[Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS

[Judy Madnick]

Please excuse the somewhat different format. This was the easiest way to convert from my WordPerfect table. If I were to deal more often (i.e., more than once every six months -- LOL!), I would have to change my method to make it more user-friendly and therefore less time-consuming. And I hope my tally is accurate.

So...the winner of this round was...The Phrontistery (#3) with 8 votes. <sigh> The new dealer is Tim Bourne, who received 5 votes AND guessed the real definition for a total of 7 points. Johnny Barrs was DQ (surprised?); Chuck Emery and Chris Carson submitted definitions but didn't vote (and, yes, I checked my spam folder).

The results:

Steve Graham
1. The wispy material making up the nest of the tent moth.
Voted for 4 and 14 - received 0 votes

Keith Hale
2. [Aboriginal / Obsolete Australian] South.
Voted for 3* and 12 - received 2 votes

The Phrontistery
3. to know or believe - received 8 votes!

Chuck Emery
4. a low-lying ice fog.
Voted for - nothing - received 1 vote

Dan Widdis
5. An open space between cultivated fields through which cattle are driven, and where the cows are sometimes milked. [Scot.].
Voted for 9 and 16 - received 1 vote

Johnny Barrs
6. the face [archaic pretence for _vis_].
DQ - received 4 votes

Guerri Stevens
7. a magical being, usually non-human.
Voted for 8 and 12 - received 0 votes

Jim Hart
8. fermented coconut water, or coconut kefir, considered by some to be beneficial to the digestive and immune systems.
Voted for 3* and 16 - received 2 votes

Millie Morgan
9. In Poland, the game of rock-paper-scissors
Voted for 16 and 17 - received 1 vote

Dave Cunningham
10. _dial_ force (from OL _vis_).
Voted for 3* and 16 - received 2 votes

Efrem Mallach
11. [Austral. slang; often in comb. form, _the wis_] Diarrhea.
Voted for 14 and 20 - received 0 votes

Dodi Schultz
12. otherworldly; strange, unnatural.
Voted for 3* and 6 - received 5 votes

Dick Weltz
13. a body with finite mass that can be treated as having negligible size and internal structure.
Voted for 3* and 6 - received 2 votes

Chris Carson
14. A coarse woolen fabric, yarn, or ribbon binding.
Voted for nothing - received 3 votes

Tim Lodge
15. _Dial._ holly.
Voted for 3* and 20 - received 2 votes

Tim Bourne
16. smart, clever.
Voted for 3* and 14 - received 7 votes

Glen Boswell
17. a mild detergent made from ostrich saliva.
Voted for 3* and 5 - received 4 votes

Mike Shefler
18. a sharply-curved section of a ski run; to make a sharp turn on skis.
Voted for 8 and 17 - received 0 votes

Andy Graham-Cumming
19. Cornish dialect variant of 'wuss' or 'wus'. A worthless or pathetic person.
Voted for 6 and 12 - received 0 votes

Tony Abell
20. [Scot] damp, slightly wet.
Voted for 6 and 16 - received 2 votes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dodi Schultz]

On 4/12/2014 10:01 AM, Judy Madnick wrote:
> Dodi Schultz
> 12. otherworldly; strange, unnatural.
> Voted for 3* and 6 - received 5 votes

No, sorry, Judy. I did vote for defs 3 and 6, but I didn't receive five
votes, only three: from Andy, Guerri, and Keith. My total score for the
round is 5.

And you say two different things about Tim B; did he receive five votes, or
seven?

I don't understand why you've omitted the usual list of voters for each def.

--Dodi


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Judy Madnick]

Dodi,

I apologize for my incorrect terminology. No, you didn't receive five *votes* but you did receive five *points*. I used the format that I used the last time I dealt...at which time I didn't list the names of who voted for what either, so I simply forgot to do so this time. Similarly, Tim received 7 *points*, making him the next dealer.

Not having dealt in six months and having to deal without software for only the second time resulted in these errors. Sorry for any confusion.

Judy



Original message
From: "Dodi Schultz" <DodiSchultz (AT) verizon (DOT) net>
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Dated: 4/12/2014 10:52:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS

On 4/12/2014 10:01 AM, Judy Madnick wrote:
> Dodi Schultz
> 12. otherworldly; strange, unnatural.
> Voted for 3* and 6 - received 5 votes

No, sorry, Judy. I did vote for defs 3 and 6, but I didn't receive five
votes, only three: from Andy, Guerri, and Keith. My total score for the
round is 5.

And you say two different things about Tim B; did he receive five votes, or
seven?

I don't understand why you've omitted the usual list of voters for each def..

--Dodi


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dodi Schultz]

I stopped using special dealing software a long time ago. I used to use
Froma's AutoDealer (I joined the game before Paul's Coryphaeus and
Marijke's Dixomatic came along) and stayed with AD because I was used to
it. But AD requires either retyping the defs or repeated
copying-and-pasting. It finally dawned on me that it was actually easier
and faster (for me, anyway) to use ordinary e-mail and keep a handwritten
tally of votes.

--Dodi

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On 4/12/2014 11:00 AM, Judy Madnick wrote:
>
> Not having dealt in six months and having to deal without software for
> only the second time resulted in these errors. Sorry for any confusion.
> Judy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Judy Madnick]

I enjoyed using Cory...until it wasn't working well for me (although it's a great program for those who use it as intended). So I set up a WordPerfect table and insert the definitions and then votes as they arrive. I am able to copy and paste the table contents into Notepad, where it becomes a text document, which I can paste into an email message. Then I have to finalize the email.

When I last dealt, not only didn't I include who voted for what definitions....but I also used the term "votes" instead of "points." No one said anything, so this time I used the same terminology without thinking about it. Now I have a nice updated version to refer to the next time I deal -- in another six months? LOL!

Judy



Original message
From: "Dodi Schultz" <DodiSchultz (AT) verizon (DOT) net>
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Dated: 4/12/2014 11:16:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS

I stopped using special dealing software a long time ago. I used to use
Froma's AutoDealer (I joined the game before Paul's Coryphaeus and
Marijke's Dixomatic came along) and stayed with AD because I was used to
it. But AD requires either retyping the defs or repeated
copying-and-pasting. It finally dawned on me that it was actually easier
and faster (for me, anyway) to use ordinary e-mail and keep a handwritten
tally of votes.

--Dodi

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On 4/12/2014 11:00 AM, Judy Madnick wrote:
>
> Not having dealt in six months and having to deal without software for
> only the second time resulted in these errors. Sorry for any confusion.
> Judy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jim Hart]

Judy, sounds like you deal and score much as I do except I use an Excel table - same idea though. And like you I don't include who voted for each def, just who each player voted for. I figure anyone can work it out if they need to.

And I see nothing wrong with listing the player's name before the def but if you want to put it after I would guess that simply moving the columns in your table would do the trick. Just a thought.

Jim

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Judy Madnick]

Hi, Jim,

I think it was you who sent me an Excel file some time ago??? I have QuattroPro, but I don't use it enough to make it worthwhile using it for Dixonary.. In other words, I wouldn't know how to set it properly. :-) So I resort to a WordPerfect table, which, for Dixonary, works equally well, I think. And after I completed the last round, I did move the name column so that it now falls *after* the definition.

I haven't really noticed whether most dealers list the names of which players voted for each definition. So...I'll ask now: Is it the preference of most players to see who voted for what? It probably makes it easier to determine whether any errors were made.

Hope everyone is having a nice weekend!

Judy



Original message
From: "Jim Hart" <jfshart (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Dated: 4/13/2014 4:53:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS

Judy, sounds like you deal and score much as I do except I use an Excel table - same idea though. And like you I don't include who voted for each def, just who each player voted for. I figure anyone can work it out if they need to.

And I see nothing wrong with listing the player's name before the def but if you want to put it after I would guess that simply moving the columns in your table would do the trick. Just a thought.

Jim

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Efrem Mallach]

Judy,

On a 1-to-10 scale that includes curing cancer, finding a solution to world hunger, and bringing peace to the Middle East, I'd rank displaying the names of players who voted for each definition pretty low. Still, it can be nice to see that all the votes I recall seeing for my definition (usually a short list, hence easy to remember) were duly recorded. I could go through the list of all the players with their votes, but it's much easier if the ones who voted for each definition are listed with it. Having them listed that way probably saves me a whole twenty or thirty seconds every week.

Efrem

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
On Apr 13, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Judy Madnick <jmadnick (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

> Hi, Jim,
>
> I think it was you who sent me an Excel file some time ago??? I have QuattroPro, but I don't use it enough to make it worthwhile using it for Dixonary. In other words, I wouldn't know how to set it properly. :-) So I resort to a WordPerfect table, which, for Dixonary, works equally well, I think. And after I completed the last round, I did move the name column so that it now falls *after* the definition.
>
> I haven't really noticed whether most dealers list the names of which players voted for each definition. So...I'll ask now: Is it the preference of most players to see who voted for what? It probably makes it easier to determine whether any errors were made.
>
> Hope everyone is having a nice weekend!
>
> Judy
>
> Original message
> From: "Jim Hart" <jfshart (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
> To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
> Dated: 4/13/2014 4:53:30 AM
> Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS
>
> Judy, sounds like you deal and score much as I do except I use an Excel table - same idea though. And like you I don't include who voted for each def, just who each player voted for. I figure anyone can work it out if they need to.
>
> And I see nothing wrong with listing the player's name before the def but if you want to put it after I would guess that simply moving the columns in your table would do the trick. Just a thought.
>
> Jim

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Judy Madnick]

Maybe we should take a vote. LOL!

Judy



Original message
From: "Efrem Mallach" <emallach (AT) verizon (DOT) net>
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Dated: 4/13/2014 11:05:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS

Judy,


On a 1-to-10 scale that includes curing cancer, finding a solution to world hunger, and bringing peace to the Middle East, I'd rank displaying the names of players who voted for each definition pretty low. Still, it can be nice to see that all the votes I recall seeing for my definition (usually a short list, hence easy to remember) were duly recorded. I could go through the list of all the players with their votes, but it's much easier if the ones who voted for each definition are listed with it. Having them listed that way probably saves me a whole twenty or thirty seconds every week.


Efrem

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[John Barrs]

Yeah! I vote

JohnnyB


On 13 April 2014 22:10, Judy Madnick <jmadnick (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

> Maybe we should take a vote. LOL!
>
> Judy
>
> ------------------------------
> Original message
> From: "Efrem Mallach" <emallach (AT) verizon (DOT) net>
> To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
> Dated: 4/13/2014 11:05:07 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [Dixonary] ROUND 2499 - RESULTS - WIS
>
> Judy,
>
> On a 1-to-10 scale that includes curing cancer, finding a solution to
> world hunger, and bringing peace to the Middle East, I'd rank displaying
> the names of players who voted for each definition pretty low. Still, it
> can be nice to see that all the votes I recall seeing for my definition
> (usually a short list, hence easy to remember) were duly recorded. I could
> go through the list of all the players with their votes, but it's much
> easier if the ones who voted for each definition are listed with it. Having
> them listed that way probably saves me a whole twenty or thirty seconds
> every week.
>
> Efrem
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Dixonary" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jim Hart]

As I implied, I don't think it is important. If I want to see who voted for
me it is pretty simple to look down the list. And besides, my home-made
dealing system doesn't do it, though I'm sure I could find a way to add the
names if my life depended on it.

Remember too: the dealer is always right.

Jim


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Daniel Widdis]

On 4/13/14, 7:53 AM, Judy Madnick wrote:
> I haven't really noticed whether most dealers list the names of which
> players voted for each definition. So...I'll ask now: Is it the
> preference of most players to see who voted for what? It probably
> makes it easier to determine whether any errors were made.
>
I like seeing it, although for me the list is usually very short. But
then again, it would take me about 5 seconds to scan the rest of the
list to find that information out.

This is a game, and dealing already takes enough time as it is. Whatever
dealers can do to get the essential information out is sufficient, and
one should only spend more time producing more detailed results if one
enjoys that sort of thing (like I might enjoy writing a VBA-enabled
spreadsheet to produce a results post, if I weren't so happy with
Coryphaeus!)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.