#30732
06/01/2001 4:35 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
here are the votes cast for each definition submitted; in the interests of full-disclosure I have included the disqualified submittals. the True Meaning was wrestling or struggling together; strife, conflict, opposition [verbatim from the OED], which made a big comeback in the voting after trailing the early favorites e) and i) -- nice work Bingley and Flatlander! of the players, Fiberbabe and Geoff(?) got it right and additionally, voters jazzo, flatlander and rapunzel also were correct. votes
-----
0 a) used to describe Anglican doctrinal debates...
* b) a wrestling match
1 c) a subcutaneous deposit of collagen
* d) cooperating with someone else in a struggle
4 e) the best possible combination of theatrical lights...
@ f) the staining which occurs on ... clerical collars
4+ g) wrestling or struggling together; strife, etc.
0 h) a group of small sea creatures
4 i) the act of combining dissimilar metals into an alloy
1 j) mourning together; mutual sorrow
1 k) the eruption of archetypes into personal consciousness...
0 l) the act of square-dance calling
*disqualified
@dishonorable mention
+Geoff's questionable vote
I'll try and staighten out the scoring tomorrow, and I'll be posting the definitions for Round 2 as well.
btw, I think I've settled on hogwash™ as the permanent name. (unless I decide to go with bodewash® 8)
|
|
|
#30733
06/01/2001 10:55 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Can we be allowed a minimal sentence of exposition for a definition? This certainly increases the enjoyment and confusion in the UK tv version mentioned elsewhere. And/or a quick resumé of reasons for choosing? (not that *anyone LIU, of course) 
|
|
|
#30734
06/01/2001 11:20 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428 |
Well, my definition (combining metals) obviously went with the "co- = together" premise that many of the definitions followed. Then I was just casting about for a combination process that I didn't know the proper word for, and for some reason the concept of alloys just jumped up and bit me on the (all together now)...brass.
|
|
|
#30735
06/01/2001 11:24 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
...jumped up and bit me on the (all together now)...brass.Ow, Flatlander, that one gave me a distinct pain in the bra- in. 
|
|
|
#30736
06/01/2001 12:22 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 819
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 819 |
+Geoff's questionable vote
Being very easily confused, I need some help understanding why my vote was questionable. Do your rules not allow someone whose submitted definition is close to correct to vote? Is that the crux of it?
|
|
|
#30737
06/01/2001 1:30 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
hmmm... let me answer your question with a question, Geoff (there's a word for this that escapes me at the moment; but I digress). armed with the information that one had flirted¹ with the True Meaning, for which definition would a reasonable person have voted? then, having answered that to your own satisfaction, ask yourself how much credit you'd give a person for voting correctly?
as I said, I consulted the A&C Gaming Rules, and the Scoring Annex being sufficiently vague, I have decided to award² you one half (½) [0.5] additional points. {now what'll I do when Dr. Bill complains about unequal treatment... wait, I know!}
¹for the voting public, here is Geoff's submission: It derives from the Latin "luctare," "to wrestle," hence a colluctation is a wrestling match.
²let me also just note (he fretted) that this "award" could just as easily have gone negative; but hey, I'm a charitable guy.
|
|
|
#30738
06/01/2001 1:44 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
mav meddles Can we be allowed a minimal sentence of exposition for a definition? This certainly increases the enjoyment and confusion in the UK tv version mentioned elsewhere. And/or a quick resumé of reasons for choosing? (not that *anyone LIU, of course)
good thought, mav. I, of course, did look it up and I thought that the Latin root was sufficiently abstruse so as to provide the desired obscurantism (which turns out to have been not quite the case). but wait'll you guys (no sexism intended) see the def'ns for round 2 -- I think they're really good (and there's definitely more)!
|
|
|
#30739
06/01/2001 1:49 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Don't your scoring plans 4 & 5 come close to Geoff's close-guessing? 4. Three points are awarded to any player who submits a definition which is similar or very close to the correct
meaning.
5. If two or more players submit a definition per rule 4 (in the judgment of the moderator), the round will be thrown out with no points scored (or the moderator can disqualify obvious attempts to sabotage the game :-Þ )OK, OK, so when do we get to see this wonderful new round?
|
|
|
#30740
06/01/2001 1:57 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
yes, mav, which is exactly what I pointed out in my original decision, awarding Geoff and Dr. Bill 1.5 points each (approx. half of 3) instead of throwing the round out as per rule 5. I can now see that the promulgators of rule 5 were a prescient lot.
|
|
|
#30741
06/01/2001 2:10 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
I blinked - sorry, boss.
Would the problem be avoided if a 'close guess definition' were simply disqualified from scoring by gathering votes but not withdrawn from public debate? (The announcement who had so guessed could follow at scoring) This would limit the score of that contributor to 3 points under R4, and other guessers would have the additional distraction of a couple of very similar meanings without knowing either were correct.
|
|
|
#30742
06/01/2001 2:17 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
okay, against my better judgment I'll throw this out for debate. consider the situation: we have a True Meaning; we have two submittals which approximate TM but are unequal; if we list them all, we now have three (3) similar meanings. I don't know about you-all, but at this point I would, as a voter....
|
|
|
#30743
06/01/2001 2:29 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
Yes, not ideal. But seems to me that otherwise a genuine Good Guess (GG®) is penalised harshly by scoring only say 1.5 - yet the LIU merchant might be tempted if they know they can score to the likely max in that one go (OK, I know some got 4 this round) But hell, it's a game - I must be bored this afternoon to be debating it I go with whatever you say
|
|
|
#30744
06/01/2001 3:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 428 |
I say give everyone who hits it on the nose (or about the head and shoulders, at least) 3 points. The only reason I could see for cancelling the round is if there were too few submissions to make it interesting (and based on round 2 there's no danger of that). No need to split up the Good Guess points, unless you suspect that the multiple Good Guessers have cooperated in their colluctation. And we can use the University of Virginia's Honor Code to ensure that there is no cheating... erm, nevermind. Oh, just don't LIU, even if you are attending Long Island University.
|
|
|
#30745
06/01/2001 4:07 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
otay, the scoring, near as I can figure it: flatlander 6 (4 for def'n, 2 for guess)
bingley 4 (4 for def'n)
geoff 3 ( for guessing with def'n?)
wwh 3 ( "" )
fiberbabe 2 ( for guess)
sparteye 1 (for def'n)
whitmano'n 1 ("")
tsuwm 1 ("")
rhubarbc 2 (see A&C Scoring Annex, amusing the mod. ¶)
paulb 1 ("", disgusting the voters sub-¶)
honorable mention for correct guesses: jazzo and rapunzel
open question: should we score something for correct guesses from "non-players"? In the interest of fairplay, I'd give jazzo and rapunzel a point, although it's not presently in the rules.
|
|
|
#30746
06/01/2001 4:29 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
flatlander: I say give everyone who hits it on the nose (or about the head and shoulders, at least) 3 points.... No need to split up the Good Guess points
you make a good case, flats. cynic that I am, I fear that there might be someone who would actually LIU if the reward looked to be rich enough, and that's what I was attempting to ward off [hmmm, I can get 3 points easy... but if everyone does it I'll just end up splitting... naaah.]
but, at least for this case, I'm inclined to agree and I will update the scores accordingly. I think the moderator should reserve the right to resort to the A&C Annex in these cases....
|
|
|
#30747
06/01/2001 11:24 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 328
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 328 |
open question: should we score something for correct guesses from "non-players"?
Is it too late to become a player? And, do I need to submit a definition to Round 3 in order to be considered a player?
|
|
|
#30748
06/02/2001 2:48 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
yes, for each round the "players" are those who submit definitions -- it takes a modicum of effort to craft something that will garner votes, I guess. 
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,916
Posts230,463
Members9,211
| |
Most Online17,319
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
