced that he was boycotting the show following the sacking of Angus Deayton. Fry described Deayton's disposal as "greasy, miserable, British and pathetic"."]
[Software] Metallic? - NO
[Rosie] Portable? - NO some chuckles in the audience
[Chalky] - Rocky? - YES [Re SF - Actually, now you remind me, I do vaguely remember that.]
A portaloo?
hmmm
[Raak] Portable, partly metallic structure with no rock in it? - NO
A tunnel?
(Chalky) Fry was right, even if Deayton is not everybody's cup of tea.
Related to fire but not necessarily fired?
Artistic?
[Rosie] Tunnel? - NO
[Dujon] Flambé? - NO
[CdM] Artistic? - NO (some murmurs in the audience)
Found in the UK?
[Software] UK-located? - NO
Is this a specific individual object?
[Raak] Specific individual object? - YES
The Great Wall of China?
The Colluseum?
100% rock?
[Rosie] Mah Jong setup? - NO
[Software] Colosseum? - NO
[CdM] The rock, the whole rock and nothing but the rock? - YES (technically I don't know that, but don't worry)
Is it a work of sculpture?
Does it have a specific purpose?
Rock of Gibralta?
A rather large carving?
homing in
[Raak] Sculpture? - YES
[CdM] Specific purpose? - It may have had, but I don't know it
[Chalky] Herculean Pillar? - NO
[Dujon] Large Carving? - YES (Applause)
The Sphinx?
The riddle is solved
We have a winner! The Sphinx it is.

The baton is passed inscrutably to Software.

Oh, no. Not me again! Hope it doesn't take 6 weeks this time!
Let me think ...

Ah, I know!

Abstract with Animal, Vegetable and Mineral connections.

Animal connection human?
The sign that swings outside Phil's pub?
Connected with the arts?
[Rosie] Human? - YES
[Duj] Hostelry? - NO
[IMJ} Arty-Farty? - YES
Theatrical?
Musical?
Pictorial?
Narrative?
Topical?
Human connection a single individual?
[CdM] Luvvies? - YES
[Rosie] Bandy? - NO
[Raak] Talky? - NO (well, maybe a bit)
[Duj] Newsey? - YES (in the UK at least)
[INJ] Loner? - YES
On television?
Is The Answer the title of a play?
[Projoy] Play - Not a play exactly but YESish
[Raak] TV? -YES
Does the name of the loner appear as part or all of the title?
The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin?
[CdM] see below -
[Rosie] Boing! Spot on!

Discretely hands the baton over to Rosie!

[Rosie] Good luck putting that baton back together. :-)
(CdM) That's TNT for you.

This one is MINERAL, sort of. Should be fairly easy.

Mineral = stone?
Tangible?
(Softers) - Stone? - No, not as we recognise it.
(CdM) - Tangible - *audience hilarity* I wouldn't try.
Lava?
Salt?
Raak - Not lava.
Sierra Mike - Salty? Ha-Harrr! Not loikely, me dearie.
Related to nuclear fission?
Dujon - NO, not fission.
Is it deep underground?
Extraterrestrial?
Raak - NO, nowhere on the Tube.
(Softers) - YES, most certainly. *audience applause*
Pluto?
(Raak) - NO, not little Pluto.
Related to the sun?
(INJ) - Sun-related? Just about, but indirectly.
Within the solar system?
(Raak) - NO, not within the solar system.
An extra-solar planet?
(Raak) - NO, not an extra-solar planet.
An expansion of some kind?
Without the solar system?
A star, or collection of stars?
Inter-stellar dust clouds?
(Dujon) - *cruel laughter from know-alls in audience* - Not a bit of it.
(CdM) - YES, not within city limits.
(INJ) - YES, in a way. (to one of your two questions, you naughty boy).
(Software) - Space fog? - NO.
A neutron star?
(Raak)- NO, not a neutron star, but *audience applause*
A black hole?
The event horizon?
A White Dwarf?
[Rosie] No, just 1 question, to be followed up, depending on the answer.
(INJ) NO, far too big :-).
(Software) V bad luck, but don't stand too close to it because it's RAAK's BLACK HOLE, if you see what I mean. Awesome deductive powers, sir. Have a newly-repaired baton.

