Wordsmith.org
Posted By: Alex Williams Some [more] Pig - 12/07/05 01:29 AM
My previous suggestion for hogwash having been washed away in a spring flood (alas), I offer this candidate and await your phony definitions via PM:

barghest
Posted By: Father Steve Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/07/05 03:17 AM
Winging its way to you at this very moment, master.
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 01:42 PM
I have received several submissions but none in the past 24 hours. If I don't receive any more by this afternoon I guess I will go ahead and post the definitions.
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 01:53 PM
Oh nonononono! You're supposed to give us a sennight, Alex! Says so in the roolz! (Now where'd I place that manual??)
Posted By: wofahulicodoc Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 02:04 PM
Count me in; PM en route.
Posted By: Owlbow Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 02:28 PM
I shall send my cloven hooved submission very soon.
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 07:59 PM
The definitions have been posted in another thread.
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 09:26 PM
Quote:

The definitions have been posted in another thread.




... like greased lightning, less than 48 hours after Pig was first presented in his poke.
Posted By: Alex Williams Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 09:57 PM
Yes, I will admit that the game is a little faster this time. But that makes it kind of fun too I think.

Oh well, the points don't matter and everybody wins anyway.
Posted By: sjmaxq Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 10:10 PM
Quote:

Yes, I will admit that the game is a little faster this time. But that makes it kind of fun too I think.

Oh well, the points don't matter and everybody wins anyway.




Actually, that's true. Jackie said the other that if she knew a certain word, everybody knew it, and I didn't, meaning that I am not part of "everybody". And, of course, I never win at Hogwash, so that reinforces that I am not part of "everybody".
Posted By: Faldage Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/08/05 11:24 PM
Quote:

I have received several submissions but none in the past 24 hours. If I don't receive any more by this afternoon I guess I will go ahead and post the definitions.




Harrumph!®
Posted By: AnnaStrophic Re: Some [more] Pig - 12/09/05 12:22 AM
Quote:

Yes, I will admit that the game is a little faster this time. But that makes it kind of fun too I think.

Oh well, the points don't matter and everybody wins anyway.




The point (sic) being that some folks don't/aren't able to check this board every day, and therefore are deprived of participating. (No, I'm not one of them, I just like time to think...)
Alex, my dear, please consider me very, very disappointed that this round went forward so quickly and without me. [crying in my parcha-e]
Please see my def for protest votes.
Posted By: Alex Williams okay okay I get the point - 12/09/05 02:35 PM
Try to look on the bright side folks. Just think how much sooner you can enjoy another game of Hogwash once this one is over.

FWIW, Hogwash to me is first and foremost a parlor game enjoyed by friends using a dictionary, some pencils and paper, and a watch. We'd go through several rounds in an hour and have a hilarious time doing it.

In the future I will be sure to allow whatever time period is industry-standard around here before posting definitions in hopes of avoiding howls of protest. Of course there is no sticky thread regarding the Hogwash rules but previous threads have indicated that this is the result of the recent upgrade to the bulletin board software. If they can ever be re-posted I hope they will indicate exactly how much time is expected in a round. To that I would add that it is unfair to the other players for a player to post their thoughts eliminating certain definitions. If I were the author of definition X then I would be mighty put out to read someone's deconstruction of it for all others to see.
Posted By: Jackie no sticky thread - 12/09/05 03:11 PM
Yes, there is, but to see it, you have to open whatever thread is listed first in W&F, then click Next. I couldn't get tsuwm to do it again, and I didn't want to copy and post it because my name appears too daggoned much as it is.
Posted By: maverick Re: okay okay I get the point - 12/09/05 04:43 PM
> To that I would add that it is unfair to the other players for a player to post their thoughts eliminating certain definitions. If I were the author of definition X then I would be mighty put out to read someone's deconstruction of it for all others to see.

fwiw, I completely disagree, and most strongly. This is one of my favourite parts of people's responses in the game!
Posted By: tsuwm Re: okay okay I get the point - 12/09/05 05:22 PM
Alex, don't despair; all this quibbling comes with hogmaster® territory.
Posted By: tsuwm Re: no sticky thread - 12/09/05 05:30 PM
Quote:

Yes, there is, but to see it, you have to open whatever thread is listed first in W&F, then click Next. I couldn't get tsuwm to do it again, and I didn't want to copy and post it because my name appears too daggoned much as it is.




yes, culpa est mea. you have to keep reminding me of these things.
Posted By: Alex Williams quibbling - 12/09/05 05:36 PM
Quote:

Alex, don't despair; all this quibbling comes with hogmaster® territory




Its barghest worse than its bight?
© Wordsmith.org