Here's a suggestion for a word game:
It's kinda like Lateral Thinking (where each person takes turns at saying a word, without repetition, which is linked to the previous word, and the winner is the one who is first to get back to the starting word) only, instead of using words that are linked, the aim of this game is to use completely unconnected words. Points are awarded every time someone makes a correct challenge (however obscure) when they feel that two words are related, when or when someone reaches the starter word.
Whatdyallreckon?

Can you give us a brief example? I think I understand what you're getting at, but I'm not sure. Sounds like fun.

I'm totally lost. Near as I can figure it's a sure win for the third player, assuming that the second player can come up with a word that is totally unconnected to the first word. What qualifies as unconnected?

OK. Let's start with a simple word like baby.

I say "baby"

You say "cat"

They're unrelated. You really couldn't argue the cat-baby connection since cat-kitten would be the correct connection.
[However, for sake of argument, both babies and cats are mammals...so that would end the game, if I understand you. But to continue...]

And then somebody else says "apple." I doubt apples could be applied to cats unless there is some cat with an apple out there in history or literature.

Is this the idea?

After "apple," maybe "wind"...

Something like that...but ending up with "baby"? (But with people arguing in between that there are connections?)

OK, for examle person A starts with deviation (the starter word), person B could then go on to say octopus (which, as far as I know is completely unconnected to deviation).
However, the other players can challenge person B by saying something like: "No, actually deviation is linked to octopus because..." in which which case the challenger gets some points and also gets to suggest the next word.(if there are no succesful challenges then the person who suggests the word gets a point and the first player to suggest the next word gets it.
The point system goes something like this:
15 for reaching the starter word
2 for a successful challenge
2 for a word with no successful challenges

Open to any suggestions to make this game more workable...

Near as I can figure it's a sure win for the third player...
You have to wait until at least the 4th go or it's cheating.

For one brief moment there I thought I understood, but now I don't think I do.

1. Deviation
2. octopus
3. automobile
4. acetominephin
5. widdershins
6. enterprise

You could keep this up forever so long as you don't come up with a word that links back to deviation.

Can you give us some further explanation of the rules here? At first I thought that the second word had to have no relation to the first, and that the third word had to have no relation to either the second or the first, while the fourth word had to have no relation to either the first or the third, and so forth. But now I'm not certain. But If those are the rules, there are an infinite number of combinations that satisfy the rule that the word offered next must have no connection to either the first word or the ultimate word.

TEd

You could keep this up forever so long as you don't come up with a word that links back to deviation.
But you could also get to the starter word again quite easily... as long as nobody challenges. The point is, NO word links to the words before and after it.
Ignore what I said about the player reaching the starter word first winning the game - it ends the game. In the end it's the number of points that matter.
Oh dear, anyone still follow?

Well, let's play a first round, and you can let us know when we haven't played it successfully.

Take deviation as the first word, and I'll propose the second word, ear candy, as discussed here previously on AWAD.

Deviation
Ear Candy

And either I'll get two points, or someone will challenge ear candy as being connected to deviation.

That should get us started, right?

WW

the point I'm not sure about is how, in this world of variable response time(s), do we know a word is successfully unchallenged. I could leap in right away with a response to ear candy, but someone else might miss out on a brilliant challenge (and the rest of us would too, as the challenges seem to be the more interesting part of the endeavor.)

Excellent point, tsuwm. I think the challenges make the fun of the game--just seeing how people went about making a connection where one might not be apparent at first.

If we really did want to play, maybe we could set up a three-hour time frame between the posting of a word, and either a challenge or the appearance of a new word. It's pretty easy to see when someone's posted by the AWAD clock.

But there would be another problem. Let's say you challenged ear candy, what then? Would the three-hour time frame then go into action for people to either agree or disagree with your challenge before you could enter the new term?

It might finally just be too unmanageable here.

Sounds like a great game to play in the 3D world, however.

Sounds like a great game to play in the 3D world, however.

It is. It is used on the radio spoof "quiz" game, I'm sorry, I haven't a Clue, where it is absolutely hilarious.
But a lot of its humour derives from the speed and wittiness of the contestants and I'm not sure how much would be lost here. I'm game to give it a go, but.

(Mind you, International Mornington Crescent would be a hoot - I shall chair a game of it at the Emerald Wordapalooza. Move over, Humph! )