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
*audience sits up, expectantly*
[Knobbly] You are actually quite close. this is a plane crash, however no electrolysis and not into the sea. Sadly no-one got out fine, or at all. I am looking for the name by which the plane crash is referred to. Oh, and no 737. There was fire, and oxygen masks did not drop, but the oxygen generator (for the masks) is the 'other' reaction.
Ah, ValuJet Flight 592
*Audience goes wild*
YES! I hand over this slightly charred baton.
Doh
Didn't think of the fact that I'd have to think of one...
I would like a go, though. It's very quiet here over the weekend, so I'll think of one before the end of tomorrow *subsides into thoughtful silence*
Ok, this is hopefully not a 4 week one...
Animal
Go!
Human?
[Raak] No.
A single individual?
[Raak] Yes.
Recently deceased?
Female?
Knut?
European?
In captivity?
Mammal?
Forget my last question - I hadn't read back carefully enough.
So much for my AVMA debut
[Dujon]Yes.
[GL] No.
[irach] Yes.
[INJ,CdM,INJ]Moot.
*Sporadic audience applause for irach for being too clever*
Actually, when I thought of it it wasn't very easy as he hadn't been news for years. How was I to know he'd go and die and make the papers again?
Thanks, Knobbly, but someone else will need to start the next one in my place. I am going to be away at a conference the next five days, and may not be able to log into mc5 as frequently as would be necessary to keep the game progressing.
I think Knobbly should have another go!
I wonder whether the choice of Knut was a massive coincidence, or whether Knobbly actually saw/heard some reference to Knut's death without being consciously aware of the fact.
To be honest, I also think knobbly should have another go, although I will admit that my original categorising of my one was flawed, but I was having trouble fitting it successfully into one main box.
Well, ok. This may not be very difficult, but it probably won't be in the news tomorrow.
This is an Animal. Let the guessing commence.
Human?
[INJ] No.
4 legs?
[Software]Yes, one in each corner.
A single individual?
[GL] An individual? No. Although there's only one in the picture in my head it could be any of them.
A deer of some kind?
Normally regarded as edible by humans?
Mammal?
Found wild in the UK?
[Dujon] Deer me, no.
[Rosie] Not normally considered edible.
[INJ] Mammal? Yes. *small ripple of applause*
[Raak] In UK? No.
A bear of any sort?
[Raak] No. I cant bear the tension. Oh dear. I apologise profusely and will hence just answer simply.
Bigger than a toaster?
[Raak]Larger than a toaster? Yes.
Kept as a pet? (By normal people)
[Rosie] No.
Extant?
Hoofed?
A Shetland Pony?
Thelwell cartoons come to mind.
[Raak] Extant - NO. Shouldn't be long now. *More sustained applause*
[INJ] Hooves, yes.
[Software] Not a pony.
An extinct species of horse?
A woolly Mammoth?
[Raak] Not a horse. Although distantly related I think there are closer extant relatives.
[FGZ] No, not a woolly mammoth.
Of the genus Bos, like an aurochs or wisent?
[irach] Bos? No.
Pyrenean Ibex ?
A litoptern?
[irach] Ibex? No
[Raak]Litoptern - No
An extinct camel or llama relative?
A brontothere?
[irach] Not a camelid.
[Raak]Nor a member of the Brontotheriidae, neither.
Rhinoceros-like?
[irach] Well, as you asked a subjective question I was going to say no, because I don't think it is; but I asked an impartial observer and they said it was, so - Rhinoceros-like? YES. *applause*
Stegosaurus?
An Irish Elk?
Unicorn?
[Rosie, INJ, Software] Thrice no.
A dinosaur of some kind?
Died out in the last hundred thousand years?
[GL, Rosie] Hoofed mammal!
[INJ] Less than 0.1 Mya? NO
Coelodonta or Stephanorhinus?
split hooves?
According to wikipedia we're down to a choice of about 220 possibles now ;-)
[FGZ] Neither of them.
[INJ] Is it a member of the order Artiodactyla? - No.
Does it have an ordinary English name?
Unlike "liptotern", "brontothere", or "madeupopodeaceae".
[Raak] It does not, to my knowledge, have a common name. Maybe we can give it one once it has been guessed.
Borissiakia?
Just cos I like the name
Just to confirm - you have answered that this is hoofed and does not have split hooves - I have to assume that means it has a single hoof like a horse, not claws or any other multi-part foot like a deer or elephant.
I notice that I automatically write 'hoofed', but 'hooves' - I'll have to follow that up, though I expect both will be acceptable.
[INJ] Not Borissiakia.
[INJ again] Yes, it does; although I'm getting a bit lost in hoof types. For one thing a deer is a hoofed mammal.
Of the family Brontotheriidae?
[FGZ] No, it still isn't.
Of the family Artiodactyls?
Does it have the letter string 'hipp' in its name?
(re deer: Yes, but a deer, like a cow, has split hooves.)
If you could still eat one, would it be kosher?
I don't think the answer will be particularly edifying, I just want to see you try to work it out :)
[GL] Artiodactyla? NO. Keep going, we're almost out of incorrect orders...
[INJ] No, the syllable 'hipp' appears nowhere in the binomial name, nor in the rest of its taxonomic classification.
[Jim] No, because it doesn't have cloven hooves (see above). That wasn't too complicated.
Of the order Perissodactyla?
[INJ] YES. Indeed an odd-toed ungulate.
One of the "rhino-like" amynodonts such as Gigantamynodon, Metamynodon , or Cadurcodon ?
[irach] Not Amynodontidae.
And when I searched for it the Popular Search Engine tried to change it to 'Amy - no, don't!' (Punctuation mine, three words its.)
*wishes you lot would speak English*
Are you all googling like crazy in order to ask questions with words that no-one uses in daily parlance? Or are you actually *experts* in this field? Whatever - clearly this game is not for me.
(Spangle) I agree. For some time this game has irritated the poo out of me and although I may contribute early on I usually drop out if it becomes clear the answer is some arcane piece of knowledge that very few people have. If it's not at the fingertips of a well-educated person (and all of us are that) then it's inappropriate. In the '50's this game was played live and the answers were always things that anyone would know of. This gives much scope for ingenuity without getting anorakky.
In the past I have threatened to retaliate (in the unlikely event that I would ever win) with a Steam Engine. Just a Steam Engine? Dear me, no - a big one. A Big Steam Engine? Come on - be serious, this one is Quite Big but not Very Big. So it's a 4-6-0, then? Yes. Not just any old 4-6-0; there were loads of them, but a Great Western 4-6-0. A Great Western 4-6-0, then? Oh, get a grip; there were several different classes. This one is a "Hall Class". OK, a Great Western "Hall Class" 4-6-0, then? Yes. Now guess which one. It's no. 7921,
Hidden text which is my current desktop, having taken a picture of it myself in 1959
, and one of 330.
Isn't that clever? This game is for 8 - 12 year olds and a complete f****** timewaster.
A quagga?
[Spangle, Rosie if they look in here again] I chose what I thought was a moderately well known extinct mammal after my living mammal was guessed in less than a day. It does say in the instructions that a search engine is useful, but I notice that further up the page, the items are a lot more general knowledge. Maybe a return to things most people have heard of wouldn't be a bad idea.
[Raak] Not a quagga.
I am sorry, I think I may have started this with my more specific topic. It happened to be an old episode of air crash investigation which I was watching at the time.
[spangle, knobbly, FGZ*] This is not a new debate. Rosie has voiced his views on this numerous times, and I don't think it's worth rehashing. But one thought did occur to me, which is that the existence of google might lead us to approach the guessing completely differently. In other words, even if the answer is not really obscure (as perhaps this one isn't; we don't know yet), we might approach it in obscure ways.
[CdM] Ah well, I'm a new player. Relatively. To this game anyway.
Volunteers to return us to our regularly scheduled game?
The reason I object to some of the extreme arcane subjects is that it denies the players the opportunity for general intelligence, which I take to be the ability to put two and two together and see connections, quite independent of any database. Digging around in Google may suit some but it doesn't exactly lift the spirits.
[Rosie] Yes, we know. You are given to saying so pretty much every few weeks.
A type of tapir?
[irach] No type of tapir.
A Chalicothere?
On the grounds that I know I've come across that one.
[INJ]Chalicothere? No.
Free advice - maybe ask another question instead of guess?
I give up
Frankly, although I've quite enjoyed some of the digging, I can't spare the effort to do more. I also have a problem in that I believe your answers have said that this animal has a single hoof (hoofed , not split). My sources state specifically that the only animals with a single hoof are related to horses, but you have said that is not the case.
Raak asked if it was an extinct species of horse. I said it wasn't an extinct species of horse, but distantly related, i.e. it belongs in the order Perissodactyl, like horses do.
There is a very important piece of identifying information that no-one has really tried to ascertain.
[All who haven't drifted off] Here is a roundup of all helpful facts so far known:
A non-human, extinct, quadrupedal mammal, of the order Perissodactyla (odd-toed ungulates). Died out more than 100,000 years ago, rhinoceros-like and larger than a toaster.
With two horn like protuberances?
[irach] Not with two horns.
Baluchitherium?
You said that you had a particular exemplar in mind. Would it help us to try to find out which one? (e.g., skeleton in a museum, illustration in a book...)
Has this creature evre been featured in a film?
[Projoy] YES Baluchitherium.
A prehistoric relative of the rhinoceros, featured in an episode of Walking With Beasts and the largest mammal ever to have existed. I would also have accepted Paraceratherium or Indricotherium. And I honestly thought it was fairly well known.
Is that the answer?
Is this a question?
[Spangle] Yes that is the answer.
Should I have added *Audience go wild, not untinged with relief* for avoidance of doubt?
[GL] Is this a rhetorical question?
Come to think of it, there's a talking baluchitherium in Brian Aldiss' short story "Old Hundreth".
It will not suprise onlookers to know that that was a triumph for Google rather than my prior general knowledge, but I for one am glad to know it now. Getting it to stick in memory will be the challenge...

