Pyramid WC query

[TheLastResort]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'190614\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 10:47 PM\']How are you not buying it? There's copious evidence to the contrary...[/quote]
What evidence is that?  Because you and Lemon say so?  I asked for a source.  So far I haven't seen anyone produce one.  Geez.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'TheLastResort\' post=\'190613\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 08:44 PM\']
Nope, not buying it.[/quote]
Okay.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'TheLastResort\' post=\'190617\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 09:09 PM\']What evidence is that?  Because you and Lemon say so?  I asked for a source.  So far I haven't seen anyone produce one.  Geez.[/quote]No, our source is real life.

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'190557\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 04:08 PM\']-Non-optional car features (Too descriptive?)[/quote]
I agree that it would be buzzed.

-Manual transmission (Synonymous?)

That's the sort of clue that I'd expect to see buzzed on the spot and perhaps reversed during the commercial.

-Just a list of commonly standard car features, i.e. A/C, power steering, power brakes (Does that stray too much from the point?)

No problem there.

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'190616\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 11:02 PM\']
Would "Rockefeller's oil company" pass muster?
[/quote]

That was the first thing I thought of, and there's no way it would pass. (It's way too similar to "a diaper" for THINGS YOU PAMPER.)

[Jimmy Owen]

A form letter....a rental agreement....an argument....

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'190620\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 09:36 PM\']
That was the first thing I thought of, and there's no way it would pass. (It's way too similar to "a diaper" for THINGS YOU PAMPER.)[/quote]
Is it, though? The reason your example was buzzed is because it specifically calls for things that you apply the verb "pamper" to when you interact with them. You don't pamper a diaper, you pamper a baby with their soft, soothing, high-quality diaper. (I heartily endorse this product and/or service.)

On the other hand, "Rockefeller's oil company" is arguably no different than "Walt Disney's dog" for THINGS THAT ARE SHAGGY, and we all know how the latter one ended up.

[Mr. Armadillo]

"Clemon being snarky" is the best I can come up with.

[Jay Temple]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'190623\' date=\'Jul 11 2008, 12:00 AM\']
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'190620\' date=\'Jul 10 2008, 09:36 PM\']
That was the first thing I thought of, and there's no way it would pass. (It's way too similar to "a diaper" for THINGS YOU PAMPER.)[/quote]
Is it, though? The reason your example was buzzed is because it specifically calls for things that you apply the verb "pamper" to when you interact with them. You don't pamper a diaper, you pamper a baby with their soft, soothing, high-quality diaper. (I heartily endorse this product and/or service.)

On the other hand, "Rockefeller's oil company" is arguably no different than "Walt Disney's dog" for THINGS THAT ARE SHAGGY, and we all know how the latter one ended up.
[/quote]
But Disney's dog was, in fact, shaggy. (Of course, that same reasoning didn't work for the celebrity who said "a Great Lake" for THINGS THAT ARE SUPERIOR.)

[mrchips]

I think CLemon's point--one with which I concur--is that the item conveyed by the giver must match the subject key in part of speech.

For THINGS THAT ARE SHAGGY (adjective), "Walt Disney's dog" passes because "shaggy" is an adjective in the title The Shaggy Dog. For a clue that might be buzzed, try "Scooby-Doo's pal"; in that case "Shaggy" is a noun. (However, "Scooby-Doo's pal's hair" would pass.)

Apply that to THINGS THAT ARE STANDARD (again, adjective). "Rockefeller's oil company" was called Standard, a noun. "A (car's) manual transmission" would be the most common, or at least the most timeless, standard (adjective) feature one thinks of right off the bat. As automotive technology has advanced, many features that once were considered options are now regarded as standard equipment. Given the era of the episode in question, "a car's AM radio" might apply. (Today, "air bags" would be right up there.)

Likewise with THINGS THAT ARE SUPERIOR. The clue "a Great Lake" leads to a noun; the subject key is an adjective.

[Jay Temple]

"Superior" was a special case, though. It's called Lake Superior because it is the largest, hence the superior, of those lakes.

[toetyper]

winter daylight time

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'190660\' date=\'Jul 11 2008, 02:36 PM\']
winter daylight time
[/quote]
I'm not sure if that could be more wrong.

[Robert Hutchinson]

I'm going to defend TLR--Pyramid often relied on reference materials to back them up when ruling against synonyms. To use an actual example (that's somewhere out in YouTubeLand, I think), they reversed a ruling on THINGS THAT ARE DRUNK because of the clue "a smashed driver". The issue, at least as described by Dick Clark, wasn't just that "smashed" was a synonym for "drunk", but that it showed up in the reference book they checked during the commercial. Again, going by the explanation, if the clue-giver had managed to come up with a different adjective that wasn't in the reference book (sloshed? hammered? loaded?) but which was still known to mean "drunk", they wouldn't have reversed it.

Now, it would probably have behooved the parties involved to establish that maybe they were talking past each other (TLR seems to have argued "it's not in a reference book" without actually establishing that Pyramid relies on reference books in similar situations). But that involves less snarking, which is non-optimal.

(Is "non-optimal forum posts" unacceptable for THINGS THAT FAIL?)

[joker316]

Pyramid also uses a list created by the writers of the WC subjects, which the judges use as a reference. And sometimes that can be a little faulty.

The last WC category on the board was THINGS THAT ARE MOUNTED. The celeb gave the clues " a portrait, your diploma"; then stated, " a Royal Canadian policeman". The contestant gave the correct answer just as the judges buzzed the clue as illegal. Opinion was that it was too descriptive. Coming back from the break, Dick Clark explained the list the judges use and how it is created. Then he said that no one had even thought of a RCP as being "mounted". Upon further review, the clue passed and because the player answered correctly, she won the money.

[Unrealtor]

[quote name=\'mrchips\' post=\'190637\' date=\'Jul 11 2008, 09:27 AM\']
I think CLemon's point--one with which I concur--is that the item conveyed by the giver must match the subject key in part of speech.

...

Likewise with THINGS THAT ARE SUPERIOR. The clue "a Great Lake" leads to a noun; the subject key is an adjective.
[/quote]

What it seems to come down to for me is word order. If you remove its status as a proper noun, "standard oil company" is acceptable because it follows the normal rules of the English language for a descriptive noun phrase, while "lake superior" is iffy because it does not.

I probably would have allowed both if I was judging, even though they're both end runs around the rule about giving a list of things that fit the category by going straight for the key word.