PDA

View Full Version : [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]


Paul Keating
April 10th, 2012, 11:40 AM
The winner of round 2296 is Guerri Stevens, whose definition "Of no effect
or significance; nugatory" received 6 votes, plus 2 points for guessing the
correct def.

Tim Bourne takes coveted second place with 6 points. And there were three
players in runner-up position with 4 points: John Barrs, Jim Hart and
Millie Morgan.

The true definition was 18: "In phonetics, of or pertaining to speech
sounds after they have been uttered" (OED2<http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/77610?p=emailA6Wn7hHh/oVOk&d=77610>),
which I thought utterly implausible, but failed to fool four perceptive
players.

1. A medical condition that appears to be equally likely
to occur across the entire population being studied.
Votes from: Abell, Emery, Grieco, Madnick, Stevens
and Weltz
Submitted by: Bourne, who scores natural 6.
2. _Leg._ a stirpes descendant as opposed to having been
adopted [Gk _gens_ race, kind]
Votes from: Lodge and Schultz
Submitted by: Barrs, who scores 2 + 2, total 4.
3. The dividing line on a snow covered hill where an
avalanche is likely to start.
No votes
Submitted by: Zorbas.
4. Containing significant amounts of iron salts (soluble
as Fe).
No votes
Submitted by: Weltz.
5. Being first, especially to a long-sought achievement.
No votes
Submitted by: Hale.
6. Dressed in a toga or gown; wearing a gown; gowned.
Vote from: Cunningham
Submitted by: Widdis, who scores natural 1.
7. Of no effect or significance; nugatory.
Votes from: Abell, Dixon, Emery, Hale, Weltz and
Widdis
Submitted by: Stevens, who scores 6 + 2, total 8.
8. Extremely hot and humid (archaic).
No votes
Submitted by: Cunningham, who scores 0 + 2, total 2.
9. Liable to disturb or annoy.
Votes from: Shefler and Zorbas
Submitted by: Lodge, who scores natural 2.
10. Intrinsic to a genus.
Votes from: Bourne and Madnick
Submitted by: Abell, who scores natural 2.
11. Relating to the genome. Vote from: Bourne
Submitted by: Emery, who scores natural 1.
12. Having characteristics in common.
Votes from: Schultz and Shepherdson
Submitted by: Shefler, who scores natural 2.
13. Pertaining to or inducing flatulence.
Votes from: Barrs and Shefler
Submitted by: Hart, who scores 2 + 2, total 4.
14. One who regulates things by means of statistics.
Vote from: Zorbas
Submitted by: Madnick, who scores natural 1.
15. Restorative or stimulating, as a drug or medication.
Votes from: Graham and Shepherdson
Submitted by: Carson, who scores natural 2.
16. A purgative, usually containing ispaghula and rhubarb
root.
Votes from: Graham and Grieco
Submitted by: Dixon, who scores natural 2.
17. Classified in a temporary or perfunctory manner (esp.
of a group).
Votes from: Dixon, Hart, Lodge and Widdis
Submitted by: Morgan, who scores natural 4.
18. In phonetics, of or pertaining to speech sounds after
they have been uttered.
Votes from: Barrs, Cunningham, Hart and Stevens
Real definition from OED2
19. _Med._ of or related to the hereditary anemias, as,
sickle cell, thalassemia, et al.
No votes
Submitted by: Schultz.
20. An early experimental device by Nikola Tesla in his
attempt to transmit electrical power through the ether.
Vote from: Hale
Submitted by: Graham, who scores natural 1.

Player Def Voted for Votes Guess DP Total
------ --- --------- ----- ----- -- -----
Stevens 7 1 & *18* 6 2 8
Bourne 1 10 & 11 6 6
Morgan 17 N/V 4 4
Hart 13 17 & *18* 2 2 4
Barrs 2 13 & *18* 2 2 4
Dixon 16 7 & 17 2 2
Lodge 9 2 & 17 2 2
Shefler 12 9 & 13 2 2
Carson 15 N/V 2 2
Abell 10 1 & 7 2 2
Cunningham 8 6 & *18* 0 2 2
Emery 11 1 & 7 1 1
Graham 20 15 & 16 1 1
Madnick 14 1 & 10 1 1
Widdis 6 7 & 17 1 1
Grieco 1 & 16 0 0
Hale 5 7 & 20 0 0
Schultz 19 2 & 12 0 0
Weltz 4 1 & 7 0 0
Shepherdson 12 & 15 0 0
Zorbas 3 9 & 14 0 0

Christopher Carson
April 10th, 2012, 01:30 PM
Hmmm. I have Millie voting for 12 and 15 at 5:45pm on the 9th.

CC


From: Paul Keating
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:40 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]

The winner of round 2296 is Guerri Stevens, whose definition "Of no effect or significance; nugatory" received 6 votes, plus 2 points for guessing the correct def.

Tim Bourne takes coveted second place with 6 points. And there were three players in runner-up position with 4 points: John Barrs, Jim Hart and Millie Morgan.

The true definition was 18: "In phonetics, of or pertaining to speech sounds after they have been uttered" (OED2), which I thought utterly implausible, but failed to fool four perceptive players.

1. A medical condition that appears to be equally likely
to occur across the entire population being studied.
Votes from: Abell, Emery, Grieco, Madnick, Stevens
and Weltz
Submitted by: Bourne, who scores natural 6.
2. _Leg._ a stirpes descendant as opposed to having been
adopted [Gk _gens_ race, kind]
Votes from: Lodge and Schultz
Submitted by: Barrs, who scores 2 + 2, total 4.
3. The dividing line on a snow covered hill where an
avalanche is likely to start.
No votes
Submitted by: Zorbas.
4. Containing significant amounts of iron salts (soluble
as Fe).
No votes
Submitted by: Weltz.
5. Being first, especially to a long-sought achievement.
No votes
Submitted by: Hale.
6. Dressed in a toga or gown; wearing a gown; gowned.
Vote from: Cunningham
Submitted by: Widdis, who scores natural 1.
7. Of no effect or significance; nugatory.
Votes from: Abell, Dixon, Emery, Hale, Weltz and
Widdis
Submitted by: Stevens, who scores 6 + 2, total 8.
8. Extremely hot and humid (archaic).
No votes
Submitted by: Cunningham, who scores 0 + 2, total 2.
9. Liable to disturb or annoy.
Votes from: Shefler and Zorbas
Submitted by: Lodge, who scores natural 2.
10. Intrinsic to a genus.
Votes from: Bourne and Madnick
Submitted by: Abell, who scores natural 2.
11. Relating to the genome. Vote from: Bourne
Submitted by: Emery, who scores natural 1.
12. Having characteristics in common.
Votes from: Schultz and Shepherdson
Submitted by: Shefler, who scores natural 2.
13. Pertaining to or inducing flatulence.
Votes from: Barrs and Shefler
Submitted by: Hart, who scores 2 + 2, total 4.
14. One who regulates things by means of statistics.
Vote from: Zorbas
Submitted by: Madnick, who scores natural 1.
15. Restorative or stimulating, as a drug or medication.
Votes from: Graham and Shepherdson
Submitted by: Carson, who scores natural 2.
16. A purgative, usually containing ispaghula and rhubarb
root.
Votes from: Graham and Grieco
Submitted by: Dixon, who scores natural 2.
17. Classified in a temporary or perfunctory manner (esp.
of a group).
Votes from: Dixon, Hart, Lodge and Widdis
Submitted by: Morgan, who scores natural 4.
18. In phonetics, of or pertaining to speech sounds after
they have been uttered.
Votes from: Barrs, Cunningham, Hart and Stevens
Real definition from OED2
19. _Med._ of or related to the hereditary anemias, as,
sickle cell, thalassemia, et al.
No votes
Submitted by: Schultz.
20. An early experimental device by Nikola Tesla in his
attempt to transmit electrical power through the ether.
Vote from: Hale
Submitted by: Graham, who scores natural 1.

Player Def Voted for Votes Guess DP Total
------ --- --------- ----- ----- -- -----
Stevens 7 1 & *18* 6 2 8
Bourne 1 10 & 11 6 6
Morgan 17 N/V 4 4
Hart 13 17 & *18* 2 2 4
Barrs 2 13 & *18* 2 2 4
Dixon 16 7 & 17 2 2
Lodge 9 2 & 17 2 2
Shefler 12 9 & 13 2 2
Carson 15 N/V 2 2
Abell 10 1 & 7 2 2
Cunningham 8 6 & *18* 0 2 2
Emery 11 1 & 7 1 1
Graham 20 15 & 16 1 1
Madnick 14 1 & 10 1 1
Widdis 6 7 & 17 1 1
Grieco 1 & 16 0 0
Hale 5 7 & 20 0 0
Schultz 19 2 & 12 0 0
Weltz 4 1 & 7 0 0
Shepherdson 12 & 15 0 0
Zorbas 3 9 & 14 0 0

Paul Keating
April 10th, 2012, 04:35 PM
On the score sheet, Millie was one of the two N/Vs, you being the other. I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and did not find anything. That took ages, because I was convinced I was missing something obvious.

The vote you report isn’t in a reply to the definition post, and even given the hint I still don’t see it anywhere else. What thread on Google Groups is it in?

From: Christopher Carson
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 8:30 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]

Hmmm. I have Millie voting for 12 and 15 at 5:45pm on the 9th.

CC

Chris Carson
April 10th, 2012, 04:49 PM
It was right between Cunningham and Graham. And yes, I missed voting through an oversight. It's been a hectic couple of days.

Chris

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 10, 2012, at 5:35 PM, "Paul Keating" <keating (AT) acm (DOT) org> wrote:

> On the score sheet, Millie was one of the two N/Vs, you being the other. I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and did not find anything. That took ages, because I was convinced I was missing something obvious.
>
> The vote you report isn’t in a reply to the definition post, and even given the hint I still don’t see it anywhere else. What thread on Google Groups is it in?
>
> From: Christopher Carson
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 8:30 PM
> To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
> Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]
>
> Hmmm. I have Millie voting for 12 and 15 at 5:45pm on the 9th.
>
> CC

Dodi Schultz
April 10th, 2012, 06:42 PM
On 4/10/2012 5:35 PM, Paul Keating wrote:
> On the score sheet, Millie was one of the two N/Vs, you being the other.
> I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and
> did not find anything. That took ages, because I was convinced I was
> missing something obvious.
> The vote you report isn’t in a reply to the definition post, and even
> given the hint I still don’t see it anywhere else.

I just went to the GG site and checked our threads (with some difficulty;
it waylaid me first with all sorts of crap about adding my mobile phone
number), and Chris is absolutely right: Millie voted just after Dave and
just before Steve G, and she voted for 12 and 15.

(I'm so glad I play by e-mail!)

—Dodi

Steve Graham
April 10th, 2012, 07:07 PM
Here's Millie's message (I can provide the message header if anyone is inclined to decipher it)

-----Original Message-----
From: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com [mailto:dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com] On Behalf Of Millie Morgan
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 2:45 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Definitions}

12 and 15 for me please

>12. Having characteristics in common.
>15. Restorative or stimulating, as a drug or medication.


Best wishes,
Millie


Steve Graham

Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx



-----Original Message-----
From: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com [mailto:dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com] On Behalf Of Dodi Schultz
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 4:42 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]

On 4/10/2012 5:35 PM, Paul Keating wrote:
> On the score sheet, Millie was one of the two N/Vs, you being the other.
> I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and
> did not find anything. That took ages, because I was convinced I was
> missing something obvious.
> The vote you report isn’t in a reply to the definition post, and even
> given the hint I still don’t see it anywhere else.

I just went to the GG site and checked our threads (with some difficulty;
it waylaid me first with all sorts of crap about adding my mobile phone
number), and Chris is absolutely right: Millie voted just after Dave and
just before Steve G, and she voted for 12 and 15.

(I'm so glad I play by e-mail!)

—Dodi

Jim Hart
April 11th, 2012, 07:14 AM
> I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and
did not find anything.

Paul - Regardless of our various personal preferences for playing via email
or GGroups or telepathy, it seems very odd that one player would not see a
vote that is visible to others. Simple inattention seems most unlikely
(though it can happen to any of us occasionally), and doubly unlikely on a
second specific search, and triply unlikely in both the email and GGroups
delivery.

Did you eventually see the original yourself rather than just the reposted
version from Steve or Chris? And if so what changed?

Jim

Jim Hart
April 11th, 2012, 07:21 AM
>
> > (I'm so glad I play by e-mail!)
>
Dodi, in this case Paul didn't see Millie's vote in email either, so it's
more complex than simply email good Google bad.

- Jim

Guerri Stevens
April 11th, 2012, 07:25 AM
I too saw Millie's vote. It appears to be a reply to your announcement
of the words; at least it carries the same subject and is threaded with
most of the other vote messages as handled by my Thunderbird setup.

Guerri

Paul Keating wrote:
> On the score sheet, Millie was one of the two N/Vs, you being the other.
> I searched my mail, and Google Groups, a dozen ways for both of you and
> did not find anything. That took ages, because I was convinced I was
> missing something obvious.

Guerri Stevens
April 11th, 2012, 07:42 AM
I will post a word later today.

Guerri

Paul Keating wrote:
> The winner of round 2296 is Guerri Stevens, whose definition "Of no
> effect or significance; nugatory" received 6 votes, plus 2 points for
> guessing the correct def.

Guerri Stevens
April 11th, 2012, 08:02 AM
Talking to myself here:

It occurs to me that Google is making changes. Definitely to Gmail and
someone here mentioned changes to the Groups. The changes to Gmail are
still "coming soon" and I have not as yet switched my own account.
However, there are changes being made to Gmail whether you have switched
or not, the most recent that I've seen is the relocation of the "sign
out" option.

I am pointing this out because maybe the reason Paul didn't see Millie's
message and some of us did, has something to do with Google itself.

The other interesting thing I notice about the voting messages is the
way they are displayed to me by Thunderbird. Paul's message is first.
Underneath his message in the top pane of the display (lists of messages
in threaded order) I see a bunch of people's voting messages: Judy, Dan,
Keith, Tim L, Johnny, Tim B, and so on.

Some of them have the subject "Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC
[Definitions}". Others have the subject "[Dixonary] Re: Round 2296:
GENNEMIC [Definitions}". Note that the position of "Re" and "Dixonary]"
are not consistent. I wonder why?

-- Guerri


Guerri Stevens wrote:
> I too saw Millie's vote...

Dodi Schultz
April 11th, 2012, 08:54 AM
On 4/11/2012 8:21 AM, Jim Hart wrote:
>
> > (I'm so glad I play by e-mail!)
>
> Dodi, in this case Paul didn't see Millie's vote in email either, so it's
> more complex than simply email good Google bad.


Jim, I wasn't referring to the ability to see things. I meant that I find
the GG site very unfriendly and a drag to deal with, so I'm glad that I've
chosen to play by e-mail.

But as I reported, I DID find Millie's vote there, in the main voting
thread for the round, right between Dave's and Steve G's. (I'm pretty sure
it came in here via e-mail as well, but I can't swear to that, since by the
time the question came up, I'd dumped my trash pile for the past couple of
days.)

Judy Madnick
April 11th, 2012, 09:10 AM
From: "Guerri Stevens" <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>

<< Some of them have the subject "Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296:
<< GENNEMIC
<< [Definitions}". Others have the subject "[Dixonary] Re: Round
<< 2296:
<< GENNEMIC [Definitions}". Note that the position of "Re" and
<< "Dixonary]"
<< are not consistent. I wonder why?

That may be a function of the sender's email program. For example, I use a third-party email program, with my email being filtered through gmail. I would imagine that my program itself "dictates" what the subject line will look like...as does the Dixonary Google group or gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc.

Just a thought...

Judy

Christopher Carson
April 11th, 2012, 10:08 AM
I play by email as well and use MS LIve Mail as my client. I had Paul's
message then a threaded group of replies, including Millie's, of most of the
votes. there were 3 or 4 non-threaded votes as well. The appearance on my
iPhone with the IOS 5 client actually looked very similar.

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Dodi Schultz
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 9:54 AM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296: GENNEMIC [Results]

On 4/11/2012 8:21 AM, Jim Hart wrote:
>
> > (I'm so glad I play by e-mail!)
>
> Dodi, in this case Paul didn't see Millie's vote in email either, so it's
> more complex than simply email good Google bad.


Jim, I wasn't referring to the ability to see things. I meant that I find
the GG site very unfriendly and a drag to deal with, so I'm glad that I've
chosen to play by e-mail.

But as I reported, I DID find Millie's vote there, in the main voting
thread for the round, right between Dave's and Steve G's. (I'm pretty sure
it came in here via e-mail as well, but I can't swear to that, since by the
time the question came up, I'd dumped my trash pile for the past couple of
days.)

John Barrs
April 11th, 2012, 10:37 AM
As well as what email clients do with replies it might also be worth a poll
to see who of us are playing with 'new' gmail and who 'old' gmail -- I
wouldn't put it past google to have changed that too

I must admit that even though they have sorted the bug that didn't load
pending messages in 'new' groups that I have reverted to 'old' for
managment becasue I personally think that is is clearer and easier to use
than 'new'

JohnnyB



On 11 April 2012 15:10, Judy Madnick <jmadnick (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

> From: "Guerri Stevens" <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>
>
> << Some of them have the subject "Re: [Dixonary] Round 2296:
> << GENNEMIC
> << [Definitions}". Others have the subject "[Dixonary] Re:
> Round
> << 2296:
> << GENNEMIC [Definitions}". Note that the position of "Re"
> and
> << "Dixonary]"
> << are not consistent. I wonder why?
>
> That may be a function of the sender's email program. For example, I use a
> third-party email program, with my email being filtered through gmail. I
> would imagine that my program itself "dictates" what the subject line will
> look like...as does the Dixonary Google group or gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc.
>
> Just a thought...
>
> Judy
>

thejazzmonger
April 11th, 2012, 10:56 AM
I have been using the new format of Gmail for quite a while.

sd

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:37 AM, John Barrs <johnnybarrs (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

> As well as what email clients do with replies it might also be worth a
> poll to see who of us are playing with 'new' gmail and who 'old' gmail -- I
> wouldn't put it past google to have changed that too
>
> I must admit that even though they have sorted the bug that didn't load
> pending messages in 'new' groups that I have reverted to 'old' for
> managment becasue I personally think that is is clearer and easier to use
> than 'new'
>
> JohnnyB
>
>
>
>