=SDC= Q1: On topic

[Jerry Friedman]

What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
sunny?

--
Jerry Friedman, T. O. Panelist

[Guy Barry]

"Jerry Friedman" wrote in message
news:88731810-038e-40f3...@u15g2000yql.googlegroups.com...

> What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
> sunny?

Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Croque Monsieur becomes Croque Madame when you put a fried egg on top.

--
Guy Barry

[Mike Barnes]

Jerry Friedman <je...@totally-official.com>:

>What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
>sunny?

I've no idea.


ObUsage: I'd write "*Which* gentleman undergoes...". That "what" comes
across to me as sloppy, though I remember coming across it a lot when I
last played Trivial Pursuit. Is it pondial?

And while I'm quibbling, if the answer to the question is the
gentleman's name, I'd ask explicitly for it.

"What's the name of the gentleman...".

Let it not be thought that this message is mean-spirited. I'm impressed
and grateful for the panel's efforts, and I appreciate the opportunity
they've provided for me to pick this particular nit. Of course the
vagueness in the question might be completely intentional, in which
case, I apologise for troubling y'all.

--
Mike Barnes
Cheshire, England

[James Hogg]

Have you seen Guy Barry's answer to this question?

--
James

[LFS]

I'm with Mike on the "Which" bit, though.

--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)

[Jerry Friedman]

On Aug 31, 12:09 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> "Jerry Friedman"  wrote in message
>
> news:88731810-038e-40f3...@u15g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>
> > What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
> > sunny?
>
> Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?
...

Not traditional, but not a bad idea.

> Croque Monsieur becomes Croque Madame when you put a fried egg on top.

Thank you!

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

On Aug 31, 12:50 am, Mike Barnes <mikebarnes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <je...@totally-official.com>:
>
> >What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
> >sunny?
>
> I've no idea.
>
> ObUsage: I'd write "*Which* gentleman undergoes...". That "what" comes
> across to me as sloppy, though I remember coming across it a lot when I
> last played Trivial Pursuit. Is it pondial?

I believe I can reveal that this question was written by a
Rightpondian.

> And while I'm quibbling, if the answer to the question is the
> gentleman's name, I'd ask explicitly for it.
>
>   "What's the name of the gentleman...".
>
> Let it not be thought that this message is mean-spirited. I'm impressed
> and grateful for the panel's efforts, and I appreciate the opportunity
> they've provided for me to pick this particular nit.

I'm quite pleased if a question leads to a usage discussion.

I think I use "which" only when the set was all known to me. For
instance, if the question were about a literal gentleman, such as the
one who said it didn't matter how he dressed, I'd say "What", because
I'm not looking at every gentleman who ever existed and picking one.

I could be wrong about my criterion, though.

> Of course the
> vagueness in the question might be completely intentional, in which
> case, I apologise for troubling y'all.

Points of usage are never troubling. I even claimed the question was
on-topic.

--
Jerry Friedman

[James Hogg]

http://www.facsimiledustjackets.com/cgi-bin/fdj455/1034

--
James

[Guy Barry]

On Aug 31, 5:00 pm, Lewis <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <k1q7v5$pq...@dont-email.me>

>   James Hogg <Jas.H...@gOUTmail.com> wrote:


> > Have you seen Guy Barry's answer to this question?
>

> No. I have him bitbucketed for excessive willful stupidity.

Well that's a very nice thing to read, I must say. Do you think I
can't read your posts because you've killfiled me?

I don't care who you killfile, but it's extremely impolite to declare
it in that fashion.

--
Guy Barry (from gmail)

[Guy Barry]

"Mike Barnes" wrote in message
news:lVBTbiYR...@34klh41lk4h1lk34h3lk4h1k4.invalid...

> Jerry Friedman <je...@totally-official.com>:
> >What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
> >sunny?

> I've no idea.

Croque Monsieur (as I think I'm allowed to reveal now, though I still
haven't worked out the rules yet). It becomes Croque Madame when topped
with a fried egg.

> ObUsage: I'd write "*Which* gentleman undergoes...". That "what" comes
> across to me as sloppy, though I remember coming across it a lot when I
> last played Trivial Pursuit. Is it pondial?

I'd say there was a difference, though not a hard-and-fast one. To me
"which" suggests a choice between named alternatives, while "what" suggests
an unspecified choice. So "what book are you reading at the moment?" but
"which book do you prefer - David Copperfield or Oliver Twist?"