The next is MINERAL (there might be odd bits of the other two in there, I'm not sure).
A structure?
Unique?
Primarily metal?
manufactured?
A flying start...
[Rosie] A Structure? STRICTLY, YES
[CdM] Unique? YES
[INJ] Primarily metal? YES
[Software] Manufactured? YES
Used in transportation?
Do people go inside it?
Artistic connections?
Found inside Earth's atmosphere?
Gathering speed...
[irach] Transportation? YES *applause*
[Knobbly] People inside? YES
[INJ] Artistic? NOT REALLY
[GL] Earthly? YES
Airborne?
Vickers VC-10 aircraft?
Currently in use?
The London Eye?
Making progress...
[Raak] Airy? NO
[irach] Holy plane? NO
[Rosie] In use? YES [Dujon] Sauron on the South Bank? NO
Great Western 'Hall Class' 4-6-0 number 7921?
Related to te Railways?
[FGZstar] Don't be silly, that's not still in use, it was scrapped in 1963.
[FGZ*] GWHC4607921? NO
[GL] Rail-ated? YES! *applause*
The Chunnel train?
[irach] Pancras to Paris? NON
Is it a 'named' engine or train?
[Duj] Named engine or train? YES
Is it a preserved steam locomotive?
The Flying Scotsman?
Puffing Billy?
[Rosie] A righted steamer? YES
[Raak] The Airborne Jock? NO
[Spangle] Drug-addled William? NO
Stephenson's Rocket?
Is it likely that I am the only Morniverser who has heard of this machine?
I don't know quite why I'm going along with this monumental piss-take. Must be the nice weather.
Union of South Africa?
Is it British?
[Spangle] Stockton to Darlington Express? NO
[Rosie] Something only you'd know? NO (I've heard of it too).
[FGZstar] Union of South Africa? NO *applause*
[GL] British? YES
Sir Nigel Gresley?
Chifferty-chafferty chifferty-chafferty
Does (or did) this locomotive hold the record (steam engines) for rapidity?
Mallard?
(Pursuing the Gresley link (thank you Wikipedia) and going with an engine that I had also heard of.)
[CdM] Not the Mallard, as that is no longer operational
[Dujon] Speed record? YES, this locomotive holds the postwar steam speed record, which means that Rosie, like The Answer, is entirely on track with...
[Rosie] LNER Class A4 4498 Sir Nigel Gresley? YES! *appreciative whistles*.
Please take this single-tracked-section token.
(I probably should have awarded a couple of claps for Flying Scotsman since the other still-operational Class A4, LNER Class A4 4464 Bittern, used to pull that train).
I hate three-cylinder engines; they don't puff properly.
Right; nothing whatsoever to do with railways in any way, shape or form, nevertheless MINERAL
Metallic?
Made of stone/rock?
Found on Earth?
(irach) Metallic? Almost entirely not.
(INJ) Stone or rock? YES, very largely.
(Gusset Login) Found on Earth? YES.
A rock formation?
(Knobbly) - Not a rock formation.
[Rosie] Manufactured or processed in some way?
(Projoy) Manufactured or processed? - YES. *some mild applause*
Related to Transport?
FGZstar - Train and boats and planes - alas, NO
A man-made wall?
(irach) - NO, not a wall.
Unique?
A building?
Artistic connections?
A Welsh slag heap?
;0)
A structure?
(CdM) - Unique? - By no means
(INJ) - Aberfan? Nothing so sad
(Projoy) - A structure? - YES.
Bigger than a washing machine?
You answered Software instead of me
(INJ) - Whoops, sorry about that - a bit early in the "morning". NO artistic connections.
Bigger than a washing machine? NO, at least in two out of three dimensions.
(Raak) A building? NO (though a structure).
Is it hollow?
A monument?
A utilitarian object?
(Projoy) Hollow? NO (very probably).
(Raak) A monument? NO. *a few laughs and a little quickly stifled applause*
(irach) - A utilitarian object? YES, very much so.
Found outdoors rather than indoors?
A Welsh slag heap?
trying again
(Softers) I replied to INJ (qv) instead of to you. Not a slag heap of any nationality.
(irach) Outdoors? YES. *some applause*
Is there just one of this?
(Pj) Unique? NO, not at all. (see reply to CdM)
Do humans typically need to touch this object with their hands and/or feet in the course of its normal use?
An electricity pylon?
Is it typically a part of something bigger?
(irach) - Need to touch the object? NO, but they probably would anyway.
(FGZstar) - An electricity pylon? NO.
(Projoy) - Part of something bigger? - NO, not in a physical sense.
Do all of its type have a specific geometric shape?
Would a typical morniverser own one?
A lighting fixture?
A dry stone wall?
Good to 'see' you in the chair, Rosie ;-)
You say it's a "structure", but does that mean it is made up of separate stone parts?
(irach) - All the same shape? YES, probably; maybe a few exceptions.
(CdM) - Ownership by typical morniverser? Good heavens, NO - we don't nick things, do we?
(Raak) - Lamp-post etc? NO.
(Chalky) - Dry-stone wall? Alas, NO.
Hidden textThey're very kind to the oldies here.

(Projoy) - Built up from stone blocks? - YES. *applause*
Found on/along a roadway?
Is it taller than a washing machine?
A pyramid?
(irach) - On a road? - Almost entirely NO, but theoretically could be at the side of one.
(Projoy) - Taller than a washing machine? - YES, but only a little.
(Softers) Square geezer? NO, nor pyramidal geometrically.
A triangulation pillar?
YESSS! Projoy wins. The actual "words on the card" were Trig Point, but that's the same thing. *Returns the single-line token*. Carry on.
There used to be a couple just down the road from my house where I grew up. OK, that's enough mineral, here's an ABSTRACT, with strong ANIMAL connections
Is the animal connection human?
[irach] Animal connection human? Only at the less significant end.
Animal instinct?
Husbandry?
Worth a punt from 75 yds.
Wayne Rooney?
Does it relate to an individual animal?
There was a trig point in the central strip of a stretch of dual carriageway in Leeds. (Scott Hall Road - may have been displaced by the guided bus route)
[irach] Instinct? NO
[Dujon] Spudhead? NO
[INJ] Individual animal? As in unique or an individual type? NO, if the former.
[Rosie] Husbandry? NO
Does this result in a specific action on the part of the animal?
Is this a song?
Human concept?
[Rosie] Action on the part of the animal? *some laughter* NOT EXACTLY
[Chalky] A song? NO
[Software] Human concept? YES
Related to a work of fiction?
[INJ] Fiction-work-related? NO, not particularly. Might be mentioned in a few.
A disease largely confined to animals?
Is this a phrase (e.g. "he had the strength of a lion")?
[Rosie] Disease? NO
[Dujon] A phrase? YES! *applause*
A pig's ear?
Is the animal domesticated?
A pig in a poke?
Dead as the dodo?
[Software] Porcine Aural Apparatus? NO
[CdM] Domesticated? NO
[irach] Hog in a holdall? NO
[Rosie] Dodo? NO.
Is it a proverb?
Is the referenced animal larger than a badger?
[FGZstar] Proverb? NO
[INJ] >Badger? NO
Is the animal in the phrase a rodent? As in "I smell a rat"?
[irach] Rodent? NO
Is the animal a mammal?
[irach] A mammal? NO
Is the animal dangerous?
Does the animal drink like a fish?
(Guessing) A snake in the grass?
A bird, such as one in the hand or two in the bush?
Playing possum?
[CdM] Dangerous? *laughter* NO
[Gusset Login] Drinking like a fish? NO *applause*
[Dujon] Grass Snake? NO
[irach] Birdies? NO
[Rosie] Marsupial? NO
Memory like a goldfish?
Or have I already asked that?
"Sleeping with the fishes"?
The one that got away?
Fishing for answers...
[INJ] What was that you said seven seconds ago? NO
[irach] Unfortunate Mafioso? NO
[Knobbly] Escapee? NO
Is a particular kind of fish named on the card?
[CdM] Particular fish? NO
Something's fishy here
[irach] Not sure if that's a question, but NO, that's not the phrase on the card.
"A Fish called Wanda"?
Always a bigger fish?
Many more fish in the sea?
A fish out of water?
Who knew there was so much to say about fish?
[irach] Cleese and Curtis? NO
[FGZstarfish] Bigger fish? NO
[Knobbly] A Fish in Sea? NO
[GL] Landed and Gasping? NO
A big fish in small pond?
Does the word 'fish' appear on the card?
[FGZstar] Parish Council Chair? NO
[Dujon] Does the word "fish" appear on the card? I thought you'd never ask... YES.
Fish face?
Begins with P(iscine)?
Fish for compliments?
Now , what fish is it that doesn't drink like a fish, I wonder.
[Software] Fish face? How dare you? Oh, I mean, NO.
[CdM] Pfish? NO
[INJ] Am I answering these questions OK, cos I do worry? (NO)
*the audience applaud INJ's other remark*
Kettle of fish?
Is there a culinary connection?
[irach] Kettle? NO
[INJ] Food? NO, not really.
Shooting fish in a barrel?
[irach] Barrel? NO, but I imagine we'll be scraping the bottom soon...
A Flying fish?
Does the referenced fish have to be dead?
[FGZstar] Flying fish? NO
[INJ] Dead fish? I think most people on hearing this expression would assume a dead fish, so YES. *applause*
(Strictly, its live/dead status isn't actually referenced, so it doesn't have to be)
A slap around the face with a wet fish?
Even better!
[Software] The Answer is, indeed, A slap in the face with a wet fish. Please accept this wet fish as your reward.
D*mn You, Software, you bounder!
I've just logged on with the intention of guessing that exact phrase.
[INJ] Yes, but it could be worse.
What a surprise, such a slippery baton!

Right, this one is Abstract with Animal, Vegetable and Mineral connections.

The anarcho-syndicalist world view?
Making a welcome(?) return.
The Internet?
This game?
Life, the universe, and everything?
The price of food?
[INJ] Back to barter? - NO welcome back BTW
[irach] www? - NO
[Projoy] Infinite loop? - NO
[Raak] Quo vadis? - NO
[Rosie] RPI? - NO
A Human Concept?
[FGZ] Conceptualized? - YES
Cuisine?
Is the Animal reference purely to humans?
Artistic connections?
[irach] Celebrity chefs - NO
[Rosie] Homo Sapiens - YES (almost entirely)
[INJ] Arty-Farty - YES
Related to music?
A straightforward question that requires a Yes or No answer?
[irach] Musical? - No not directly
[Spangle] Michael Miles? - NO
An artistic style, whatever the form of art?
Related to a performance art?
Funny?
[Rosie] Impressionist? - NO
[INJ] Acting? - NO though some say that could be the case
[Pro] Humour? - NO
The mona lisa?
Is this an organisation?
[FGZ] Enigmatic? - NO
[Rosie] Corp? - NO
A title of an artistic work?
[irach] Famous name? - NO
a piece of architecture?
[FGZ] bricks & mortar? - NO
To do with literature?
CGFC?
[Pro] Property boom?- NO
[Spangle] CGFC? - NO probably
[Pro] Sorry wrong answer
literate? - mostly NO
Is the vegetable connection floral?
WTF's CGFC cos im FIIK.
Related to painting?
[irach] petal based? - YES * a good portion of the audience claps *
[Pro] Decoration? (As this question was answered previously I assume you refer to the industrial kind) - NO
[Rosie] me too, in the absence of knowledge the safest answer is always NO
Ikebana or other type of Flower Arrangement?
CGFC
[Rosie] I made it up because I wanted to find a question that wouldn't be changed when SW was giving an answer. The changes are sometimes inaccurate and misleading. They cause a double look-back to ascertain the response to a reasonable question. I really give up. I actually HATE the way that this game is played.
Therefore - I am not going to play it any more. :)
A bridal bouquet?
The Guernsey Battle of Flowers?
(Softers) Yes, I know it's The Donkeys, but it's all I can think of ATM. I like Guernsey, BTW.
(Spangle) Yes, can be a bit annoying, especially if the meaning of the question appears to have been changed. I think one should always assume that it has not, and that the quizmaster is merely indulging himself a little.
The Chelsea flower show?
[Spangle] Sorry, old mate, just doing as Rosie says.
[FGZ] Blushing bridal flowers? - NO audience claps and talks among themselves enthusiastically
[Rosie] Donkey Derby? - NO [Rosie, how could you?]
[Duj] Annual display? - NO
Are the petals confetti?
A buttonhole?
(Could you answer my last question? You seem to have missed answering it)
[Knobby] Confetti - NO not on the card but the audience applauds appreciatively.
[FGZ] Carnation? - NO more loud applause
[irach] Floral display? - NO audience murmurs appreciatively
Horticulture?
[irach] Farmer Giles? - NO
Boutonnière or corsage?
[irach] Formal floral decoration? - NO (see above, not what is on the card) audience claps again
a fleur-de-lis?
Wedding arbour?
A wedding?
[FGZ] FdL? - NO
[irach] Underneath the arches? - NO audience claps hard
[FGZ] Nuptials? - YES! audience wild with anticipation
The royal wedding between Prince William and Catherine Middleton?
Hurrah!
[FGZ] Well done mate, exactly the words on the card!

* passes over the bouquet shaped baton *

Funny that, I had that about 3 turns ago, and dismissed it as too obvious. Anyway, my turn, ABSTRACT, with strong ANIMAL connections, as well as VEGETABLE and MINERAL connections.
A sport?
Animal human?
Sport? No, but will have minor sporting connections
Human? Yes, but will have minor connections to other animals.
A recipe ?
Recipe? No
Butchery?
Butchery? A definite no.
A single specific human?
Specific Human? No
Quadruped ?
Quadruped? As I have said before, the main focus is human, but non-specific. There are minor links to other animals which are quadruped, but it probably won't help with the answer to go into detail on them.
Falls within the remit of the 'fashion' industry?
Fashion? Nope.
Is it an activity?
Connected to the arts?
Activity? No.
Artistic Connections? Yes, but only minor ones.
A phrase or saying?
Phrase or Saying? No
Sporty?
As before, not particularly sporty, but with sporting connections
Is it something everyone does?
Is it an award of some sort?
Related to food or the culinary arts?
Something everyone does? No
An award? No
Food related? Yes, but not in the fine dining sense, and not exclusively involved in food.
Something done with or to meat and/or vegetables?
A licence to do something?
Done to meats or Veg? No (the food connection is not that strong)
Licence to...? No.
A type of behaviour?
Type of behaviour? No
Related to science?
Science Related? No.
Does the answer relate to a 'medical' condition?
Related to a severe medical condition? Not completely, but I'm sure there is some small relation
Related to games?
Related to games? No.
A ritual?
A ritual? No
A dictionary?
A dictionary? No.
Is it an activity?
Does this have a small relation to everything?
Activity? No, but it has activities
Small relationship to everything? Not quite, but is related to a lot of things.
Is this a human creation?
Human Creation? Yes
One particular country/nation
One Country/Nation? No.
So to summarise...
  • Not: a sport, a recipe, butchery, a specific human, a quadruped, fashion, an activity, a phrase or saying, something everyone does, an award, something done with meat/veg, a licence, a type of behaviour, science-related, games, a ritual, a dictionary, an activity (but it has them), a country.
  • Connections to: humans, food.
  • Minor connections to: non-human animals, the arts, sports, severe medical conditions, a lot of things.
  • Is: a human creation.
We haven't got very far, have we?
Related to a belief system?
Always the problem with Abstract - You need to get a category or a link to something physical before you can begin to make proper progress. I generally try to avoid setting Abstracts for those reasons.
Related to a belief system? This is NOT linked to a belief system in any way.
Time for a hint, methinks...
This is multinational, and part of a major convention.
To do with climate change?
Carbon trading?
Global warming? No
Carbon Trading? No
To do with military matters?
An international banking connection?
Military? Not connected to the military, but may become involved in military matters.
International Banking? No
To do with medicine?
Medicine? Has something to do with medicine, but not solely with medicine.
Is the answer based on a televison/film series?
TV/Film? No
Anything to do with the law?
To do with the Law? Sort of. it is specifically protected by it.
A human right or rights?
Human right? No, but it does help to protect them.
Does this have a specific United Nations connection?
Specific UN connection? Not really, but I'm sure there will be some connections... It's sort of a grey area. Sorry I can't be more helpful on that one.
OK then ... does this have a specific connection to some other international organisation (e.g., World Bank, World Trade Organisation, World Health Organisation, International Monetary Fund, etc....)?
Connected to a big international organisation? YES
*Audience Awakens*
Does it have to do with the law?
Oops, was just asked.
Does it have to do with humanitarian action?
Humanitarian? Yes.
*Audience look expectant*
The Red Cross?
Red Cross? Yes
*Audience Screams and goes wild*
It was indeed the Red Cross. I therefore hand you over a red, cross-shaped baton.
Phew. Ok, here's a concrete ANIMAL and VEGETABLE. Oh, and ABSTRACT as well.
A statue of a gorilla eating a banana?
Human animal?
[Projoy] Like this?
[FGZ*] Odd that it took us so long to get something eminently guessable. As INJ said, abstracts can just be very hard to get a handle on. As a minor quibble, if it was "NOT linked to a belief system in any way", we probably wouldn't also have the Red Crescent.
Can it be found in Milton Keynes?
Can anything be found in Milton Keynes? Sorry to be so flippant.
[Projoy] Oooh, close, but...no, nothing like.
[Rosie] Surely, if one waits in Milton Keynes, all the world shall eventually pass by one's front door. Yes! This can be found in Milton Keynes!
[CdM] Not a human animal.
Should the word "concrete" be taken literally?
(Raak) Is MK the new Crewe Station?
No, concrete would be MINERAL.
Musical?
[CdM] I suppose, but as a symbol it is not related to any religion, although there was some speculation by other religions which caused the red crescent and red crystal to come into existence.
[FGZ*] Not musical.
Begins with a P?
[Rosie] ...what do they say about Crewe Station?
[Tuj] Does not begin with a P.
Connected with agriculture?
[Tuj] Dunno. Perhaps they pronounce its name as if it began with a P.
[jim] Agro? Not really.
Connected to Architecture?
Is it man-made?
(Tuj) It is said that if you stand on Crewe Station you will see, either on the platform or through the window of a train, and within a reasonable length of time, the entire population of Britain, not to say the whole world.
[F] No connection to architecture.
[R] Is man-made.
Is it unique?
[Rosie] Thanks! Would've been nice to know when I went there every few weeks a few years ago... but at least that proves I could have been seen there, I guess
[Tuj] Not unique.
Vegetable wood?
[Rosie] Not wood.
Edible?
[CdM} Yes, edible.
Commonly eaten?
[CdM] Commonly eaten.
Eaten raw?
[Software] Not eaten raw.
A confectionary item of some sort?
[jim] I don't think this is classed as confectionary. Or confectionery.
Does it taste sweet?
[CdM re: gorilla] "the recipient will simply love it to pieces." Are they using "love" as a euphemism for "smash"?
A dish?
(I mean as in 'Fish and Chips', not as in a nice piece of Samian Ware)
[Projoy] * a ripple of polite applause* It is sweet.
[INJ] Not a dish.
Honey?
A raspberry ripple of polite applause?
[jim] Not honey (being neither cooked, nor -- apart from the occasional stray bee leg -- animal).
[CdM] Not a raspberry ripple.
Is suet involved?
[INJ] As near as I can judge from Google, this does not generally contain suet.
Jelly on a plate?
[FGZ*] Not jelly on a plate.
Can it be bought in a supermarket as a single item?
[Rosie] That sounds like two questions. Can it be bought in a supermarket? Yes. Does one buy them individually there? No.
Sold ready to eat?
[FGZ*] Ready to eat.
Rice pudding?
[FGZ*] Not rice pudding.
Generally found in the chiller cabinet?
[INJ] Brrrr? No.
Marshmallows?
[Software] Not marshmallows. (I'd class those with confectionery.)
Sweet and sour pork?
(Raak) Wasn't meant to be two questions but whether you could buy a packet of "it" in a supermarket, or anywhere.
Typically sold in a bottle, jar or can?
[Rosie] You can buy a packet of it.
[CdM] ...but not a bottle, jar, or can.
It might be profitable at this point to consider the Abstract part of this.
[Rosie] That was slightly misleading -- you can buy a packet of them.
Involves chocolate in any way? Such as a packet of "Smarties" or "M&Ms" ?
[irach] It can involve chocolate.
A cookie?
Crunchy frog?
[Rosie] Only if it's a crunchy frog cookie, as...
[CdM] ...a cookie it is. nom nom nom.
[Raak] Um, where's the baton? There seems to be just a pile of crumbs here.

This one is MINERAL and VEGETABLE.
Vegetable wood?
Wood? In part, yes.
mineral = metal?
A building?
A garden?
Metal? No.
A building? No.
A garden? No.
Significant amounts of water?
Significant amounts of water? It is going to come down a bit to the definition of "significant", but I think the best answer is No. Despite this, the audience *applauds*.
mineral = stone?
A natural feature?
A desert?
Stone? In large part, Yes
Natural feature? Yes.
Desert? No.
The Grand Canyon?
Grand Canyon? No. (Besides, someone already did that, iirc)
Near the sea?
Near the sea? Yes. *applause*
In Europe?
European? No.
Do rock climbers climb it?
A headland?
The hole in the rock, near Paihia, New Zealand?
Climbing? Yes (parts of it).
Headland? No. *tiny smattering of applause*
Incredibly long-shot guess? No.
A mountain, possibly Everest?
In the Americas?
Is it an island?
Mountain? No.
In the Americas? No.
Island? Yes. *applause*
Rockall?
Long shot.
Rockall? No. (That's in Europe, last I heard)
In Australasia?
Inhabited?
Hawaii?
Java?
Australasian? No.
Inhabited? Yes.
Hawai'i? No.
Java? No.
Has it been in the news recently?
Volcanic?
Bigger than an Arran?
Tristan de Cuhna?
Newsworthy? Not that I am aware of.
Volcanic? No.
Arranometricity? Smaller than an Arran.
Tristan de Cunha? No.
Tropical?
Fernando Po
?
Tropical? Yes.
Fernando Po
? No
.
Isolated, i.e. not part of an archipelago?
Isolated? No.
A British Overseas Territory?
BOT? No.
In the Indian Ocean?
Bikini Atoll?
In the Indian Ocean? As so often happens, seemingly easy questions end up being harder than I expect. But, based on my reading of Wikipedia, the best answer is Yes. Not to be cryptic about it, it is in a body of water with a separate name, but which is usually considered to be part of the Indian Ocean.
Bikini? No.
Bay of Bengal?
Bay of Bengal? No.
Is it an independent country?
South China Sea?
Al Hallaniyah?
One of the Maldives?
Independent country? No.
South China Sea? No. (That's part of the Pacific.)
Al Hallaniyah? No.
One of the Maldives? No.
I'll just clarify one thing: this island is part of an archipelago by the standard definition, which is pretty broad -- that is, it is part of a group of islands. But focusing on well-known archipelagos is unlikely to be helpful. (My first reaction when I read Rosie's archipelago was that this island is not part of an archipelago, and it was only when I checked the definition of the word that I decided that it in fact is.)
In the Arabian Sea?
Réunion?
Part of Africa?
Arabian? No.
Réunion? No.
African? No.
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
Andaman and Nicobar Islands? No (Wikipedia tells me they are in the Bay of Bengal).
Sentosa?
Interestingly, Wikipedia shows the Indian Ocean going as far as the Malay peninsula and therefore including my guess. However that does also mean that several hundred Indonesian islands are also possibles.
Sentosa? No.
My reading of wikipedia is, roughly speaking, that there is one pretty broad definition of ocean, whereby pretty much all salt water is included in one ocean or another. Within these oceans there are then various pieces of water that have their own names -- example, the Bay of Bengal is part of the Indian Ocean. But there is also a narrower definition, in which the oceans are basically all the unnamed left over bits.
In the East Indies?
Excuse me for having 2 goes in a row - but at least it's not a guess at the answer.
That was my understanding as well, but I hadn't really thought about the implications in that part of the world, if you're going to say that you go directly from the Indian to the Pacific ocean.
East Indian? No.
Part of Australia?
Komodo?
Australian? No.
Komodo? No.
Not sure why it is proving so hard to narrow this down, other than the fact that people are doing a fair amount of guessing of places that have already been ruled out, and people are jumping perhaps too soon to guessing particular places.

What you know: This is an inhabited non-volcanic tropical island, one of a group, smaller than the Isle of Arran, not recently in the news. Rock climbing occurs there, and it does not have significant amounts of water on it.

It is located in a named body of water that is typically understood to be in the Indian Ocean. (As long as we are taking the broad definition of ocean there is no ambiguity about which ocean it is in.)

It is not Sentosa, Réunion, Al Hallaniyah, Komodo, Java, one of the Maldives, or one of the Andaman and Nicobar islands. It is not in the Arabian Sea or the Bay of Bengal. It is not African or Australasian, or in the East Indies. It is not a British Overseas Territory.

I will tell you for free that I think you are unlikely simply to guess it without more information. I don't expect everyone here to have heard of it (it may fail the Rosie test) but I would expect some or several people to have done so. It does have a couple of claims to fame. And there was a reason why I chose it as a subject; it's not just some random small island.
Is this island inhabited by natives of the territory (as opposed to resident scientists)?
Does it have a name in English?
Phuket Island?
Was it affected by a tsunami a few years ago?
Inhabited by natives? I'd guess that most of the inhabitants are natives of the country of which this island is part, but very few would have been born on the island itself. There are also certainly some foreign residents, but I doubt if there are many scientists.
Name in English? Not exactly sure what you mean, but I think the best answer is No. (It can certainly be referred to using the English language, and in that sense the answer is yes, but I presume you mean something more than that.)
Phuket? No. *applause* (As an example to clarify my previous answer, I would say that "Phuket" is not a name in English as I understand the term; it is simply an English phonetic representation of the island's name in Thai.)
Tsunami-affected? Yes. *applause*
In the Andaman Sea?
Though if the answer is yes then we may need a clarification on the meaning of 'East Indies'.
Andaman Sea? Yes. My bad, sorry. I thought I knew the meaning of East Indies and didn't even bother to check. Turns out there's been a gap in my geographical knowledge all my life.
Yes, wikipedia's definition was wider than I expected, but since you'd already quoted wikipedia I assumed you were going with it. BTW I think I have a very good candidate for the answer, but I'll wait a couple of hours or until someone else has had a go.
OK, I'm feeling a bit less stupid now
According to Britannica online's entry on East Indies:

"Historically, the term East Indies is loosely applied to any of three contexts. The most restrictive and best-known use is as a synonym for the islands that now constitute the Republic of Indonesia (formerly known as the Netherlands Indies, or Dutch East Indies); these include the Greater Sunda Islands (Borneo, Celebes, Java, and Sumatra), the Lesser Sunda Islands (stretching eastward from Bali to Timor), the Moluccas, and New Guinea (including Papua New Guinea on the eastern half of the island). In a second, larger sense, East Indies refers to the Malay Archipelago (including the Philippines), which now is more commonly called insular (or archipelagic) Southeast Asia. Finally, in its broadest context, the term East Indies encompasses the foregoing plus all of mainland Southeast Asia and India."

By this account, islands in the Andaman sea would be included in the second definition or the third, depending in turn on the exact meaning of "Malay Archipelago", but not in the first.

On the other hand, that discussion also suggests that perhaps I should not have had reservations about including this island in an archipelago.
Were you there, either during or shortly after the tsunami?
Was I there? No. I have never been there.
Koh Phi Phi?
No, it begins with ผ
เกาะ ผีผี (pronounced Pee Pee) is indeed the correct answer. Somehow, Tuj never shows up when he is really needed. (Phi Phi actually refers to a small group of islands, but when answering I had in mind the largest, Phi Phi Don.)

One บะถน handed over.
kob kun krab. I couldn't remember the name, but I searched for 'beach movie location' as I remembered about the fuss over bringing in palm trees etc.

This next one is ANIMAL with Abstract connections

Human Animal?
[GL] Human? - YES
Alive?
[Rosie] Still with us? - NO
English-speaking? (Back when he or she was still alive enough to speak, of course)
[CdM] Anglophone? - NO
Male?
[irach] The stronger sex? - YES
Infamous?
European?
[FGZstar] Infamy, infamy? - NO
[CdM] European? - NO
Real person based on whom a movie was made?
Alive at any time during the 20th century?
[irach] Movie subject? - NO
[CdM] Around in C20? - NO
Biblical figure?
A national leader?
A single individual?
(We've been assuming that, but haven't confirmed it)
[irach] Biblical? - NO
[Rosie] National Leader? - Not as easy to answer as you'd think, as it depends on the definition of both words. I'll say NO(ish)
[CdM] individual? - YES
A state governor?
Begins with P?
[CdM] For shame! Mea culpa
Of African racial descent?
(Within the last three hundred years, I mean, since I believe we all are in another sense).
[FGZstar] gubernatorial? - NO
[Tuj] Pstarting? - NO
[Projoy] Out of Africa? - NO
From the East Indies?
(proudly flaunting my new-found knowledge)
[CdM] East Indiaman? - NO (by any definition)
Alive in the C19th?
Sonam Gyatso?
[Projoy] 19th century? - YES
[CdM] Dalai Lama(III)? - NO
From North America?
Does the abstract part of the answer on the card result from this gentleman lending his name to something or somewhere?
Spanish-speaking?
[Projoy] Unlikely (though not impossible) given that he was not an Anglophone. We're probably down to S. America, Russia or China.
[INJ] The first or the third, depending on which Wikipedia page you go to...
[Projoy] N America? - NO
[Dujon] Eponym? - NO (but don't give up on the abstract element - I reckon you need it as well)
[CdM] Hispanophone? - NO
BTW There was a slight murmur of appreciation in the audience at CdM's previous question. Also, to clarify, I don't know that the male in question spoke no English or Spanish, but it's unlikely and they certainly weren't his first language.
Hannibal?
Have you read any of the previous answers?
[FGZstar] Hannibal? - NO (of course there could be a Hannibal who didn't come from Africa and was alive in the 19th Century)
Associated with a specific religion?
[CdM] Mm. Lots of non-Anglophones in Mexico, I'd've thought, in the C19th, not to mention now, and I daresay some indigenous North American people in the C19th might not have spoken English...
[Projoy] A specific religion? - YES *applause*
From Asia?
[Projoy] Asian? - YES
[CdM et al] An apology is in order from me this time. I have had another look at Wikipedia and by the longest stretch of the definition with the longest stretch he could be described as from the East Indies - just not by any use of the term I've ever come across. Can we agree going forward that we'll only use the term for the Malay/Indonesia/Borneo/Phillipines etc. archipelagos?
From China (C19 borders)?
[Projoy] Chinese? - NO
Do you know the name of this individual?
[Projoy] I didn't mean unlikely in the sense that it was unlikely you'd be able to find a non-Anglophone in N. America. I meant unlikely that the solution to this AVMA would be North American and non-Anglopohone. If you see what I mean.
[CdM] Do I know his name? - YES, and I would accept that - but that's not what's on the card.
from Asia Minor?
[Projoy] Little Asia? - NO
From the Middle East?
[Projoy] Middle Eastern? - NO (Between you & CdM you've straddled the target very well)
From India?
[FGZstar] From India? - Depends - Not from somewhere that is currently in India.
From what is now Pakistan?
Well, that was a bit painful
[Projoy] Land of the Pure? - YES *relieved applause*
Gotama Siddhattha?
[GL] Sid Arthur? - NO (wrong country and 2400 years too early)
Dalip Singh Sukerchakia (aka The Last Maharajah)?
(yes, I looked him up)
Actually, he probably spoke English, didn't he? Hm...
Ranjit Singh, Lion of the Punjab?
(aka "Napoleon of the East", to boot)
[Projoy] Last Maharajah? - NO
Lion of the Punjab? - NO
You're right, it's quite plausible that the person in question had some English given where and when he lived, but I don't know that and it wouldn't be helpful to know in any way I can think of.
P.S. Don't forget the Abstract - there's more to it than just a nickname.
Is this person popularly supposed to be divine in some way?
And I'm not talking about a fabulous hairdo.
[Projoy] Divinity? - NO but *some applause*
Imran Khan?
Is The Answer the title of a person or an office they would hold?
Hm. I must admit I'm even drawing a blank with Wikipedia on this one.
Does the abstract element link to some present-day phrase or saying?
[Software] Imran Khan - NO
[Projoy] Titular? - YES *another small ripple of applause*
[CdM] Phrase or saying? - NO
I think you're only a couple of questions away - in fact, if you came up with the answer I think you would have a pretty good idea that it was correct. The religious element was important, but I had no idea it existed when I chose the subject and I expect it's not really going to help much except as confirmation. The abstract link is probably the key.
Does the title take the form "The X of X"?
(Or rather, the X of Y, I suppose)
[Projoy] 'X of Y'? - YES *the audience starts getting coats and bags together*
Is the "Y" a specific city, such as Lahore?
[Projoy] Why a city? - NO, not a city
Not the Nawab of Pataudi, shurely?
[Rosie] The Noob? - NO (Assuming you mean Iftikir or Mansoor Ali Khan, the cricketers, then it's wrong century & country again)
Is the "Y" the name of a "nation" - e.g. a body of people even if not necessarily a recognised state?
[Projoy] Nation/people - Let me put it this way. It's the name of a geographical area and, by extension, the people who inhabit it. Whether they constituted a 'nation' or 'people' at the time is less clear.
Is the area Punjab?
[Projoy] - Punjab? NO
BTW it would be a bit of a blow if someone else were to jump in and get it now, wouldn't it? (This the last time I'll say it, but - Abstract?)
OK - the abstract connection... to do with a published work of fiction?
[Projoy] Printed Page? - YES *audience perk up again*
Fiction? - Category Error (If forced, I would say Yes, but that's misleading)
Is this person mentioned in a religious work?
The Akond of Swat, as in Edward Lear's "Who or which or why or what, Is the Akond of Swat"...?
Well, there you go
After all Projoy's hard work!!!
It is The Akond of Swat (or Akhund, if you prefer) - Muslim Saint and key regional figure on the NW frontier of the late C18 and first half of C19, but much better known these days because of Mr Lear.
The baton passes to irach.
Not kicking myself
It's OK. I hadn't actually heard of the AoS, so probably would have taken me several days more working solo!
Profanity restraint.
Two in succession I haven't heard of. This is so-ooo boring.
[Rosie, all] Constructive suggestion: perhaps when a player sets a new answer, they could email it to Rosie first, and he can confirm he's heard of it before the round commences. That way, there'll be a more level playing field.
This one is ANIMAL.
Human?
Alive?
[Glogin] Yes, human.
[Projoy] Dead as a doornail.
Unique individual?
Female?
[CdM] ? . . . ;)
[Dujon] As opposed to a collection of humans. And also, perhaps, as opposed to an individual defined by his or her role (e.g., 'The British Prime Minister'), so at any moment the answer is an individual, but that individual is not the only person to have held that role. But yes, "specific" rather than "unique" might have been a bit less of a tautological repetition of the same thing.
From a country which has English as one of its official languages?
Died in C20?
[CdM] Yes, a unique named individual.
[Dujon] No, not female.
[FGZ*] No, no English speak.
[Pro :)] Did not die in C20.
Died in C21?
Died in C19?
A political figure?
A deeply religious chap?
[CdM] My aplogies, but I couldn't resist. Your response had me chuckling out loud. Thanks.
European?
[Rosie] Sorry you feel that way about it, but I don't consider one of Edward Lear's best-known poems to be obscure and the Swat valley has been in the news quite a lot in the last few years. The other information about him was new to me.
A renowned thinker?
[Gusset Login] Did not die in C21.
[Projoy] Did not die in C19.
[CdM] A political figure... yes, in a manner of speaking.
[Dujon] As far as I know nothing is really known if or whether the individual was a deeply religious chap or not.
[ImNotJohn] Not European.
[FGZStar] He certainly had a following, but was not specifically known as a philosopher-type renowned thinker.
Primarily known as a warrior?
[ImNotJohn] In some biographical accounts, he is known as a warrrior.
Died after CE1500?
From the Indian subcontinent?
[Projoy] Yes, he died after CE 1500.
[Raak} Not from the Indian subcontinent.
Died before CE1700?
[Projoy] Yes, died before CE 1700
Chinese?
Was he an artist of some sort?
[INJ] Well, the poem was about the fact he knew nothing about him... ;)
[Raak] Not Chinese.
[Tuj] Not an artist.
South American?
So far this man seems to have been singularly unimpressive. Was he Russian?
[Projoy] Not South American.
[Dujon] Not Russian.
The leader of a group of people?
From North America?
(by which I mean everything from the Panama isthmus to Alert)
Begins with P?
From the territory that would later be the USSR?
[ImNotJohn] Yes! The leader of a group of people.
[Projoy} Yes, from North America (the audience sits up, roused from slumber induced by apathy, and now bristles with anticipation).
[Tuj] Does not begin with "P".
[Raak] See the last response to Projoy. Therefore, "Nyet".
Of European ethnicity?
From Mexico?
[Rosie] Not of European ancestry.
[Projoy] Yes. Si, si! Méxicano.
Moctezuma II?
Moctezuma II it is. A baton shaped like an Aztec battle mace, decorated with quetzal feathers is handed over to Projoy!
Koh Phi Phi (potassium hydroxide, half of one plus root five, half of one plus root five), The Akond of Swat, as opposed to the Akond of Chemical Insect Repellant, and Moctezuma II, presumably related to the Retributively Laxative One. You children are all far too clever for me.
[Rosie] Yep, Moctezuma II is better known to many (including me up to a few moments before I made my guess) simply as Montezuma. I daresay irach would have accepted that answer too...
OK, the next is ABSTRACT
The unbearable lightness of being?
The set of things Rosie knows?
Dismay?
Abstractness?
[jim] Lightness? *some audience laughter* NO
[INJ] What Rosie Knew? NO, altho I considered very seriously setting that!
[Phil] Dismay or Datmay? NO
[Raak] A study in abstraction? NO, altho I wish I had thought to set that.
A way of life?
Related to the arts?
Begins with P?
[Knobbly] A way of life? NO
[INJ] Related to the arts? YEAH, SOMEWHAT
[Tuj] Begins with P? YES
(Hypothesis: the discovery of the initial letter always encourages players to start making random guesses much earlier than they otherwise would, resulting in slower actual progress toward the answer. However, drawing players' attention to this hypothetical phenomenon might counteract the effect by nudging them toward persistence with deductive questioning instead of randomly guessing words beginning with P for three days.)
Does it consist of words?
A condition that affects people?
Is it you?
[Raak] Not quite sure how to interpret the question. The Answer obviously consists of [the] words [on the card] but the words making up The Answer don't refer to something that consists of words (e.g. "a phrase") How'd I do?
[!John] A condition? NO
[Tuj] I'm so vain, you bet I think this clue is about me? NO (I've already been an answer in this game, in fact).
Paulo Picasso?
Musical connection?
(I figure I'm allowed a serious question as well.)
Tangible?
[CdM] PP the Painter? NO
[CdM] Music? NO.
[FGZstar] Can be tanged? NO
Related to religion?
Is it a human invention?
Persistence?
[Phil] Religious? NO
[Tuj] A human invention? I WOULD SAY NOT, altho there are arguments either way.
[GL] Persistence? NO :)
Related to mathematics?
Is the answer on the card a single word?
[CdM] Numbery? BARELY
[Tuj] alloneword? There are three words on the card, but there's definitely a one word answer I'd accept.
So, so far, we have tenuous connections to both the arts and mathematics.
Did the Ancient Greeks know about this?
[INJ] Greeks knew? I EXPECT SO, altho I know of no evidence they did.
(Having googled the topic of The Ancient Greeks and The Answer, and discovered it to be an extremely subtle matter, I'd put it another way: The Answer was certainly manifest in Ancient Greece and its existence was unlikely to have been overlooked, but for reasons that will become clear, a straight yes would be a significant oversimplification.)
Would yer average Guardian-reading Surrey pensioner be aware of this?
[Rosie] If you've never heard of this, I simply won't know how much lower it's possible to set the bar in future :P
Related to physics?
[irach] Physics-related? YES, SOMEWHAT
Something to do with light?
[Rosie] Light-related? YES.
Is the word 'rainbow' relevant?
The summer solstice?
[Duj] Rainbow-relevant? YES, to an extent.
[Rosie] Wicker Man weather? NO.
Prism-related?
Polarization of light?
Lightning?
Maxwell's equations?
[CdM] Prism sentence? NOT REALLY
[irach] Pole dancing? NO
[Rosie] Stormy weather? NO
[Raak] Maxwell? NO
Colour-blindness?
Photosynthesis?
Does a particular colour appear on the card? (Pink, purple, puce...)
[Rosie] Color-blindness? *audience applause and cheering* NO
[Knobbly] Sunshine into cells? NO
[CdM] YES!! You have landed right on it. The words on the card are The Color Puce, all of which appear in your question, so I think you win. *hands over a purplish-brown sort of baton*
Well! That was unexpected!
This one is ABSTRACT, with various ANIMAL connections (and more tenuous MINERAL and VEGETABLE connections)
Barbeque?
An activity?
Just in case anyone wondered about the Ancient Greek stuff, the name for the color puce dates back to C18 France, and there's no extant evidence that the Ancient Greeks had a word for it. In fact there seems to be considerable doubt that Ancient Greek words for colors even really map to current concepts of color, with the color words not necessarily describing a shade, but physical properties instead or as well as.
Barbequan? No
Acting Town? No. I doubt that I will be able to keep this theme up for long :-)
A Human Construct?
Made-up Vale? Yes.
Animal sacrifice?
Anything to do with the tube?
(May as well be obvious if no-one else will)
Killingdone? No.
Tubish? Interesting question. The simple answer is No. Nevertheless, there is one connection, highly tangential yet perhaps still significant.
Is the animal connection entirely human?
Human animals? Yes. There are different kinds of animal connections, to various different humans.
To any particular human is there just one type of animal connection?
Types of connection? Let me try to clarify. There are, I would say, three distinct animal connections, each of a rather different kind. Each is a connection to a particular individual or group of individuals. (So I'm not sure I understand the question, but I think the answer is yes.)
Begins with P?
[CdM] Phew! Can't wait for that answer to become clear at the end of this round!
Is this a form of commendation bestowed upon an individual, group of individuals or posthumously?
If that makes sense.
Begins with P? No.
Commmmendation? No.
Is the Tube connection to do with the name of a particular station?
Is it artistic?
Tangential tube connection to particular station? Yes *applause*
Artistic? Um, yes. I suppose. *laughter*
Sorry, I'm traveling right now so internet connection is a bit interrupted
Is the human connection to specific individuals, alive or dead?
The Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick maker? With Baker Street being the tangential Tube connection and representing three different groups of individuals...
Connected with the world of work?
Specific individuals alive or dead? As I said, I am thinking of three connections. One is to a group of specific individuals, all alive to the best of my knowledge. The second is to a single specific individual, alive. The third is to a specific individual who is fictional.
BBC? No. (The tube connection is very specifically to an individual station. It is tangential in the sense that the link between that station and the answer is somewhat indirect. Pursuing that connection might not be the easiest way to the answer, but it is one possible route.)
Work-related? No.
Is it associated with a particular location?
Associated with a particular location? Difficult to answer. In one sense, yes. But in the sense that you probably intend, I think the best answer is No.
Invented within the last 100 years?
Cor, right. Let's muck in.
Invented in last hundred years? Yes (though "invented" is not the usual word).
[Tuj] In response to your prior question, I'll add for free that the reason that it's difficult to answer is that the particular location is -- to the best of my knowledge -- fictional.
Is it associated with television?
[CdM] Very sporting of you, and very conscientiously answered =)
I'm glad someone's still playing!
TV-related? No.
Harry Potter related?
Do any of these people have something in common besides The Answer?
Pottery? No.
Things in common? The group of individuals have in common the fact that they are part of this group of individuals. The specific fictional individual is linked to this group. The specific real individual is, as far as I know, completely unconnected except through The Answer.
Any religious connection?
Science-related?
Is the group of individuals a popular beat combo?
Any connection to sport?
Religious connection? No.
Science-related? No.
Popular beat combo? Yes! *loud applause*
Sporting connection? No.
Is the answer a song title?
Song title? Yes. *applause*
The Diary of Horace Wimp?
Is the fictional human a character named in the song?
Horace Wimp? No.
Fictional human named in the song? Yes. *applause*
Eleanor Rigby?
The rise and fall of someone or other?
The unmourned Ms Rigby? No.
Rise and fall? No.
Incidentally, I seem to have beaten Wikipedia with this one. None the less, I am confident that many people here will know the answer. I am even tentatively confident that Rosie is one of them. :-)
Also incidentally, it occurs to me that, for completeness, I should note that there are a large number of other animal connections, but these are uninteresting and unhelpful in terms of getting to the answer.
My Old Man (who's a dustman)
Tentatively confident that this is not the answer, but may help.
Gorblimey trousers? No. You were warmer with Eleanor Rigby (though not warm enough to get applause, remember)
Mr Postman (please)
Another pot-shot before I start asking serious questions.
Is the fictional person, who is named in the song, male?
Is the character named in the title?
Postman Pat? No.
Fictional person male? No.
Eponymity? Yes.
Mr Tambourine Man?
[Rosie] That would have to be Ms Tambourine Man, so No.
Is the real person named in the song?
Real person named in the song? The name of the real person appears in the song, but not as a reference to the real person.
A song from before 1960?
The Girl from Ipanema?
re - Tambourine Person. It was getting late, even for me.
Mrs Robinson?
Pre-1960? No.
Ipanemanian? No.
Anne Bancroft? No.
A British song?
Let me summarise/recapitulate and answer Rosie's question as I do so.