That was a bit quick. Next time it'll be a particular steam engine. *evil grin*

ANIMAL.
Human?
Yes, human.
Male?
Living?
Fictional?
Male? Could be.
Living? When it exists, it is living.
Fictional? Can be.
Someone defined by their job?
Jobsworth? No.
Juvenile as opposed to adult?
Could be either.
Communicates by speaking?
Is this person known by a figurative reference?
Someone defined by their relationship to other people?
[Bigsmith] Could speak, but not relevant.
[Rosie] No figurative reference.
[INJ] To other people? No.
Someone noted for an achievement?
Does the Animal occupy a titular position?
[Rosie] Not an achievement.
[Software] Not entitled.
Everyone seems to be assuming that this is a single person.
A dwarf?
Not a dwarf.
A gathering for a particular event?
A group of people dedicated to a cause (e.g. a club)?
[Rosie] *applause!* Yes, a gathering for an event.
[Dujon] Supporting a tiddlywinks team? No.
A demonstration?
[Projoy] more applause! Not a demonstration.
A flash mob?
An audience?
[Software] Quite the opposite, for...
[CdM] A flash mob it is. A sudden crowd of naked unicyclists appear and hand you their batons.
That was unexpected. OK, MINERAL
Metallic (mainly or wholly)?
Metallic? Largely, yes.
Man-made?
Man-made? Yes.
An individual thing?
Individual thing? Not sure what you mean. The answer on the card is a single named item, but there are many of them in existence. Or, to put it another way, the first word on the card is an indefinite article.
Small, i.e. pocketable?
An electrical implement?
Pocketable? No.
Electrical? Yes.
An expression of a collection?
Expression of a collection? No. A single named item, as noted above.
High-tech?
High-tech? There are probably high-tech incarnations of this, but the answer has to be no.
A domestic item?
Domestic? Yes
From the pre-electronics age, e.g. electric kettle?
An electric iron?
Pre-electronic? Yes.
Iron? No.
A gardening tool?
Gardening? No.
Curling iron?
A coil of some kind?
A kitchen appliance?
Curling iron? No.
A coil? It contains a coil, yes.
Kitchen appliance? Yes.
A timer?
Used in food or drink preparation?
Does it begin with K?
Lurking
Electric hot plate?
A toaster?
A toaster is the correct answer! Sadly, no one asked the traditional size question. *hands Raak a baton, scarcely warm on one side and blackened and charred on the other*
Oh, did I forget it was on? Never mind, the blackened bits are the best!

ANIMAL with VEGETABLE and ABSTRACT connections.

Animal human?
Human? Yes.
currently alive?
Can be alive or dead.
I suspect people will begin this one with assumptions that will take a long time to overcome.
Schrödinger as role reversal?
Er, what? No.
A single named individual?
Not a single named individual.
Connected with the arts?
A population?
(Raak) If Schrödinger rather than his cat had been in the box it would be intrinsically impossible to know whether he was alive or dead, thus meeting one of the requirements. Just being a bit flippant.
Is this a person referred to in a common description (e.g. 'carrot top')?
[irach] Not arty.
[Dujon] Not a type of person.
A part of a person?
[INJ] *applause!* Yes! A part of a person.
Cauliflower Ear?
Shameless lurker's guess. Hope it's wrong
A gender-specific feature?
Although I actually reckon Chalky's right - it's what I'd thought of, but I was waiting my turn.
Figurative reference?
[Chalky] Your wish is granted. Not a cauliflower ear.
[INJ] Yes, gender-specific.
[Rosie] Yes, figurative.
A bushy beard?
[INJ] Not a bushy beard.
Adam's apple?
Assuming male.
[Rosie] Yes, the Adam's apple. One fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil handed over.
Wahay. Well done Rosie.
(Chalky) Thanks.

Now I've got to do bit of thinking - thinks - Ah, yes - It's ABSTRACT, with ANIMAL connections.
Nothing whatsoever to do with steam engines.

Animal human?
Welsh Language?
Anything to do with the weather?
Artistic connections?
A wolf in sheep's clothing?
Softers - YES, human.
(Chalky) Nage.
(Raak) NO, not weather-related.
(INJ) NO artistic connections.
(irach) NO disguised ferocity.
Is the human element male?
(irach) - Could be either sex.
A stereotype of some sort?
(Dujon) Douse the barbie and I'll tell you, mate.:-) Not a stereotype.
An expression?
(Softers) - NO, not an expression.
Related to emotions?
Fictional?
(INJ) Emotions are only very occasionally associated with this, so short answer, NO.
(Raak) - Fictional? - Can be, but basically NO.
A particular type of human being?
An action?
(Software) - NO, no particular type.
(INJ) - NO, not an action.
I have an idea
(Dujon) - Forget it; it's not that.
Specific to a particular culture?
A type of behaviour?
(INJ) - Culture-specific? - *some audience murmurs* - NO, not really.
(Software) - NO, not a type of behaviour.
Begins with a P?
(Tuj) Pinitial? - Sorry, NO.