Maybe "what" isn't so idiomatic when the noun is personal, but since the
"gentleman" in question wasn't actually a person (though you weren't to know
that at the time), I think Jerry's use of "what" was in keeping with the
tone of the question.

> And while I'm quibbling, if the answer to the question is the
> gentleman's name, I'd ask explicitly for it.

> "What's the name of the gentleman...".

Again, once you know the answer, it becomes clear that this phrasing was
impossible. "The clue's in the question", as someone-or-other used to say
(Roy Walker on Catchphrase?).

--
Guy Barry

[Guy Barry]

"Jerry Friedman" wrote in message

news:72d291a1-9a7d-4eb2...@m18g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...

> On Aug 31, 12:09 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > "Jerry Friedman" wrote in message
>
> > news:88731810-038e-40f3...@u15g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
> > > sunny?
>
> > Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?
...

> Not traditional, but not a bad idea.

So what happens if I think I've got the correct answer, but I'm not sure,
and I don't want to spoil it for anyone else? In this case I was fairly
sure the answer was right.

Also I can't see how this "first-on-the-buzzer" idea can possibly work when
you've got people scattered all round the world in different time zones.
Much as I'd like to spend 24 hours a day hunched over the computer waiting
for the next question to come up, in practice I do have a few other things
to do. How do you ensure that things are fair for all the competitors? (In
this case I just happened to see the question before I went out of the house
at around 7am British time, but I could easily have missed it.)

--
Guy Barry

[LFS]

On 01/09/2012 08:42, Guy Barry wrote:
>
>
> "Jerry Friedman" wrote in message
> news:72d291a1-9a7d-4eb2...@m18g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
>
>> On Aug 31, 12:09 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> > "Jerry Friedman" wrote in message
>>
>> >
>> news:88731810-038e-40f3...@u15g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > > What gentleman undergoes a sex change when topped with something
>> > > sunny?
>>
>> > Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?
> ...
>
>> Not traditional, but not a bad idea.
>
> So what happens if I think I've got the correct answer, but I'm not
> sure, and I don't want to spoil it for anyone else? In this case I was
> fairly sure the answer was right.

Post it, don't mess about. You'll see that people also post suggestions
which sometimes contribute to a collaborative process of working out the
answer

.
>
> Also I can't see how this "first-on-the-buzzer" idea can possibly work
> when you've got people scattered all round the world in different time
> zones. Much as I'd like to spend 24 hours a day hunched over the
> computer waiting for the next question to come up, in practice I do have
> a few other things to do. How do you ensure that things are fair for
> all the competitors? (In this case I just happened to see the question
> before I went out of the house at around 7am British time, but I could
> easily have missed it.)
>

Over the years since Garry invented this wonderful game (oh dear, a
touch of the Nicholas Parsons crept in there...) we've tried several
ways of addressing this problem, none of them entirely successful. More
people used to take on the administrative burden, which is quite
significant. I'm just delighted that Jerry and Michael are prepared to
keep it going. I won a Herdwick once but most of the time I just marvel
at the mostly incomprehensible questions and the fact that anyone can
answer them, especially when the replies come in very quickly.

[Mike Barnes]

Guy Barry <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>:

>Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?

If that's what you call a spoiler, it needs to be about three times as
long to work for me. But I didn't want one anyway, so that's all right.

This a real spoiler:



But I imagine the software that most people use nowadays will ignore it.

[Guy Barry]

"LFS" wrote in message news:aae1ip...@mid.individual.net...

> Over the years since Garry invented this wonderful game (oh dear, a touch
> of the Nicholas Parsons crept in there...) we've tried several ways of
> addressing this problem, none of them entirely successful.

So what's the history of the competition? There's quite a bit of material
on the AUE website, but it's all still rather mysterious.

--
Guy Barry

[Guy Barry]

"Mike Barnes" wrote in message

news:+96Vh4a+...@34klh41lk4h1lk34h3lk4h1k4.invalid...

Reproduced exactly as I saw it - three blank lines. Didn't spoil anything
I'm afraid.

Anyway, the danger of my answering any of the other questions that quickly
is so minimal that my concerns appear to be entirely theoretical.

