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 ....
[Projoy] Manufactured - YES [Chalky] Animal/Vegetable? - Either/Or is probably the most helpful, but in both cases that would be predominantly, rather than entirely.
[Chalky] Indoors? - YES [Rosie] Specific part of an animal? - YES (at least for the predominant part) Thinking about my answer to Chalky, the 'predominantly' bit, although true, is probably not helpful. From now on I will ignore the minor elements in my answers unless specifically asked.
[Projoy] Does what it says on the tin? - NO [Raak] Leather? - YES - that is the animal component - at least, that's easily a better answer than No [GLog] A covering? - NO [Rosie] Smellie? - NO
[CdM] Functional? - NO * A few 'tut's from a small minority of the audience* [Chalky] That toaster question - Similar in total volume, depending on the toaster, but differently shaped. [Projoy] A fabric? - NO (though we might get into a discussion of definitions)
[GLogin] Remember: either Animal or Vegetable [Rosie] The Bible? - YES, *Applause* But you have not yet got the words on the card [Projoy] A specific Title? - YES [Raak] Sign here please? - NO
Projoy has it - A/The Gutenberg Bible it is. There were about 180 Gutenberg bibles, about 40 printed on vellum and the rest on paper, giving the either/or.
[INJ] On further thought, I feel like I should change my answer to your adaptation question. As you phrased the question: "A character in literature later adapted for the screen?" the truthful answer is YES, but this isn't a wholly typical case, so check your assumptions.
[Kinrah] You have hit the subject on one of its two heads! It was ZAPHOD BEEBLEBROX, indeed. As you can see, my confusion over the adaptation question arose because of course, while the screen versions followed the book version chronologically, they didn't do so adaptationally, as it were. Plus of course, the character didn't originate in the books.
Over to you, Kinrah. *Hands over a perspex baton shaped like a cricket stump, just before there is the sound of a million billion people saying "Wop"*
I was trying to weigh up whether to go for Zaphod or the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster (which has the potential to be part animal), even though I have just realised [Tuj] ruled that out with his 'P' question. Whee. Now, let's see if I can get the formatting right with ABSTRACT/ANIMAL connections This shouldn't be too difficult.
[Rosie] Intellectual? NO *audience whispers among itself* [INJ] Political? NO [Projoy] Nounal? YES I've also been considering the science question, and much like Projoy, I'm going to do a bit of a U-Turn; YES FOR A GIVEN VALUE OF SCIENCE. I believe it could be called a science by some people.
Sorry about the so long gap - had a LOT of stuff to do over the end of the weekend. [Projoy] Economical? NO [Tuj] Teensy-Weensy? DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU ARE COMPARING IT TO *audience laugh* [Chalky] Just the one? NO [INJ] Mainstream? YES [GL] Why-y? NO [Projoy2] Process? NO *more hushed whispers from audience*
[Projoy] Active? NO [INJ] Move that joystick? NO [Software] Cartoon? NO [Rosie] Doctor, Doctor? STRICTLY NO (There is one connection, but it's so far gone from the standard question bounds that it's also not worth looking into.)
Since this is taking much longer than I anticipated (I really hope it's not because I'm giving the wrong answers) as a sort of first hint here's a roundup of what you do know. Begins with P Given value of science Noun It was invented Audience gave loud applause to Theory It exists It works in both theory and practice Studied in a mainstream environment Also, it seems the audience have changed their mind and decided to give some rather late *loud applause* for 'Process'.
[Rosie] Incompetence rising? NO *audience laugh... then quickly fall silent* [INJ] Businesslike? YES (but in the same way as Theory and Practice) [Software] Filling the time available? NO [Projoy] Intarwebs? NO [Dujon] 3.14? NO-*is deafened by audience applause*
[INJ] Itself and one? NO [Rosie1] Triangular numbers? NO [Rosie2] Quantum mechanics? NO [Projoy1] Square of the Hypotenuse? N- *audience explodes into applause* NO [Projoy2] Pythagoras no greater than two? N- *audience applauds even louder, if that's even possible* NO
[Software] Mathematician Philosophy? NO *a few claps from audience* [Projoy] Ball manifolds? NO [INJ] Something we've yet to hear from Colin Sell? NO *audience ooh quietly*
[Projoy] Shaping the world? YES (Taking the other one as a question as well) [Projoy2] Demonstrating true maths? YES Glad you like it. I still hope that it's not taking this long because I'm answering the questions wrong. Just for another hint though; one of the questions I answered NO to earlier has got something to do with the answer, but I took the question to mean the definite article, as it were, because that's what I suspect it was intended as.
I know it's wrong but I have to get it out of my head. I generally think it's a bad thing to know the first letter. Leads to all kinds of weird guesses.
[Rosie] Surface areas? NO [Software] Maths expression? NO [Projoy] Angle measurer? NO [CdM] Clue in the name? YES *audience applause* [Projoy2] Proving the square? YES *more applause*
[Rosie] Correct, it was indeed a Pythagorean Triple! My confusion with some of the earlier questions arose when trying to work out whether mathematics could be classed as a science or not. But by reaching the correct answer I can rest easy knowing that if any of my answers were wrong, they weren't so wrong as to block out the answer completely.
(I can't resist pointing out that although I had never previously heard of "a Pythagorean triple", I still came quite close to winning that round! Good clues.)
*can't resist pointing out that she has never heard of a Pythagorean Triple and didn't even come close to asking any relevant questions but happily embraces fresh knowledge*
(Projoy, Chalky) Yes, I'd agree it doesn't quite trip off the tongue in the same way that Pythagorean Triangle does though it is a quite genuine mathematical term. BTW, did you know that 3 cubed plus 4 cubed plus 5 cubed equals 6 cubed?