You are looking for a song, written since 1960. performed by a popular* beat combo. The title of the song includes (or perhaps is) the name of a female fictional person. The song also has a connection to a real person (actually, many real people, but only one is of interest); to clarify my earlier response to INJ, the real person shares a name with the fictional person named in the song.

Now here is some more information for free: Wikipedia informed/reminded me that there are actually quite a few songs with the same or related titles. Some of these songs are better known than the one I have in mind (which is, remember, sufficiently obscure that it is not mentioned in Wikipedia). Of course, finding one of these other songs would be a possible route to the answer. The song that I have in mind is British. The song that I have in mind also has a tangential connection to a particular LU station. A fictional location is named in the song, but I don't think that's helpful.

You are not likely to guess it outright (although that's not impossible). Your best route might be to focus on the real person at this point. Or, if you like, on the LU link. You are also welcome to ask questions about the other songs that share the same title, but I warn you that most of them are not songs that I know.

*It's fair to say it was popular at the time. It's also fair to say it is largely forgotten now, I think.
Nonetheless, is the song from the sixties?
Is the real person still alive?
Taking the suggested route
Song from the sixties? Yes.
Real person still alive? Yes.
(Oh, and two other LU stations are tangentially linked to the LU station that is tangentially linked to the song.)
Is the character referred to by their given name (with or without surname)?
Caroline by the Fortunes?
A Beatles song?
Referred to by given name? Yes.
Caroline? No.
Beatles? No. I remind you that I said that this particular group is largely forgotten.
Does the song title consist of the person's given name and family name and nothing else?
as in 'Eleanor Rigby' or 'Jennifer Eccles'
Is the surname mentioned in the title?
[INJ, Projoy] The song title consists of a given name (which might or might not be a nickname) and nothing else.
A propos of not much, I'm amused that there is a connection (via a rather better known performer) that I can draw between Software's guess and the answer. But that on its own is unlikely to be of help to you. If you need a clue later I might elaborate on that.
Lola?
Lola? No. (I really do think it is unlikely you will just guess it)
Was the real person an adult when the song was released?
Real person an adult? Good question. I'm almost certain that the answer is yes.
Is the real person British?
British? Yes.
The real person: renowned as a great beauty at the time of the song?
Great beauty? *audience laughter* Whether the person was a great beauty I have no idea. I'm confident that the person was not widely renowned for the fact.
Was she known mainly for her profession?
Is the person known simply by their first/given name?
Real person known mainly for profession? No. (But the fictional person, perhaps yes.)
Real person known simply by first/given name? The least misleading answer is Yes, though the strict answer is probably No.
Is the real person most famous for being married to or in a relationship with someone substantively famous?
Real person famous for relationship? No. Check your assumptions.
Is the real person the same for every questioner?
So (trying to summarise it for myself). The answer is a song title from the sixties released by a group who are not particularly well-known now (I'm thinking of the stature of The Honeycombs). The title is a woman's given name/nickname . That name is also the name of a real individual also identifiable solely by that single given name (or perhaps more likely, nickname). The real individual is still alive and was probably? an adult when the song was released.
Real person the same for every questioner? Yes. But if you had asked the question a bit differently I might have had to give a very different answer.
And I think your summary is accurate. Don't think I know/remember the Honeycombs (but then I had forgotten the name of the band that sang the answer before I looked it up, even though I remembered several of their songs).
Was the real person we've been talking about famous at all?
Was the real person famous? No. *applause* Now question your other assumptions. :-)
Having googled The Honeycombs, I think INJ has it about right. The group that sang the answer is perhaps a bit better known (although its Wikipedia entry is shorter), but certainly roughly equivalent in stature.
Speaking of The Honeycombs, the first second of this video is worth seeing.
Is the real person only identified by a relationship?
Like 'Grandma'
BTW - Can't look at Youtube from work. This is getting to be more and more of a restriction.
Is this non-famous real person also female?
Real person identified by relationship? No.
Non-famous real person female? No! *applause*
(I'm reasonably confident, by the way, that INJ will know/remember the answer, and I think most Morniversers of my age or older will also know it. I'm less sure about Young Master Projoy and his contemporaries -- they may need to use the google -- although I think there is a good chance that he (they) would at least know another song by the group.)
Rosie?
I can think of 2 60's songs with that title. The one by a group would be The New Vaudeville Band IIRC (not googled)
INJ has it! Rosie by the New Vaudeville Band is the answer on the card. The timeless lyrics, for those of you who have forgotten, began
There's a pub in town called the Rose and Crown
And one day I met Rosie there.
(dadada)
She served my drink with a knowing wink
I knew that I would get somewhere
(dadada)
I heard her whisper she was mine
So we left before closing time

Rosie was on the B-side of Finchley Central. Timeless lyrics:
Finchley Central is two and sixpence from Golders Green on the Northern Line
And on the platform, by the kiosk, that's where you said you'd be mine
There we made a date
For hours I waited
But I'm blowed, you never showed.

However, the NVB were most famous for Winchester Cathedral, a top ten hit in the UK, and number one in the US. I won't bother to reproduce the timeless lyrics. Part of my reason for choosing this answer was the discussion of music over at mcios, where INJ observed that a lot of that 60s music we thought was so great doesn't actually hold up all that well. And yet, and yet...

The link to Software's Caroline guess was through Neil Diamond (Sweet Caroline and Cracklin' Rosie). I will leave it to Rosie himself to tell us if he was a (a) an adult and (b) a great beauty in 1967.

*takes baton made of polyvinylchloride, drills very narrow hole through the center along its entire length, compresses the ends of the cylinder until it is a flat disc of about 17.8 cm diameter, and gives it to INJ*
Rosie, oh Rosie. It's raining when you look the other way.
And again Projoy asks the key question and someone else does a Cavendish on him. I feel almost embarrassed (but not enough to give up my turn).

OK, this one is VEGETABLE

Is it a pea?
Welp, I'm glad the cavalry arrived for that one =)
Edible?
[Tuj] Begins with a 'P' (followed by an 'e' and an 'a')? - NO
[CdM] Comestible? - NO
Is it classed as a tree?
Is it Alive?
Is it unique?
[Knobbly] Tree-y? - YES *applause*
[GLogin] Alive? - YES
[Tuj] Oneique? - YES
Is it notable for its dimension?
Tane Mahoute?
Notable for other than physical reasons?
(CdM et al) (a) Adult in 1967? I have never been an adult except where it matters. (b) A great beauty? Only two Morniversers, Software and Chalky, know what I really look like. Ask them, while I quietly yet viciously twist their arms. I was a little prettier in 1967 but not much, time having been kind to me.
(INJ) That's the only Rosie I can remember. (Don Partidge). I started work at a perfume factory as a chemist in Jan 67 and immediately got called Rosie by the lads in the factory, from my first name, and hence the monicker. That having been established, when the song came out in 1968 they started singing it at me. All quite aimiable, despite my white coat and their boiler suits since I was quite young (25). I don't remember Rosie by the New Vaudeville Band BTW.
A form of grass?
The Royal Oak at Boscobel?
This is going quickly
[Tuj] - monster bonsai? - NO
[FGZStar] Lord of the Forest? - NO
[Rosie] Other than Physically famous? - Hmmm, I could argue that either way depending on what you mean by physical reasons. Let's go for NOish.
[Dujon] Bamboo-ey? - NO
[CdM] The original Royal Oak? - NO
Famous due to location?
In Europe?
Would Robin Hood have strong connections?
[FGZstar] Famous for site? - NO
[CdM] European? - NO
[Dujon] Majorly Hoodie? - NO (though that's where I started before deciding on the actual answer)
Superlative in any respect?
(physically, I mean)
Is this a specific tree-y object (as opposed to a unique family or grouping)?
[Projoy] x-est? - YES *prolonged applause*
[Dujon] Specific tree? - YES
Apologies for infrequent responses - heavy decorating weekend, and discovered the wireless router only works properly when it's in the room we've stripped out.
Is it notable for its age?
"Methuselah" the bristlecone pine from California?
We have a winner
Projoy has it - it is Methuselah - the current oldest known living tree (I would have accepted that as an answer). After his efforts in the last few, I regard that as well-deserved.
One slightly bristly baton passed on
Timber!
Phew. Glad to have finally felled one after so long (altho as with Akond of Swat, I wouldn't have gotten "Rosie" very quickly, if at all, using the deductive method. Still enjoyed both tho).

