Allow me to paint the picture for you. My friends and I are playing The $100,000 Pyramid (with Todd's software, of course.) As the 5th in the group, I am the host and judge. The team is in the WC, and has reached the last category. It is "Things that blossom."
The cluegiver starts with "A rose. A flower." which elicits "Things that bud. Things that bloom." CG nods vigorously, ponders, then says "A lotus." This does nothing. The receiver is still on "bloom" and "bud."
Finally, with 5 seconds left, CG gives the clue "Mayim Bialik." I quickly pound on the buzzer because Mayim Bialik WAS Blossom on television, and thus it does not fit the category of "Things THAT blossom."
However, the cluegiver then tries to defend her clue, saying that in the first season of Blossom, Mayim Bialik was quite an ugly girl, but by the end of the run, she was a fairly attractive young lady. Therefore, she blossomed.
I didn't buy it, and my ruling stood. I don't think I was being unreasonable, but what do you guys think? Does her defense hold any water?