[Dixonary] Results - Round 1837 - queem

[Judy Madnick]

Let's hope I got this right!

* * * * *

The winner of round 1837 is Chuck Emery, whose definition "A frame in which
loose pages are squared up before binding" earned a natural 6 .

John Barrs takes coveted second place with 4 points. And there were 2
players in runner-up position with 3 points: Tony Abell and Bill Hirst.

The true definition was 5: "Protected from the wind"
(http://phrontistery.info/q.html), which no one guessed.

*1.*To intertwine.
****Vote from:****Stone
****Submitted by: Heimerson, who scores natural 1.

*2.*To foam or boil.
****Votes from:***Schultz, Keating, Shefler
****Submitted by: Abell, who scores natural 3.

*3.*A male hare (Afrik.).
****Vote from:****Savage
****Submitted by: Shepherdson, who scores natural 1.

*4.*A solitary bee or wasp.
****Vote from:****Savage
****Submitted by: Bourne, who scores natural 1.

*5.*Protected from the wind.
****No votes
****Real definition from http://phrontistery.info/q.html

*6.*(Spenser.) Came, has arrived.
****Votes from:***Keating, Scott, Barrs
****Submitted by: Keating, who scores natural 2.

*7.*[obs.] A furtive glance; a spy.
****Votes from:***Stone, Carson
****Submitted by: Shefler, who scores natural 2.

*8.*A levelling device [Origin Obscure].
****Vote from:****Shepherdson
****Submitted by: Savage, who scores natural 1.

*9.*[Scot.] Sociable; friendly; congenial.
****Vote from:****Scott
****Submitted by: Lodge, who scores natural 1.

10.*[Arab.] A chess piece, roughly equivalent to a bishop.
****Vote from:****Widdis
****Submitted by: Cunningham, who scores natural 1.

11.*A desert of cold oatmeal sweetened with treacle. (Scots)
****No votes
****Submitted by: Scott.

12.*A frame in which loose pages are squared up before binding.
****Votes from:***Schultz, Bourne, Hirst, Stevens, Barrs, Crom
****Submitted by: Emery, who scores natural 6.

13.*The yeasty foam that rises to the surface of fermenting malt
****liquors.
****Votes from:***Hirst, Shefler
****Submitted by: Stone, who scores natural 2.

14.*A public meeting or local judicial assembly in England prior to the
****Norman Conquest..
****Votes from:***Bourne, Abell
****Submitted by: Stevens, who scores natural 2.

15.*In handweaving, the swing-out arm of a shuttle, which holds the
****bobbin containing yarn.
****No votes
****Submitted by: Crom.

16.*A very thin flatbread made with lentil flour, often crisped by deep-
****frying or grilling.
****Votes from:***Emery, Crom
****Submitted by: Carson, who scores natural 2.

17.*In tiddlywinks, a shot which accidentally squops (covers) a
****partner's wink, making it unplayable.
****Votes from:***Widdis, Carson, Stevens
****Submitted by: Hirst, who scores natural 3.

18.*_Law_ the doctrine under which indebtedness is protected from a
****recovery action due to the creditor's moral turpitude.
****Vote from:****Cunningham
****Submitted by: Schultz, who scores natural 1.

19.*1. To be or become heated in religious argument or religious
****ecstacy; 2. hence also sometimes a false prophet (frm. Arabic
****'kamar').
****Votes from:***Emery, Shepherdson, Abell, Cunningham
****Submitted by: Barrs, who scores natural 4.

This doesn't look well-formatted on my screen. Hope perhaps it travels better!

****Player*********Def*Voted*for*Votes*Guess*DP*To tal
****------*********---*---------*-----*-----*--*-----
****Emery***********12***16*&*19*****6*****0********6
****Barrs***********19****6*&*12*****4*****0********4
****Abell************2***14*&*19*****3*****0********3
****Hirst***********17***12*&*13*****3*****0********3
****Carson**********16****7*&*17*****2*****0********2
****Keating**********6****2*&*6******2*****0********2
****Shefler**********7****2*&*13*****2*****0********2
****Stevens*********14***12*&*17*****2*****0********2
****Stone***********13****1*&*7******2*****0********2
****Bourne***********4***12*&*14*****1*****0********1
****Cunningham******10***18*&*19*****1*****0********1
****Heimerson********1******N/V******1*****0********1
****Lodge************9******N/V******1*****0********1
****Savage***********8****3*&*4******1*****0********1
****Schultz*********18****2*&*12*****1*****0********1
****Shepherdson******3****8*&*19*****1*****0********1
****Crom************15***12*&*16***********0********0
****Scott***********11****6*&*9************0********0
****Widdis***************10*&*17***********0********0

[Bill Hirst]

Congratulations on the D0. Three cheers, etc, etc, well done.

-Bill

[Christopher Carson]

Congratulations on a very nice D0. I never would have guessed the correct
def.
CC

[Dodi Schultz]

Congratulations on the D0, Judy!

Well done!

--Dodi

[guerri@tapcis.com]

Congratulations on your D0! The definition is interesting. After voting,
one of my sisters, who works at a library, sent them an Email, because
queem is not in any dictionary we have on hand. The librarian's response
was that the Oxford English Dictionary defines queem as a variant of
"queme", defined as "pleasing, agreeable, acceptable to a person". So I
thought the real definition was number 9 in your list!


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Dixonary] Results - Round 1837 - queem
> From: "Judy Madnick" <jmadnick (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
> Date: Fri, August 31, 2007 11:55 am
> To: Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
>
> Let's hope I got this right!
>
> * * * * *
>
> The winner of round 1837 is Chuck Emery, whose definition "A frame in which
> loose pages are squared up before binding" earned a natural 6 .
>
> John Barrs takes coveted second place with 4 points. And there were 2
> players in runner-up position with 3 points: Tony Abell and Bill Hirst.
>
> The true definition was 5: "Protected from the wind"
> (http://phrontistery.info/q.html), which no one guessed.

[Judy Madnick]

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com

<< The definition is interesting. >>

That's one of the reasons I've been a little uncomfortable using Phrontistery as a source. I usually try to find the word in a secondary source also -- this time I did not. In the future, I will return to my usual "mode of operation" to avoid a problem.

Judy

[Chuck]

Judy -

Congratulations on the D0. You're the queem, for sure. And from the
rain as well, I trust.

- Chuck

[Daniel B. Widdis]

Congrats on the D0, Judy!

--
Dan Widdis

[Judy Madnick]

Thanks for everyone's congrats. That's two DOs in a row -- so perhaps everyone can stop voting for my definitions so that I don't have to deal again for a while? I liked the *old* habit of not winning much better than this new one. <G>

Judy

[Tony Abell]

On 2007-08-31 at 14:29 Judy Madnick wrote:

> The true definition was 5: "Protected from the wind"
> (http://phrontistery.info/q.html), which no one guessed.

How'd you do that again? Congrats!

> From: guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com

> << The definition is interesting. >>

> That's one of the reasons I've been a little uncomfortable using Phrontistery
> as a source. I usually try to find the word in a secondary source also -- this
> time I did not. In the future, I will return to my usual "mode of operation"
> to avoid a problem.

I don't know about anyone else, but I do not have easy access to any
authoritative dead tree dictionaries of the unabridged kind that have suitable
words for Dixonary. The local library is closed most of the time I'm home and is
a ten-minute drive away anyway. As far as I know, none of the major dictionary
publishers gives their content away for free on the Internet (Merriam-Webster
supposedly will give you access for $35/year, but I don't even know if you can
browse; it looks like you can only search, which is useless for playing
Dixonary).

The only acceptable solution would be to buy my own copy of the OED or whatever,
but I'm not wealthy enough to be willing to do that just to play a game.

In fact, I'm seriously considering dropping out because of the difficulty of
searching for words. It already takes me close to an hour to find one using
these questionable Internet sources, and that's more time than I really should
be spending on non-essential activities these days. If I were retired it might
be different, but as it is I'm almost always pressed for time.

[Judy Madnick]

----- Original message ----------------------------------------
From: "Tony Abell" <hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com>

<< How'd you do that again? Congrats!

Dumb luck. <G>

Judy

[Daniel B. Widdis]

TA> I don't know about anyone else, but I do not have easy access to
TA> any authoritative dead tree dictionaries of the unabridged kind

Who needs unabridged? I use AHD4 at http://www.bartleby.com/61/ most of the
time. Also, http://dict.die.net/ has lots of words from several online
sources (referenced when you pull up each woid). Mostly, when I find an
obscure word through some other source, I can search and find it in one of
those two.

TA> In fact, I'm seriously considering dropping out because of the
TA> difficulty of searching for words.

That pales in comparison to the time spent coming up with defs!


--
Dan

[Dodi Schultz]

>> I don't know about anyone else, but I do not have easy access to any
>> authoritative dead tree dictionaries of the unabridged kind that
>> have suitable words for Dixonary.

Good lord, Tony. You don't need one of those huge unabridged volumes! Or an
online source of obscure or obsolete words, either. I--and others--have
found plenty of usable words in such current dead-tree desk dictionaries as
American Heritage, Random House College, Merriam-Webster Collegiate,
Concise OED (just to name four I happen to own). Surely you own ONE
dictionary?

--Dodi

[Christopher Carson]

Tony,

You don't really need to shell out $350 for the OED on CD. I picked up a
copy of the American Heritage Dictionary on CD and have made good use of it
in finding words. When I have some time, I do visit the library and mine
the OED and make up a list of words for future use but I've used the AHD a
lot and I think it was only $20 or so.

Chris

[Tony Abell]

On 2007-09-01 at 17:51 Dodi Schultz wrote:

> Good lord, Tony. You don't need one of those huge unabridged volumes! Or an
> online source of obscure or obsolete words, either. I--and others--have
> found plenty of usable words in such current dead-tree desk dictionaries as
> American Heritage, Random House College, Merriam-Webster Collegiate,
> Concise OED (just to name four I happen to own). Surely you own ONE
> dictionary?

I have several, including the M-W Collegiate, and they are almost useless for
Dixonary because the unusual words they list are too obvious for what they are:
taxonomic names, chemical names and other scientific terms. Either that or they
fail the Google test (words that fail the Google test are likely to go down with
too many DQs). The very first word I dealt, potto, was from my trusty
Collegiate. I thought it was very obscure, but it immediately drew two DQs and
thus almost had to be withdrawn.

I will grant that one CAN find suitable words in an ordinary college-level
dictionary, but it takes considerably more effort and time than I can generally
afford. Large unabridged dictionaries contain lots of the obsolete obscurities
that are the most fun words to deal, and it isn't as difficult to find them,
that's all.

[Guerri Stevens]

I read a lot and jot down unusual words for future use. The only problem
is that often I cannot find them in our own dictionaries and don't
usually feel like spending time looking elsewhere.

I have noticed that if I open even a paperback dictionary and look
around a bit, I will stumble over unusual words.

Guerri

Tony Abell wrote:
....

> In fact, I'm seriously considering dropping out because of the difficulty of
> searching for words. It already takes me close to an hour to find one using
> these questionable Internet sources, and that's more time than I really should
> be spending on non-essential activities these days. If I were retired it might
> be different, but as it is I'm almost always pressed for time.

[dixonary@siam.co.uk]

> In fact, I'm seriously considering dropping out because of the difficulty of
> searching for words.
>
I use a CD-ROM copy of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary that cost £10 or
so. All the words I've dealt have come from there; it's usually takes me 10
minutes or so to find a word I've never seen before and check that it hasn't
already been dealt.

Best wishes,

Tim B