Author Topic: Pyramid Judging (Read 8252 times)

Neumms · « **Reply #30 on:** March 20, 2008, 05:45:41 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'182030\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 03:27 PM\']
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'182011\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 09:12 AM\']
And what was Hall-of-Fame books a clue to?[/quote]
"Things That Are Enshrined." It's the clue that won Keif Ferrendini $100,000.
[/quote]

"Hall-of-Famers" seems pretty legit, despite the prepostition. "Hall-of-Fame books" is just weird.

clemon79 · « **Reply #31 on:** March 20, 2008, 06:59:47 PM »

[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'182035\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 02:45 PM\']
"Hall-of-Fame books" is just weird.
[/quote]
Well, again, if you can cite an HOF that would in fact enshrine books, then it's fine. And those absolutely exist, so I can see why it was let through. I look much more askance at "Walt Disney dog" in that particular run.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #32 on:** March 20, 2008, 07:28:21 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'182044\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 03:59 PM\']
Well, again, if you can cite an HOF that would in fact enshrine books, then it's fine. And those absolutely exist, so I can see why it was let through. I look much more askance at "Walt Disney dog" in that particular run.
[/quote]
My logic: in the general vernacular, "The Shaggy Dog" is a Walt Disney movie, Wilson Daniels is a Walt Disney character, and the shaggy dog is a Walt Disney dog. I wish I could put it in to better words, but in my mind, it checks out.

clemon79 · « **Reply #33 on:** March 20, 2008, 08:16:50 PM »

[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'182046\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 04:28 PM\']
My logic: in the general vernacular, "The Shaggy Dog" is a Walt Disney movie, Wilson Daniels is a Walt Disney character, and the shaggy dog is a Walt Disney dog. I wish I could put it in to better words, but in my mind, it checks out.
[/quote]
Your logic is reasonable and adequately communicated. I suppose I can see that too. I guess I don't like that Keif didn't precede it with the article "a", as you did, which wouldn't have made it sound nearly as awkward.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #34 on:** March 20, 2008, 08:20:32 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'182047\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 05:16 PM\']
Your logic is reasonable and adequately communicated. I suppose I can see that too. I guess I don't like that Keif didn't precede it with the article "a", as you did, which wouldn't have made it sound nearly as awkward.
[/quote]
She did, kind of. She said "A dog...Walt Disney dog", as if to go back and put "Walt Disney" in there. Kind of similar to "Hall of Fame Books". Her first clues were "The torah...the holy books...", so she may have just been going with the flow. I see what you mean though.

clemon79 · « **Reply #35 on:** March 20, 2008, 08:26:31 PM »

[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'182049\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 05:20 PM\']
She did, kind of. She said "A dog...Walt Disney dog", as if to go back and put "Walt Disney" in there.[/quote]
Also true. I wasn't suggesting that the absence of a leading article makes it illegal, it just makes it sound questionable.

/okay, we're analyzing this a little too much now

//back, and to the left
///back, and to the left

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #36 on:** March 21, 2008, 08:07:14 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'182003\' date=\'Mar 20 2008, 11:26 AM\']if you're going to ding "Red-light traffic" for not being "Red-lit traffic" (which I think we all agree would be fine)[/quote]
Oh boy, now I have a chance to be contrary!

I would not accept the latter, because that phrase would mean that you're shining red lights on the cars.

clemon79 · « **Reply #37 on:** March 21, 2008, 11:47:05 AM »

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'182082\' date=\'Mar 21 2008, 05:07 AM\']
I would not accept the latter, because that phrase would mean that you're shining red lights on the cars.
[/quote]
Which, it could be argued, you are.

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #38 on:** March 21, 2008, 06:33:26 PM »

Mmm . . . maybe.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #39 on:** March 21, 2008, 06:50:49 PM »

I've seen some pretty big street lights...

clemon79 · « **Reply #40 on:** March 21, 2008, 08:08:07 PM »

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'182128\' date=\'Mar 21 2008, 03:33 PM\']
Mmm . . . maybe.
[/quote]
But see, "maybe" is enough in this case. If you can make a reasonable case for it, they kinda have to err on the side of "let it fly."

toetyper · « **Reply #41 on:** March 22, 2008, 01:36:47 PM »

the catergory-- things that are reviewed

clue- a critically acclaimed movie

allowed ? "

BrandonFG · « **Reply #42 on:** March 22, 2008, 01:54:23 PM »

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'182192\' date=\'Mar 22 2008, 01:36 PM\']
the catergory-- things that are reviewed

clue- a critically acclaimed movie

allowed ? "
[/quote]
I'm thinking buzz...isn't "critical acclaim" synonymous with review?

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #43 on:** March 22, 2008, 02:20:18 PM »

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'182193\' date=\'Mar 22 2008, 10:54 AM\']
[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'182192\' date=\'Mar 22 2008, 01:36 PM\']
the catergory-- things that are reviewed

clue- a critically acclaimed movie

allowed ? "
[/quote]
I'm thinking buzz...isn't "critical acclaim" synonymous with review?
[/quote]
A positive review, yes. A review in general?

clemon79 · « **Reply #44 on:** March 22, 2008, 03:10:15 PM »

What Kevin said. I think it flies.