As this seems to be a little slow I'll say that the Words on the Card are the indefinite article plus one other, and that the answer is exceedingly commonplace.

A Place?
(Chalky) - NO, not a place.
More than one human involved?
Is there a visible component?
(Software) - YES, more than one human.
(INJ) - Visible? - Straightforward answer is NO, though in some circumstances there may be.
To do with the radio?
Sporting connection?
(Raak) - Nothing to do with the radio (or television).
(CdM) - Play up, Wanderers? - NO.
A queue?
(Softers) - NO, not a queue.
A human interaction?
(INJ) - Human interaction? NO, nothing so complicated.
A thought?
Is there a technological connection?
(Softers) - A thought? - NO.
(INJ) - Nothing to do with technology.
Associated with a particular part of the anatomy?
You've got dirty minds, all of you.
(CdM) - To do with any of your bits, rude or otherwise? - Mmm, can be, but not normally.
Is it in the Morniverse?
Connected with language?
(Softers) - This is almost entirely absent from the Morniverse.
(INJ) - Connected with language? - NO.
Common sense?
(CdM) - That which "is almost entirely absent from the Morniverse"? - NO.
A number of people grouped together for a common purpose?
(INJ) - Purposeful gathering? - NO.

Is it time for the gentlest of hints?

A round?
It feels as if someone just needs to ask the right question and we'll home in quickly, but I'm struggling now.
(INJ) - What's yours? - NO, not this time.
Everyone is associated with/acquires/posseses The Answer.
Personal contact?
(Software) - Face-to-face? - NO.
An ego?
(Dujon) - An ego - NO, nothing so abstruse.
Sense of humour?
(Software) - NO, not a sense of humour.
As this is so slow I'll say that the answer is prosaic, and not a characteristic.
A soul?
(Phil) - NO, nothing so nebulous.
a type of utterance?
(INJ) - NO, not any type of utterance or any other type of action.
I've checked back for any possibly misleading answers I may have given but there aren't any. Please, someone, ask the right question. Any further hint on my part would probably enable someone to get the answer almost immediately.
When you say "everyone is associated with/acquires/possesses The Answer", does "everyone" include the dead?
Is it studied?
(CdM) YES - this includes the dead but not the very, very long dead in most cultures.
(Graham III) - Studied? YES, but the answer itself is not a study.
A name?
(Phil) - YES, a name. Getting very warm. *audience stubs its fags out and returns*
A surname?
Does the answer relate to an autopsy?
Sorry, Mr Belshaw, too late because THE WINNER IS MR JONES OF LEICESTER! A surname it is. Well done, Phil; carry on.
Bit of a lurker's victory, but it came from very careful analysis. "almost entirely absent from the Morniverse" was the biggest indicator.

So, next up is ABSTRACT with animal and vegetable connections

Drunkenness? ...with all due respects...
[Rosie] How very dare you! NO, not drunkenness :-)
The tale of "Jack and the Beanstalk"?
[irach] Fee fie fo fum? NO
Animal = human?
[Rosie] Nice one. I'm now trying to think of how many surnames do show up in the Morniverse. Off the top of my head I can think of 3.5.
Anything to do with pubs?
(CdM) Surnames - ImNotJohn, PaulWay, Simons Mith possibly? Not Herr Bratsche, despite appearances.
[CdM] Human association? YES
[Rosie] To do with pubs? NO
Artistic connections?
[INJ] Arty? NO
Begins with a P?
[Tuj] P? NO
A tool?
A feature of the natural world?
Specific vegetable?
[Rosie] That was my list (PW=0.5), together with parslow.com.
Culturally specific?
[surnames] Do you want to add another 20% for JLE - or is that just getting silly?
[Dujon] A tool? NO
[Rosie] Feature of the natural world? NO
[CdM] Specific vegetable? YES
[INJ] Culturally specific? I think that's a YES
Is/are the human(s) real rather than fictional?
[CdM] Real humans? YES
Connected with food?
And then there was the contibutor whose real name was Terence Ulysses Anorak.
[INJ] Food-related? NO
Let's not forget Mr Wild Pants or Suzy Creamcheese
A phrase or saying?
(CdM) Yes, I'd forgotten the landlord.
[Rosie] Phrase or saying? Inasmuch as the words on the card are well-known, it's a phrase, but not in the sense that I think you meant. Therefore, NO.
A figurative meaning?
Single real human?
[INJ] It's quite a coincidence, when you think about it, that we have both the gentleman you mention and Terence Ulysses Jacket here in the morniverse.
[Rosie] Figurative? NO
[CdM] Single real human? NO
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord