pyramid category syntax

[toetyper]

are the catergories 'THINGS  YOU PROTECT' and 'THINGS THAT ARE PROTECTED' different.    "A bodyguard's client' would be allowed for the 2nd, but what about the first

[Kevin Prather]

They are interchangeable, and the clue would work for either.

[Jay Temple]

While I agree that the same clues would be legal, and either would be an acceptable response for the other, the curious part is that I'd come up with slightly different clues depending on the wording.

THINGS YOU PROTECT: a 2-run lead, the President
THINGS THAT ARE PROTECTED: a minority class, an uncopiable TV show

[clemon79]

an uncopiable TV show

Pretty sure you just got buzzed here.

[PYLdude]

an uncopiable TV show

Pretty sure you just got buzzed here.

Oxford says otherwise, amazingly.

[clemon79]

Oxford says otherwise, amazingly.

Last I looked, Oxford wasn't the judge.

[PYLdude]

Oxford says otherwise, amazingly.

Last I looked, Oxford wasn't the judge.

Then what are you buzzing for?

[clemon79]

Then what are you buzzing for?

Because I think it's an illegal clue, silly, why else would I buzz it?

[PYLdude]

Then what are you buzzing for?

Because I think it's an illegal clue, silly, why else would I buzz it?

If that's the reason that's pretty weak, Chris. Especially considering, in the spirit of the game, it isn't.

[geno57]

I'm with Chris on this one.  Adding the adjective "uncopiable" to "A TV show" would make the clue illegal.

In other words ... Just saying "A TV show" would be fine.  Adding the descriptive word would get you buzzed.  And I don't mean that in a good way.

[PYLdude]

I'm with Chris on this one.  Adding the adjective "uncopiable" to "A TV show" would make the clue illegal.

In other words ... Just saying "A TV show" would be fine.  Adding the descriptive word would get you buzzed.  And I don't mean that in a good way.

And I still say you're both wrong. It's not synonymous, it's not overly descriptive...I don't see what the big deal is.

[BrandonFG]

Merriam-Webster doesn't recognize the word, which leads me to think you'd get buzzed off that alone, since that's the dictionary more often used in the States. Why not just say "a copyrighted product" instead? It doesn't give away the essence, and might even push the contestant into thinking of copyright protection.

[Otm Shank]

"Uncopyable" would not be buzzed for being synonymous, although I think it would be a puzzling clue for the contestant.

The category syntax was driven by a few factors: first, and foremost, if the category was already used in a previous Winner's Circle, they recycled the old card. Other factors would be the syntax of the adjacent boxes (avoiding a series of "things that," "things that," "things that") and the space constraint of the box.

[toetyper]

Merriam-Webster doesn't recognize the word, which leads me to think you'd get buzzed off that alone, since that's the dictionary more often used in the States. Why not just say "a copyrighted product" instead? It doesn't give away the essence, and might even push the contestant into thinking of copyright protection.

,  
question-- in the winners circle.  If your clue has a word that isnt in the dictionary. but doesnt give the essenCe of the Catergory.,  do you get buzzed

[PYLdude]

question-- in the winners circle.  If your clue has a word that isnt in the dictionary. but doesnt give the essenCe of the Catergory.,  do you get buzzed

Of course you get buzzed. That shouldn't be a question.