--
Guy Barry

[R H Draney]

Guy Barry filted:

>
>Also I can't see how this "first-on-the-buzzer" idea can possibly work when
>you've got people scattered all round the world in different time zones.
>Much as I'd like to spend 24 hours a day hunched over the computer waiting
>for the next question to come up, in practice I do have a few other things
>to do. How do you ensure that things are fair for all the competitors? (In
>this case I just happened to see the question before I went out of the house
>at around 7am British time, but I could easily have missed it.)

I never pretended that anything more than blind luck had me reading one question
and answering it four minutes after it was posted...more often than not, a
question will get plenty of wrong guesses before the right answer emerges, which
blunts the effect of reaction time considerably....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Guy Barry]

"Guy Barry" wrote in message news:2yk0s.229757$YL5.1...@fx11.am4...

> "Mike Barnes" wrote in message
> news:+96Vh4a+...@34klh41lk4h1lk34h3lk4h1k4.invalid...

> > This a real spoiler:



> > But I imagine the software that most people use nowadays will ignore it.

> Reproduced exactly as I saw it - three blank lines. Didn't spoil anything
> I'm afraid.

Of course that's the opposite of what I meant. Spoiler space is meant to
prevent spoilers, so the fact that your spoiler space didn't work meant that
it *did* spoil things - or at least it would have done if there had been a
genuine spoiler beneath the spoiler space.

And of course when you said "this is a real spoiler", you meant "this is
real spoiler space, followed by a non-spoiler". Or at least "this is
intended as real spoiler space, even if it doesn't appear as spoiler space".
In actual fact it appeared to me as non-spoiler space followed by a
non-spoiler.

I wish I hadn't started this now.

--
Guy Barry

[Paul Wolff]

In message <%%i0s.229727$YL5....@fx11.am4>, Guy Barry
<guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> writes

>
>So what happens if I think I've got the correct answer, but I'm not
>sure, and I don't want to spoil it for anyone else? In this case I was
>fairly sure the answer was right.

As Laura said, send it, as soon as you fancy you have a plausible
solution. Many solutions are arrived at by drawing on others'
suggestions.

>
>Also I can't see how this "first-on-the-buzzer" idea can possibly work
>when you've got people scattered all round the world in different time
>zones.

It's swings and roundabouts. The questions will (probably) be posted by
the Totally Official Panel in handfuls at a variety of times of day or
night, and the hard ones will go unanswered for days (or even years, in
some cases - I suspect there's at least one where the TO answer has been
lost and no-one's sure what it should have been).

>Much as I'd like to spend 24 hours a day hunched over the computer
>waiting for the next question to come up, in practice I do have a few
>other things to do. How do you ensure that things are fair for all the
>competitors? (In this case I just happened to see the question before
>I went out of the house at around 7am British time, but I could easily
>have missed it.)
>

I usually throw myself into this competition, but have been away all
weekend and haven't had time even to roll my sleeves up yet. I may find
some time this evening, and will be pleased if I can.

Now back to work.
--
Paul

[Peter Moylan]

Interesting. Thunderbird showed it as a full page jump, as intended, but
then reduced it to almost nothing in this reply.

You're right; most software doesn't respect the ascii control
characters. Even fewer programs correctly handle the control codes in
the second half of the 8-bit ISO code sets.

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

[Mike Barnes]

Peter Moylan <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid>:

>On 01/09/12 19:13, Mike Barnes wrote:
>> Guy Barry <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>:
>>> Am I supposed to put spoiler space in here?
>>
>> If that's what you call a spoiler, it needs to be about three times as
>> long to work for me. But I didn't want one anyway, so that's all right.
>>
>> This a real spoiler:
>>
>>


>>
>> But I imagine the software that most people use nowadays will ignore it.
>>
>Interesting. Thunderbird showed it as a full page jump, as intended, but
>then reduced it to almost nothing in this reply.

Logic tells me that Thunderbird probably reduced it to almost nothing in
a *preview* of your reply. It worked fine for me in your reply, so I
expect it will work fine in Thunderbird when your reply comes back to
you from the server.

>You're right; most software doesn't respect the ascii control
>characters.

:-)

>Even fewer programs correctly handle the control codes in
>the second half of the 8-bit ISO code sets.

I'm no expert but I think the problem is often confusion between
Windows-1252 and ISO 8859-1, and the fault lies as much with writers as
readers.