This one is VEGETABLE and/or ABSTRACT (and topical). Probably a bit of mineral involved too, but unlikely to help.
The Great Pumpkin?
Is it largely paper?
The Sunny Sun on Sunday?
[Raak] Pumpkin? NO
[Tuj] Largely paper? YES, typically.
[CdM] The Even Newers of the World? NO
Does it have words on it?
A book?
[Raak] Has words on? YES *applause*
[INJ] A book? NO
A printed apology?
:o)
Related to the phone hacking scandal?
[Software] Desperate PR exercise? NO
[Raak] Phone-hacking related? YES
A letter of resignation?
[Raak] YES! and please accept mine from the chairmanship. *hands over envelope*
MINERAL.
Unique?
Stone?
[jim] Unique.
[Projoy] Not stone.
Man made?
[K] Man made.
An alloy?
The Eiffel Tower?
Unique?
Oops. Already answered. Located in Europe?
The Golden Gate bridge?
[D] Not an alloy.
[GL] Not the Eiffel Tower.
[P] Mmm...slightly tricky. No, not in Europe.
[i] Not the Golden Gate.
Has it ever been in Europe?
[P] (nerdish nit-picking mode) tricky... (common sense mode) No, it's never been in Europe.
Bigger than a house by volume?
In the Middle East?
[P] Bigger than a small house, maybe not bigger than a large one.
[CdM] (common sense mode) Not in the Middle East.
Is it a single, discrete structure (that has been made up of mostly the same molecules for the length of its existence)?
On the surface of the earth?
Begins with P?
[P] Roughly, yes, a single discrete structure.
[INJ] *applause!* Not at the moment.
[Tuj] Does not begin with P.
Space shuttle Atlantis?
A non-geostationary manmade satellite?
[P] no, because...
[CdM] Atlantis it is. Have this space alloy baton carved out of the scrap metal of our space dreams.
Standing on the shoulders of others' coattails there.
This one should be easier than my last couple, I think. It is VEGETABLE (and I suppose technically MINERAL as well).
Salted potato crisp or chip?
edible?
Smaller than a toaster?
Crispchip? No.
Edible? Yes
Smaller than toaster? Not really a well defined question.
Smaller than a standard two slice toaster?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wahl-Slice-Toaster-Touch-ZX515/dp/B000SZ085Y/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1311252738&sr=8-11
Larger than a toaster in some dimension(s) but smaller in others?
Is it unique?
Does it consist of a single vegetable ingredient?
e.g. Mashed Potato rather than sliced bread
Mineral salt?
Solid?
A single, discrete item?
Is its main purpose to be eaten?
Or is its edibility merely because of material choice?
Liquidy or pureed?
Toaster questions? Still not well-defined.
Unique? No.
Single ingredient? No.
Salty? No (I can't definitively say there is no salt, but it's not what I was thinking of and I have found no mention of it).
Solid? No.
Discrete item? No.
Meant to be eaten? Yes.
Liquid? Yes.
Does it come in different flavours?
Does it come in a variety of sizes?
Different flavours? Yes, at least sort of.
Different sizes? Again, it's a liquid so the question is not really very well-defined. That said, Yes is a reasonable answer.
Could I buy it in a British supermarket?
A glass of something?
Astescbury? Perhaps not every supermarket, but I'm sure you could find it easily.
Glass of something? That's how you'd often encounter it, Yes. <*applause*
Is it (gasp) intoxicating?
Intoxicating? Yes. (No applause because the audience, knowing me, was taking that for granted.)
Old Rosie?
The brand of alcoholic beverage not the (relatively youthful) player of this game.
distilled?
Old Rosie? No.
Distilled? Yes.
A whisky?
Whisky? No. And for free, I'll tell you it is also not a whiskey.
A particular brand of distilled beverage?
Tequila?
Tequila? No. (I think I did that once before, years ago)
A brandy?
amaretto?
A particular brand?
Brandy? No.
Amaretto? Yeeeuuuuch. No.
Particular brand? Oops, sorry, missed that. No.
Invented in Europe?
European? Yes.
Akvavit?
Akvavit/aquavit? No.
Associated with a particular country?
Distilled from a fruit?
Distilled from a grain?
Absinthe?
Rock & Rye?
Associated with a particular country? Yes.
Distilled from fruit? Yes.
Distilled from grain? No.
Absinthe? No. *loud applause*
Sex and drugs and fruit-flavored whiskey? No.
I have a feeling that INJ is going to hit me with a few technical fouls on this one, revolving around certain definitions.
Ouzo?
Ouzo? No. *more applause*
Anis?
Sambuca?
Actually, no, not distilled from a fruit per se. How 'bout pastis?
And it is indeed the one that begins with P -- pastis. The technicalities that I had trouble with were (a) do liqueurs such as pastis (which is technically a liqueur because it has sugar added) that have as their basis a distilled alcohol themselves count as distilled?; and should I have at least given some applause to brandy, given that the broad definition of brandy is alcohol distilled from fruit? It was actually surprisingly hard to find what kind of alcohol typically forms the basis for a pastis, since it is the added herbs etc rather the alcohol that are its defining feature.

One provencale baton handed to Projoy
Gosh, I never knew of such subtleties. I thought they chucked fruit in a bucket, waited till it went off then poured off the juice into bottles...

These last few have gone refreshingly quickly. Here's an attempt at another swift one (famous last words) ABSTRACT
Human construct?
[CdM] HuCo? YEAH, I guess so.
Topical?
[INJ] Topical? NO
Begins with P?
One of the cardinal sins?
[Tuj] P? NO
[cfm] Se7en? NO
Related to current events?
An emotion?
[FGZstar] Currency? NO
[GL] Emotion? NOT REALLY, altho there are connections to emotion.
One word on the card?
A medical condition?
[Tuj] Monolog? NO
[FGZstar] A medical condition? NO *a few laughs*
(PS. While I was unwell a little while ago I passed the time by listing all the answers in this game. This is the 439th clue. When we get to 500, I might post up the details).
Something debunked?
Experienced by the typical morniverser?
Related to the arts?
[cfm] Debunked? NO
[CdM] Experienced by us? HM. Not sure I can give a meaningful answer, and certainly not a helpful one.
[INJ] Arts? YES, there is an arts connection.
Related to a particular colour?
[Proj] I did once list all the outcomes of the Begins-with-P question - so it'd be interesting to see what percentage of subjects actually have begun with P. Also, did you note how many questions it took to determine each answer?
Primarily the performing arts?
[Tuj] Color? NO
[INJ] Performing? NO
[Tuj] I'm quite sad, but not quite that sad! I did take a note of how many days each one took, tho, so that's a rough and ready guide.
Generally positive?
[CdM] +ve? *much audience laughter and some applause* YES, DEFINITELY.
Connected to music?
An award?
[Tuj] Music-y? NO
[INJ] An award? NO *some matey laughter*
A board game?
[Duj] Board Game? NO
Specific to a particular culture?
Primarily confined to electronic media?
[CdM] Culture-specific? NO (altho the artistic connection is)
[INJ] Electronic media? NO
Related to, um, reproduction?
Figuring that the audience is easily amused.
[CdM] Sexy? *audience laughter* NO (only in the most tangential manner, via the artistic connection)
Related to the visual arts?
Painting, photography, etc. as opposed to performing or literary.
[INJ] Visual arts? NO (but it's one of the others you named)
Related to the literary arts?
Oblig.
A particular type of writing?
[Tuj] Yes, that was the next question
[Tuj] Related to literature? YES
[INJ] Particular kind thereof? YES
A specific literary work?
[FGZstar] Related to a specific work? YES
A novel?
[INJ] Related to a novel? YES
Is it the title of said novel?
[Tuj] Eponymous? NO
Comedic?
[Chalky] Is the novel with which The Answer is connected comedic? NO
More from the archives...
(Incidentally, stats fans, I just checked to see if there was any evidence of familial bias in this game and discovered that, while CdM is better at guessing INJ's clues than anyone else, INJ is second to Raak at guessing CdM's.)
Written in the 20th century?
[re INJ] Yes, well, I've known him for longer than he's known me.
Is this a well known phrase or saying which originated in a novel?
[archives stats] I think INJ 'holds back' from guessing CdM's clues to avoid nepotismic accusatories [I made that phrase up] whereas CdM displays no such compunction when guessing INJ's clues.
;-)
[irach] C20 novel? NO
[Chalky] Phrase from a novel? YES! *applause*
It is a truth universally acknowledged that it was the best of times so call me Ishmael?
[Chalky] Maybe I'm related to Raak, and am just unaware of the fact.
[CdM] Three guesses in one question? NO, none of those. *tumultuous applause, nonetheless*
A 19th Century novel?
[irach] C19? YES.
"Happy families are all alike;"
[Chalky] Small version of Olive from On the Buses? NO.
So, an opening sentence, then?
[CdM] Dark and stormy? NO.
Ah. In that case the applause presumably means the author is Austen or Dickens or Melville?
[CdM] Another sneaky three-guesses-in-one question? YES.
"Barkis is willing ..."
... as the audience laughed and applauded the 'is it positive?' question
Dickens?
[Chalky] Barkis? NO
[Tuj] Dickens? YES.
What the Dickens?
From Oliver Twist?
[GL] Shakespeare, Merry Wives, III, ii? NO
[INJ] OT? NO
'something will turn up' as in The Micawber Principle
From A Christmas Carol?
[Chalky] Turn up for the books? NO
[FGZstar] Bah Humbug , coffin-nail, surplus population, God bless us etc.? NO
From a book with the name of a character in the title?
[INJ] Nobody's name in the title.
Incidentally, I am at this moment standing in the room in which Dickens wrote parts of Oliver Twist, but not the work in question. The next room contains the desk at which (it says) Dickens wrote his last words. I assume they mean his last published words.
(There is a continual loop of As Long As He Needs Me sung by Shani Wallis playing upstairs. Classy.)
From one of Dickens' non-fiction works?
[FGZstar] Uncommercial Traveller et al.? NO
Was the book ever made into a film?
[FGZstar] Filmed? YES.
It is a far far better thing that I do?
(figuring that at least counts as positive)
YES! We have a winner. The words on the card are simply A far, far better thing. *tumbrils and drums roll; Projoy hands CdM a knitting needle*
(And to think, we're not even related!)
I knew that one ages ago, but I didn't want to discourage the others by 'guessing' it.
[INJ] Daddy?
Yeah. Me too.
Oh damn, that's let the cat out of the bag.
OK. This is MINERAL with ABSTRACT CONNECTIONS
A discrete object?
The Sword In The Stone?
Discrete object? Discrete Yes, object No.
Previously sized (ex-calibre)? No.
Actually, I am not 100 percent sure if I would call it discrete; it depends on how tight a definition you are applying. It is, however, specific, if that helps.
Involving a gemstone?
Gemmy? No.
Solid?
A geographical feature?
Bigger than an average breadbox?
Begins with P?
Positivity
Solid? Yes.
Geographical feature? In the broad sense of the term, Yes.
Bigger than a breadbox? Yes.
Begins with P? Yes.
A specific region (such as a country or smaller)?
Portsmouth?
Located on land?
Feature of a desert?
Noticing that there's no veg.
Specific region? No.
Portsmouth? No. (Nor Plymouth)
Located on land? Yes.
Desertish? No. (There might be some vegetable as well, depending on the exact interpretation of the words on the card, but any vegetable is inessential and unhelpful. Note again that i am using a fairly broad definition of "geographical feature".
In a specific part of the world?
In a specific part of the world? Yes.
Is it man-made?
Some argue that deserts are man-made, eg Basildon.
In the Americas?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord