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
(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?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord