ASCWC 38 - QUICKIE Clues
Steve Ball
misinterpretations and omissions.
John Masters:
Living, in other words, is an encounter soon over (7)
QUICK + IE; def. = an encounter soon over
Mark Brader:
In Monte Carlo, who has "half luck" (that is, it's soon over)? (7)
QUI + (lu(CK) + IE; def. = it's soon over
Pete Maclean:
qki? (7)
Cryptic definition(?) IS the rhyme or reason as to which letters are
omitted?
Old Timer/Jim:
Short-lasting relationship (7)
Cryptic definition(?) This is pretty much a straight definition. Am I
missing something?
Uri Guttman:
Fast sex errand.
Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing something
else?
Kevin Wald:
Brief lewd act that's disgusting occurs in silence, mostly (7)
ICK in QUIE(t); def. = Brief lewd act
David Akenhead:
Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
Naturally! (7)
Cryptic definition(?)
Duke Lefty:
Fast that is satisfying hunger (7)
QUICK + IE; def. = (it's?) satisfying hunger(?) I don't get the definition.
--
Thanks,
Steve = : ^ )
Steve Ball
> Mark Brader:
> In Monte Carlo, who has "half luck" (that is, it's soon over)? (7)
> QUI + (lu(CK) + IE; def. = it's soon over
Sorry, I'll read that again:
QUI + (lu)CK + IE; def. = it's soon over
> Pete Maclean:
> qki? (7)
> Cryptic definition(?) IS the rhyme or reason as to which letters are
> omitted?
And that. *Is there* rhyme ...
--
Steve = : ^ )
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 9, 9:03 am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> wrote:
>
> > Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
> > misinterpretations
>
> > Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
> > Naturally! (7)
> > Cryptic definition(?)
>
> And. Cryptic def.
>
> 1. Quick (as in the Quick (=living) and the Dead "strictly in the
> biblical sense") + IE ("that is")
> 2. Naturally! = Quickie def. "Man hath but a short time
I wish you'd stop offering explanations that are more cryptic than the
clues they're supposed to explain!
Where is the "living" in the clue that would lead the solver to QUICK?
What sense of QUICKIE can be rendered with "Man hath but a short
time ,,, naturally"?
When is a definition ever split by the wordplay? (It's bad enough when
some think the wordplay can be split by the definition.)
Pete Maclean
news:CA16BB67.2F782%prett...@every.thing...
> Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
> misinterpretations and omissions.
>
> qki? (7)
> Cryptic definition(?) IS the rhyme or reason as to which letters are
> omitted?
Yes, it is intended to be a cryptic, self-referential definition.
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 9, 12:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 9, 5:27 am, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 9, 9:03 am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> wrote:
>
> > > > Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
> > > > misinterpretations
>
> > > > David Akenhead:
> > > > Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
> > > > Naturally! (7)
> > > > Cryptic definition(?)
>
> > > QUICK + IE
> > > And. Cryptic def.
>
> > > 1. Quick (as in the Quick (=living) and the Dead "strictly in the
> > > biblical sense") + IE ("that is")
> > > 2. Naturally! = Quickie def. "Man hath but a short time
>
> > I wish you'd stop offering explanations that are more cryptic than the
> > clues they're supposed to explain!
>
> > Where is the "living" in the clue that would lead the solver to QUICK?
>
No, it most certainly does not.
> means QUICK
>
> > What sense of QUICKIE can be rendered with "Man hath but a short
> > time ,,, naturally"?
>
> Well, it is a short sexual act, isn't it? And it is natural.
What in "Man hath but a short time ... naturally" indicates a sexual
act?
> > When is a definition ever split by the wordplay? (It's bad enough when
> > some think the wordplay can be split by the definition.)
>
> We have different rules in the UK to yours.-
Kindly produce some published clues in which a definition splits a
wordplay.
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 9, 12:46 pm, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 12:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 9, 9:03 am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> wrote:
>
> > > > > Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
> > > > > misinterpretations
>
> > > > > David Akenhead:
> > > > > Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
> > > > > Naturally! (7)
> > > > > Cryptic definition(?)
>
> > > > QUICK + IE
> > > > And. Cryptic def.
>
> > > > 1. Quick (as in the Quick (=living) and the Dead "strictly in the
> > > > biblical sense") + IE ("that is")
> > > > 2. Naturally! = Quickie def. "Man hath but a short time
>
> > > I wish you'd stop offering explanations that are more cryptic than the
> > > clues they're supposed to explain!
>
> > > Where is the "living" in the clue that would lead the solver to QUICK?
>
> P.S. I think "in the biblical sense" is a nice double innuendo too!-
It would be if "know" had been in the clue anywhere.
Pete Maclean
> Steve Ball:
>
>> Pete Maclean:
>> qki? (7)
>> Cryptic definition(?) IS the rhyme or reason as to which letters are
>> omitted?
>
> And that. *Is there* rhyme ...
Well, yes, there is some reason: the letters that are left could easily be
read as a shorthand for "quickie" and also, at a pinch, could be pronounced
as "quickie". Thus, my view is that "qki?" works while, say, "qui", "quik"
or "qike" would not.
Uri Guttman
SB> Uri Guttman:
SB> Fast sex errand.
SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
SB> something else?
i have heard it used as a quick errand. could be nonstandard. i liked
how the surface read when i wrote it.
uri
--
Uri Guttman ------ u...@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------
David Akenhead
Peter, you are misinterpreting my clue!
I am NOT splitting the word play!
Man hath but a short time defines QUICK (life or living - also medical
"quickening in the womb")
strictly in the biblical sense (supports the quotation in the intended
sense), that is +IE
Tell me where I am splitting the word play here? "Quick, that is" is a
synonym for "Man hath but a short time"
Naturally! lends credibility to the alternative sexual definition for
Duke
> Fast that is satisfying hunger (7)
> QUICK + IE; def. = (it's?) satisfying hunger(?) I don't get the definition.
Well, a quick sexual act is, at least stereotypically, an act
satisfying a particular hunger (lust), rather than one of romance. I
was trying to come up with a non-obvious definition and link it back
to "fast."
Duke
Old Timer
>Short-lasting relationship (7)
>Cryptic definition(?) This is pretty much a straight definition. Am I
>missing something?
Pretty well a CD as you read it, but I still think there's a bit of a
jump between a "short-lasting relationship", which could be a a simple
friendship which doesn't last long, and a "quickie" which has sexual
connotations. Not a particularly inspired clue, I have to admit.
Jim
Peter T. Daniels
No, I am trying to interpret your "explanation."
> I am NOT splitting the word play!
>
> Man hath but a short time defines QUICK (life or living - also medical
> "quickening in the womb")
No, it does not. It might be an allusion to mortality (but not a
definition of mortality, since it's not a noun). It is also not an
allusion to QUICK because in the sense 'life or living', QUICK is an
adjective, and it's not an adjective. It also has nothing to do with
the noun sense of QUICK (which AFAICT no one used in a clue here).
> strictly in the biblical sense (supports the quotation in the intended
> sense), that is +IE
>
> Tell me where I am splitting the word play here?
In your "explanation," you "explained" both the beginning and the end
of the clue as parts of the wordplay, and you claimed that the middle
was part of the definition. (Of course since there _isn't_ actually a
definition -- no reference to 'alive' or 'living', I suppose you
didn't actually interrupt the wordplay with a definition.)
"Quick, that is" is a
> synonym for "Man hath but a short time"
> Naturally! lends credibility to the alternative sexual definition for
> "Man hath but a short time-
There is nothing "sexual" about "Man hath but a short time."
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 9, 3:40 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 7:46 am, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 9, 12:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > David Akenhead:
> > > > > > Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
> > > > > > Naturally! (7)
> > > > > > Cryptic definition(?)
>
> > act?
>
>
> You can't be serious! to quote my favourite tennis player!-
I know nothing of tennis players, let alone which ones you might
favor, nor why you might choose to attribute a cliche' to one of them.
What in "Man hath but a short time ... naturally" indicates a sexual
act?
If you are trying to equate "mortality" with "the little death" (a
French expression that didn't catch on much in English), you are still
diametrically opposite your supposed allusion to 'alive or living' (I
correct your minor lapse of 'life or living').
And, of course, you have no examples of published clues with the
definition interrupting the wordplay.
Rodders
news:CA16BB67.2F782%prett...@every.thing...
Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
misinterpretations and omissions.
You missed mine
>QUICKIE
Wham, bam, thank you Mam (7)
Rodders
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 9, 8:19 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Jun 9, 2:58 pm, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 9, 3:40 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 9, 7:46 am, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Jun 9, 12:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > David Akenhead:
> > > > > > > > Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
> > > > > > > > Naturally! (7)
> > > > > > > > Cryptic definition(?)
>
> > > > What in "Man hath but a short time ... naturally" indicates a sexual
> > > > act?
>
> > > Solution: QUICKIE
>
> > > You can't be serious! to quote my favourite tennis player!-
>
> > I know nothing of tennis players, let alone which ones you might
> > favor, nor why you might choose to attribute a cliche' to one of them.
>
> was adamant as I am, on this one, that the ball was good!
>
>
>
> > What in "Man hath but a short time ... naturally" indicates a sexual
> > act?
>
Ok. I'm asking everyone who reads this newsgroup.
> > If you are trying to equate "mortality" with "the little death" (a
> > French expression that didn't catch on much in English), you are still
> > diametrically opposite your supposed allusion to 'alive or living' (I
> > correct your minor lapse of 'life or living').
>
> I am not. The Quick IS the living
No one would have any problem with a definition (or a clue) that
equated 'living' (adj.) with QUICK. There is, however, nothing in the
clue to suggest 'living'.
Perhaps you are back to the sort of circular claim you tried to use in
your AHASUERUS or whatever it was clue: if you know the answer, you
can somehow discover that there is a vague reference within the
meaning of the clue to something that vaguely relates to the answer
word.
> > And, of course, you have no examples of published clues with the
> > definition interrupting the wordplay.
>
> The definition is the entire clue. The wordplay is NOT interrupted.-
So now you've changed your claim from "cryptic definition" to "It's an
&lit." In that case, you're back to square one and need to explain it.
In full. Clearly. Without any allusions.
Since the clue as a whole is not a noun or a noun phrase, it cannot
clue a noun.
Since the surface of the clue has no interpretation in the English
language, it cannot, a fortiori, clue any particular word.
Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
> Man hath but a short time defines QUICK (life or living - also medical
> "quickening in the womb")
> strictly in the biblical sense (supports the quotation in the intended
> sense), that is +IE
I have no problem with QUICK meaning 'the living'; as David says it's used
in liturgicial stuff.
But, like Peter, I do not see how the phrase "Man hath but a short time" is
a synonym or definition of "the living". At best, it hints at it, it's a
description of one aspect of human life. You might as well claim that
"green"
is adequate to clue "grass".
--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.
Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsre...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".
David Akenhead
> On Jun 9, 9:55 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
David Akenhead:
Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
Naturally! (7)
Cryptic definition(?)
Final explanation to my much contested clue!
Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
Naturally!
= QUICK + IE of course!
Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
Naturally!
= QUICKIE in the natural sexual context!
Peter T. Daniels
No matter how many times you repeat nonsense, it does not suddenly
turn into sense.
Steve Ball
> On Jun 9, 12:00 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Jun 9, 5:27 am, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 9, 9:03 am, Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> wrote:
>>
>>>> Here are the clues & my interpretations. Please correct any
>>>> misinterpretations
>>
>>>> David Akenhead:
>>>> Man hath but a short time - strictly in the biblical sense, that is?
>>>> Naturally! (7)
>>>> Cryptic definition(?)
>>
>>> QUICK + IE
>>> And. Cryptic def.
>>
>>> 1. Quick (as in the Quick (=living) and the Dead "strictly in the
>>> biblical sense") + IE ("that is")
>>> 2. Naturally! = Quickie def. "Man hath but a short time
>>
>> I wish you'd stop offering explanations that are more cryptic than the
>> clues they're supposed to explain!
>>
>> Where is the "living" in the clue that would lead the solver to QUICK?
>
> Man hath but a short time, means living,
If so, would you say, for example, "he's no yet dead, he's still man hath
but a short time"?
Steve Ball
> You missed mine
>
>> QUICKIE
>
> Wham, bam, thank you Mam (7)
My humblest apologies. It is included in the contest.
Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
> Sorry, Steve. I got sidetracked. Look at the latest posting. I admit
> that my logic is flawed somewhat when it comes to dissection.
That's an alarming statement from someone who's said he's been employed
previously as a crossword consultant.
> However, my original stuff is usually not nonsense...
You may well be right, but your approach of arguing and justifying and
repeatedly changing your point of view about your clues makes it hard for
anyone to tell.
> ... as Peter would have everyone believe - prime example being my "rice"
> clue in my Hurricane comp...
I think it would be sensible if you stopped trying to argue, in current
competition threads, for your own clues in previous competitions. It's not
germane to the current competition.
Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
> I did not address my comments to you.
So what? This is a public newsgroup.
> As usual I am being rubbished and I am trying to justify my existence as a
> result, by reference to my own record.
It'll only irritate people more, if every time we're discussing clues in one
competition you try to drag previous discussions back into the mix.
> Not germane, my foot!
This thread is meant to be about ASCWC 38.
> Brigid K is right in her observations.
She has a point of view, as we all do. Whether she's "right" is a matter of
opinion.
> My problem is directly due to Asperger's of which I have been recently
> diagnosed.
It seems to me that regardless of a (recent) diagnosis, you must have had to
come to terms with the problems the condition causes, through all your
working life.
I find it hard to believe that you'd have met such problems only when you
started to use usenet.
> I told you privately...
Yes, so I kept the information to myself.
Brigid K
> On Jun 10, 4:38 pm, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
>
> I did not address my comments to you. As usual I am being rubbished
> and I am trying to justify my existence as a result, by reference to
> my own record.
> problem is directly
> due to Asperger's of which I have been recently diagnosed. I told you
> privately, but have recently outed myself to preserve my own sanity.
David, ignore Jeremy Nicoll , this group should be in the interests
of learning
about cryptic crosswords, instead it appears that some wish to
undermine
peoples confidence, and abuse them.
Peter T. Daniels
> On Jun 10, 5:03 pm, David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 10, 4:38 pm, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
> > <jn.nntp.scrap...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:
> > > David Akenhead <da...@akomcrosswords.com> wrote:
> > > > Sorry, Steve. I got sidetracked. Look at the latest posting. I admit
> > > > that my logic is flawed somewhat when it comes to dissection.
>
> > > That's an alarming statement from someone who's said he's been employed
> > > previously as a crossword consultant.
>
> > > > However, my original stuff is usually not nonsense...
>
> > > You may well be right, but your approach of arguing and justifying and
> > > repeatedly changing your point of view about your clues makes it hard for
> > > anyone to tell.
>
> > > > ... as Peter would have everyone believe - prime example being my "rice"
> > > > clue in my Hurricane comp...
>
> > > I think it would be sensible if you stopped trying to argue, in current
> > > competition threads, for your own clues in previous competitions. It's not
> > > germane to the current competition.
> > I did not address my comments to you. As usual I am being rubbished
> > and I am trying to justify my existence as a result, by reference to
> > my own record.
> > Not germane, my foot! Brigid K is right in her observations. My
> > problem is directly
> > due to Asperger's of which I have been recently diagnosed. I told you
> > privately, but have recently outed myself to preserve my own sanity.
>
> David, ignore Jeremy Nicoll , this group should be in the interests
> of learning
> about cryptic crosswords, instead it appears that some wish to
> undermine
> peoples confidence, and abuse them.-
Brigid, if you are able to interpret David's postings, please do
provide an interpretation after each one.
How, in this case, do you see that his clue leads to the answer
QUICKIE?
I fail to see what Asperger's, whether diagnosed or not, recently or
not, has to do with general incoherence and inability to pursue a
logical chain of deduction. On the contrary, one would expect such a
person to be _more_ guided by reason and less by emotion.
Jeremy Nicoll - news posts
> David, ignore Jeremy Nicoll , this group should be in the interests of
> learning about cryptic crosswords, instead it appears that some wish to
> undermine peoples confidence, and abuse them.
You've got the wrong idea about my posts.
David is not lacking in confidence. Indeed he's pointed out quite often
here (and on his website) that he's been employed in various crossword-
related ways, something that (I presume) few of the rest of us can claim. I
certainly can't.
But the group is used to having sensible discussions about what makes a good
clue. Part of that is an expectation that any setter should understand
their own clue at the point at which they create it.
The thing that I find hardest to take in David's "justifications" of his
clues is that he'll argue a clue works in one particular way then when some
of us dispute that, he'll shift his ground and argue from some other point
of view. And he keeps doing this. It doesn't make sense that a setter
cannot properly explain and justify their own clue.
--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.
Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsre...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".
John Masters
I usually try to keep out of these 'discussions' but, in no particular
order, some well meant advice for David:
1. David, you are welcome here, as is anyone, providing you stick to
the normal usenet conventions.
2. Try to evaluate your post before you hit the 'SEND' button. As an
example this last QUICKIE submissions thread contains Twentytwo posts;
eleven of them are yours; 50%. Does tat not seem excessive?
3. We all have some cross to bear, myself included. I do not intend to
broadcast it to the world or make it an excuse for whatever faux pas I
might make.
4. All or most of us have at some stage been subjected to vitriolic
posts from some disgruntled fellow player, none more so until now than
P.T.D. It is all part of the usenet experience.
5. Do not take any criticism personally; the object is to improve one's
setting, solving and general literacy skills and, of course, to have
fun. Different people have differing ideas about what is fun :).
6. If you have a justification for your clue stick with it. If it is
proven to be erroneous then accept the fact. Don't try and justify your
arguement with different criteria. Sometimes, often in my case, we all
submit crap clues.
7. All of us here have different ideas as to what makes a good clue.
Accept these differences and learn new approaches from them.
This is all meant in a friendly way.
John
--
A European says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with me? An
American says: I can't understand this, what's wrong with him?
(Terry Pratchett)
Uri Guttman
>>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <prett...@every.thing> writes:
SB> Uri Guttman:
SB> Fast sex errand.
SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
SB> something else?
my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
--
Uri Guttman ------ u...@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com --
----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------
--------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com ---------
David Akenhead
Thank you, John. Your points are fair. I have taken your advice and
have removed most of the postings, leaving just the ones which I think
are relevant.
John Masters
David, as has been pointed out before, you cannot remove your posts.
Once posted they are out in the usenet space for eternity. Think of it
like writing a letter on your PC. You write it in Word, print 5000
copies and mail them to 5000 different people. If you then delete the
file from your PC the 5000 people who received your letter can still
see it.
John
--
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb
-- they're often students, for heaven's sake.
(Terry Pratchett)
Mark Brader
> David, as has been pointed out before, you cannot remove your posts.
> Once posted they are out in the usenet space for eternity. Think of it
> like writing a letter on your PC. You write it in Word, print 5000
> copies and mail them to 5000 different people. If you then delete the
> file from your PC the 5000 people who received your letter can still
> see it.
A better analogy to a Usenet cancel message is that you write to the
5,000 people and ask them to find and discard your original message.
And maybe 1,000 of them do it.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Asps. Very dangerous. You go first."
m...@vex.net -- Raiders of the Lost Ark
Rodders
> You missed mine
>
>> QUICKIE
>
> Wham, bam, thank you Mam (7)
My humblest apologies. It is included in the contest.
--
Steve = : ^ )
It must have left a lasting effect on you.... :-)
Peter T. Daniels
> 6. If you have a justification for your clue stick with it. If it is
> proven to be erroneous then accept the fact. Don't try and justify your
> arguement with different criteria. Sometimes, often in my case, we all
> submit crap clues.
Hey, you're the one who "found" that neurotic CITROEN!
Peter T. Daniels
> >>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>
> SB> Uri Guttman:
> SB> Fast sex errand.
>
> SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
> SB> something else?
>
> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
I suspect that there were no "quickie-marts" before Apu's Kwiki-Mart
came along (it would have been an invitation to trademark litigation).
A few seasons ago, Lisa had a myPod and maybe a myPhone, but we
haven't seen them recently. Perhaps Apple complained.
Uri Guttman
PTD> On Jun 10, 2:29 pm, "Uri Guttman" <u...@StemSystems.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>> >>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> writes:
>>
>> SB> Uri Guttman:
>> SB> Fast sex errand.
>>
>> SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
>> SB> something else?
>>
>> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
>> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
>> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
PTD> I suspect that there were no "quickie-marts" before Apu's Kwiki-Mart
PTD> came along (it would have been an invitation to trademark litigation).
maybe but quickie meaning doing a fast errand is something we can all
understand. "i am going out for a quick errand" vs i am driving 2 hours
to shop at ikea.
uri
Steve Ball
>>>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>
>>>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <prett...@every.thing> writes:
> SB> Uri Guttman:
> SB> Fast sex errand.
>
> SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
> SB> something else?
>
> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
And how does that explain "quickie" = "errand"?
Steve Ball
>
>
>> You missed mine
>>
>>> QUICKIE
>>
>> Wham, bam, thank you Mam (7)
>
> My humblest apologies. It is included in the contest.
And, to give you the same right of reply as the other entrants:
Rodders:
Wham, bam, thank you Mam (7)
This appears to be a straight definition with no wordplay. Am I missing
something?
--
Thanks in advance,
Steve = : ^ )
Steve Ball
>>>>>> "PTD" == Peter T Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>
> PTD> On Jun 10, 2:29 pm, "Uri Guttman" <u...@StemSystems.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>>>>>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> writes:
>>>
>>> SB> Uri Guttman:
>>> SB> Fast sex errand.
>>>
>>> SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
>>> SB> something else?
>>>
>>> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
>>> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
>>> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
>
> PTD> I suspect that there were no "quickie-marts" before Apu's Kwiki-Mart
> PTD> came along (it would have been an invitation to trademark litigation).
>
> maybe but quickie meaning doing a fast errand is something we can all
> understand. "i am going out for a quick errand" vs i am driving 2 hours
> to shop at ikea.
So you're saying that, if you say "I'm just going out for a quickie", your
wife/GF will understand that you're running a quick errand?
Uri Guttman
SB> Uri Guttman:
>>>>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>>
>>>>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <prett...@every.thing> writes:
SB> Uri Guttman:
SB> Fast sex errand.
>>
SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
SB> something else?
>>
>> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
>> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
>> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
SB> And how does that explain "quickie" = "errand"?
going to the quickie mart is an errand.
uri
Uri Guttman
SB> Uri Guttman:
>>>>>>> "PTD" == Peter T Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>>
PTD> On Jun 10, 2:29 pm, "Uri Guttman" <u...@StemSystems.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "UG" == Uri Guttman <u...@StemSystems.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>> "SB" == Steve Ball <pretty.g...@every.thing> writes:
>>>>
>>>> SB> Uri Guttman:
>>>> SB> Fast sex errand.
>>>>
>>>> SB> Two definitions(?) Where does "quickie" = "errand" or am I missing
>>>> SB> something else?
>>>>
>>>> my subconscious just came up with why i associated quickie with
>>>> errand. ever heard of a quickie mart - a convenience store? it is
>>>> sometimes spelled kwiki as on the simpsons.
>>
PTD> I suspect that there were no "quickie-marts" before Apu's Kwiki-Mart
PTD> came along (it would have been an invitation to trademark litigation).
>>
>> maybe but quickie meaning doing a fast errand is something we can all
>> understand. "i am going out for a quick errand" vs i am driving 2 hours
>> to shop at ikea.
SB> So you're saying that, if you say "I'm just going out for a quickie", your
SB> wife/GF will understand that you're running a quick errand?
mine would! :)
Rodders
Rodders:
Straight definition it is.