(Softers) Entertainment? - NO, and for some, not in any way whatsoever. (Projoy) Fictional? - NO. You may have been misled by my supplementary to Gusset Login in which I had taken his question to be "Alive and very old?" This person exists.
(Projoy) It can be, and the subject of this AVMA is undoubtedly grateful for the money it generates but he would not be flattered to be called merely an entertainer, unlike say a comedian, who needs an audience above all else.
(Chalky) - YES, not always easy listening, you could say. (Dujon) Someone who hangs around with musicians? - well, actually he does, of course, because PROJOY has it. It's the great DAVE BRUBECK, 89 the other day. Well persisted, Pj. Your go.
[Rosie] I'm not quite sure how to interpret the question. Incidentally, I now realise there should have been some *applause* for your "Mortality" question.
(Pj) penult. question - Yes, it is a bit obscure. I was knackered and not totally sober after a prolonged bout of pub piano-tuning and payment in kind.
[Tuj] Fictional? YES *a single pedantic audience member (probably Breadmaster) clears his throat disapprovingly at this answer, but everyone else ignores him* [Duj] A human construct? YES
Quick and helpful New Year recap, disregarding unhelful byways: This is fictional*, connected with religion, and the audience have reacted positively to "mortality" and negatively to "nativity".* unless you're amazingly pedantic
As I typed my acceptance a flock of cockatoos flew over this my nest. Is it an omen or a red herring? To be honest I don't know how this will work given my/our time difference. Let me think for a short while, please?
Ladies and gentlemens, this is not going to work. The time difference does indeed put up some sort of barrier. Perhaps Projoy might nominate a replacement?
[Dujon] Don't give up on it yet. When CdM returns from his travels he'll be in your time zone, and Rosie operates on Hughestime, which is completely different from anyone else. Perhaps Flerdle needs to take a look in as well.
(INJ) I was just going to say the same thing. HMT has come into its own. I'll ask a question when I get back from the pub and Dujon has finished his breakfast.
[Softers] As in feeble minds? NO [INJ] A bipedal brain? NO [GL] That, my friend, is a jolly good question. My answer must be that the subject exists but at the same time it doesn't. Therefore I am forced to YES [Tuj] The one and only? YES [Chalky] It is well known but it's not, other than by its description, that which you intimate. Ergo NO
I've got to say I'm much better at throwing the odd curveball in than staging an inquisition myself! Maybe I should set my watch to HMT so I know when Rosie's due...
[Tuj] That could well depend on the hours that Rosie's publican keeps combined with the depth of snow and black ice? Invented? Not in the sense of the wheel, the steam engine or the loom, but invented it is. YES
[INJ] à la carte? NO [INJv2] Given the situation I have no objection, ImNotJohn, but it's really up to the other participants. In the sense that it is unique of its kind (although it has competitors in the fame stakes) YES *audience is now stirring and seems to be taking a little more interest* [GL] NO
Ooh heck, you do toss down the odd googly don't you? In itself I would have to answer NO but in practical sense I would be inclined to YES In other words the question is a wee bit too loose to pass a definitive judgment.
[Projoy] I will relent on my previous comment - but only to the extent that someone named it. To find out who did the deed I would need some more research, but I think that the effort would be pointless. *The audience has reverted to its (or their) original attitude - heads up and staring at the roof of the auditorium*
[Projoy] Sorry, I've done it again. A part of a mammalian species? NO CLUE: The animal portion refers to a particular mammal but not to one of its named variations.
[Tuj] Ursine? NO *Every single audience member is now awake* [Kinrah] Join the dots? NO ... BUT *The audience has burst into applause, feet are being stamped on floorboards and a collective breath has been taken*.
[I have instructed the audience to 'tone it down a bit'. As you probably know they do tend to become over excited at times] [Projoy] The dog with a waggly tail? NO [Rosie] A casually recognised pattern of stars? NO *The audience though is murmuring and beginning to look expectant*. [Gusset Login] The ecliptically organised? NO *Audience reaction was a decently loud ripple of applause.* [Projoy] The King of the jungle? NO (see the answer to Kinrah above) [INJ] Within the orbit of Sol? NO
[INJ] Sorry, my answer was looser than my collar. I should have said that it most surely does not orbit Sol, unless you take the sun's influence as the be-all and end-all of the Universe.
[Kinrah] One of the Andromedan look alikes - elliptical, spiral or otherwise? NO *The audience has settled back but still looks interested* [Gusset Login]The equine embodiment of bodylessness? YES Offers a bed, sheets and the subject - plus a stick - to the winner.
[Dujon] Dinosaur's Uncle? NO. [Rosie] Depiction of the living? YES, would be the more helpful answer, though not technically the more accurate. [Dujon II] Rubbing? NO *The audience members, who helped a lot with the last round, begin to return from the bar and retake their seats*
[INJ] The King/Queen? YES To clarify an early answer in light of what is now known, I feel I should point out that although the statue is not stone its pedestal may be.
[Kinrah] - Depiction? - I think 'NO' is the most useful answer, although for some people the answer might well be different. It could be argued both ways.
I wasn't, actually. It just so happened that Simon Hoggart's parliamentary sketch on Thursday mentioned a Heffalump trap, so that brought him to mind. Would Pooh also be vegetable? What's he made of?
I started off thinking about a Teddy Bear (possibly Aloysius), but the 'what is it made of?' question was a bit of a problem, so Pooh was easier as an abstract.
[INJ] Primarily decorative? SEE ABOVE (I said that the most helpful thing is to think of it as functional, but the more strict answer in this particular case might be that it's decorative) [CdM] A single sheet? YES *applause*
(Damn! I was almost sure I had that last one right. I probably would have gotten it right, too, if I had remembered that pound notes weren't circulating any more (something that I knew but had not really absorbed , if you see what I mean).)