[Dixonary] Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)

[Dodi Schultz]

Wayne says he posted the results last night, but they haven't arrived in my
mail. Nor are they at the TAPCIS.COM Website. The last message I've seen in
either place is Russ Heimerson's vote last evening.

Has anyone else seen results of the round???

--Dodi

[France International]

I have not.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>
To: <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 2:40 PM
Subject: [Dixonary] Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)


>
>
> Wayne says he posted the results last night, but they haven't arrived in
my
> mail. Nor are they at the TAPCIS.COM Website. The last message I've seen
in
> either place is Russ Heimerson's vote last evening.
>
> Has anyone else seen results of the round???
>
> --Dodi
>

[EnDash@aol.com]

Not I


In a message dated 8/26/2008 2:42:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com writes:



Wayne says he posted the results last night, but they haven't arrived in my
mail. Nor are they at the TAPCIS.COM Website. The last message I've seen in
either place is Russ Heimerson's vote last evening.

Has anyone else seen results of the round???

--Dodi




**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)

[Dodi Schultz]

Okay, I'm going to go ahead and deal the next round, since my def (#1,
cybernetic unit) received 8 votes. The runners-up were #10, the specialized
neuron, with 6 votes; and #6 the linked genes, which I believe was the real
one, also with 6 votes. (I was keeping track and noting names as players
voted, because it looked early on as if I might come out ahead.)

New word coming up very shortly.

Aside from my submission and the one I think was the real one, of course I
have no idea of sources. (When I looked the word up after I voted, I didn't
find the exact def given, but that was the only def with genes.)

Here's who voted for each def, according to my notes: #1: Weltz, Bourne,
Crom, Widdis, Emery, Madnick, Abell, Heimerson; #2, Lodge, Hirst, Crom,
Widdis; #3, Carson; #4, nobody; #5, Shepherdson, Savage; #6, Shefler,
Lodge, Savage, Abell, Heimerson, Cunningham; #7, nobody; #8, Hirst; #9,
Carson; #10, Schultz, Weltz, Shefler, Bourne, Stevens, Emery; #11,
Shepherdson, Hart; #12, nobody; #13, nobody; #14, Carson; #15, Schultz,
Stevens; #16, Hart, Madnick.

Wayne apparently can't reach the list, but if he'll e-mail Mike and ID the
other authors by def number, Mike can do the rolling scores.

--Dodi

[France International]

And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.

Mike

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>
To: <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 4:35 PM
Subject: [Dixonary] Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)


>
>
> Okay, I'm going to go ahead and deal the next round, since my def (#1,
> cybernetic unit) received 8 votes. The runners-up were #10, the
specialized
> neuron, with 6 votes; and #6 the linked genes, which I believe was the
real
> one, also with 6 votes. (I was keeping track and noting names as players
> voted, because it looked early on as if I might come out ahead.)
>
> New word coming up very shortly.
>
> Aside from my submission and the one I think was the real one, of course I
> have no idea of sources. (When I looked the word up after I voted, I
didn't
> find the exact def given, but that was the only def with genes.)
>
> Here's who voted for each def, according to my notes: #1: Weltz, Bourne,
> Crom, Widdis, Emery, Madnick, Abell, Heimerson; #2, Lodge, Hirst, Crom,
> Widdis; #3, Carson; #4, nobody; #5, Shepherdson, Savage; #6, Shefler,
> Lodge, Savage, Abell, Heimerson, Cunningham; #7, nobody; #8, Hirst; #9,
> Carson; #10, Schultz, Weltz, Shefler, Bourne, Stevens, Emery; #11,
> Shepherdson, Hart; #12, nobody; #13, nobody; #14, Carson; #15, Schultz,
> Stevens; #16, Hart, Madnick.
>
> Wayne apparently can't reach the list, but if he'll e-mail Mike and ID the
> other authors by def number, Mike can do the rolling scores.
>
> --Dodi
>

[Toni Savage]

I was 11 (the mantle)

-- Toni Savage


--- On Tue, 8/26/08, France International <stamps (AT) salsgiver (DOT) com> wrote:

> From: France International <stamps (AT) salsgiver (DOT) com>
> Subject: [Dixonary] Re: Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)
> To: Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
> Date: Tuesday, August 26, 2008, 5:02 PM
> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the
> results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the
> results.
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dodi Schultz"
> <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>
> To: <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 4:35 PM
> Subject: [Dixonary] Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)
>
>
> >
> >
> > Okay, I'm going to go ahead and deal the next
> round, since my def (#1,
> > cybernetic unit) received 8 votes. The runners-up were
> #10, the
> specialized
> > neuron, with 6 votes; and #6 the linked genes, which I
> believe was the
> real
> > one, also with 6 votes. (I was keeping track and
> noting names as players
> > voted, because it looked early on as if I might come
> out ahead.)
> >
> > New word coming up very shortly.
> >
> > Aside from my submission and the one I think was the
> real one, of course I
> > have no idea of sources. (When I looked the word up
> after I voted, I
> didn't
> > find the exact def given, but that was the only def
> with genes.)
> >
> > Here's who voted for each def, according to my
> notes: #1: Weltz, Bourne,
> > Crom, Widdis, Emery, Madnick, Abell, Heimerson; #2,
> Lodge, Hirst, Crom,
> > Widdis; #3, Carson; #4, nobody; #5, Shepherdson,
> Savage; #6, Shefler,
> > Lodge, Savage, Abell, Heimerson, Cunningham; #7,
> nobody; #8, Hirst; #9,
> > Carson; #10, Schultz, Weltz, Shefler, Bourne, Stevens,
> Emery; #11,
> > Shepherdson, Hart; #12, nobody; #13, nobody; #14,
> Carson; #15, Schultz,
> > Stevens; #16, Hart, Madnick.
> >
> > Wayne apparently can't reach the list, but if
> he'll e-mail Mike and ID the
> > other authors by def number, Mike can do the rolling
> scores.
> >
> > --Dodi
> >

[Guerri Stevens]

My def was 12, with no votes.


Guerri

France International wrote:
> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.

[JohnnyB]

Mike

Mine was #9 I was a DQ - that was my area of research (and Wayne said he'd
awarded 2DP because he really trimmed what I had sent ) I think it got 1
vote


JohnnyB


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dixonary" group.
To post to this group, send email to Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Dixonary+unsubscribe (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Dixonary?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Tim Lodge]

Mike

My def was 10, the specialised neuron. I think the real def was 6,
the unit of linked genes, and if that's the case I scored 8 as well,
but mine was unnatural.

-- Tim L

On Aug 26, 10:02*pm, "France International" <sta... (AT) salsgiver (DOT) com>
wrote:
> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.
>
> Mike
>

[Russ Heimerson]

Mine was #15,

Russ

France International wrote:
> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.
>
> Mike
>

[Tim Bourne]

> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.

Mine was #7.

Best wishes,
Tim.

[Scott Crom]

Many thanks to Dodi for stepping up to deal!

This is a bit embarrassing--I sent my definition to Wayne well
before the deadline (I have a file copy which I can send Mike if
you're interested), but it didn't appear on Wayne's list. I
complained when I cast my vote, and Wayne said he'd award me two
dealer points.

Scott

[Bill Hirst]

I didn't have a definition, and I didn't get any votes.

-Bill

[Chuck]

My def was submitted well within the time limit but didn't appear, and
therefore got no votes.

- Chuck


Toni Savage wrote:
> I was 11 (the mantle)
>
> -- Toni Savage
>
>
> --- On Tue, 8/26/08, France International <stamps (AT) salsgiver (DOT) com> wrote:
>
>

[Tony Abell]

For the record (more or less literally): my def was #13 (no votes).

--
Tony

[Wayne Scott, MD]

That's actually what I have!
Wayne

[Christopher Carson]

Mike,

My def was number 2, the Greek drama part and according to my tally it got 4
votes.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "France International" <stamps (AT) salsgiver (DOT) com>
To: <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 5:02 PM
Subject: [Dixonary] Re: Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)


>
> And on the chance that Wayne can't communicate the results, if you would
> each tell me what def was yours, I can figure out the results.
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dodi Schultz" <SCHULTZ (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>
> To: <Dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 4:35 PM
> Subject: [Dixonary] Results of Round 1933 (OPERON)
>
>
>>
>>
>> Okay, I'm going to go ahead and deal the next round, since my def (#1,
>> cybernetic unit) received 8 votes. The runners-up were #10, the
> specialized
>> neuron, with 6 votes; and #6 the linked genes, which I believe was the
> real
>> one, also with 6 votes. (I was keeping track and noting names as players
>> voted, because it looked early on as if I might come out ahead.)
>>
>> New word coming up very shortly.
>>
>> Aside from my submission and the one I think was the real one, of course
>> I
>> have no idea of sources. (When I looked the word up after I voted, I
> didn't
>> find the exact def given, but that was the only def with genes.)
>>
>> Here's who voted for each def, according to my notes: #1: Weltz, Bourne,
>> Crom, Widdis, Emery, Madnick, Abell, Heimerson; #2, Lodge, Hirst, Crom,
>> Widdis; #3, Carson; #4, nobody; #5, Shepherdson, Savage; #6, Shefler,
>> Lodge, Savage, Abell, Heimerson, Cunningham; #7, nobody; #8, Hirst; #9,
>> Carson; #10, Schultz, Weltz, Shefler, Bourne, Stevens, Emery; #11,
>> Shepherdson, Hart; #12, nobody; #13, nobody; #14, Carson; #15, Schultz,
>> Stevens; #16, Hart, Madnick.
>>
>> Wayne apparently can't reach the list, but if he'll e-mail Mike and ID
>> the
>> other authors by def number, Mike can do the rolling scores.
>>
>> --Dodi
>>
>

[Dave Cunningham]

IIRC, mine was 5 -- since I always fool Toni <g>.

Dave

On Aug 26, 4:35*pm, Dodi Schultz <SCHU... (AT) compuserve (DOT) com> wrote:
> Okay, I'm going to go ahead and deal the next round, since my def (#1,
> cybernetic unit) received 8 votes. The runners-up were #10, the specialized
> neuron, with 6 votes; and #6 the linked genes, which I believe was the real
> one, also with 6 votes. (I was keeping track and noting names as players
> voted, because it looked early on as if I might come out ahead.)
>
> New word coming up very shortly.
>
> Aside from my submission and the one I think was the real one, of course I
> have no idea of sources. (When I looked the word up after I voted, I didn't
> find the exact def given, but that was the only def with genes.)
>
> Here's who voted for each def, according to my notes: #1: Weltz, Bourne,
> Crom, Widdis, Emery, Madnick, Abell, Heimerson; #2, Lodge, Hirst, Crom,
> Widdis; #3, Carson; #4, nobody; #5, Shepherdson, Savage; #6, Shefler,
> Lodge, Savage, Abell, Heimerson, Cunningham; #7, nobody; #8, Hirst; #9,
> Carson; #10, Schultz, Weltz, Shefler, Bourne, Stevens, Emery; #11,
> Shepherdson, Hart; #12, nobody; #13, nobody; #14, Carson; #15, Schultz,
> Stevens; #16, Hart, Madnick.
>
> Wayne apparently can't reach the list, but if he'll e-mail Mike and ID the
> other authors by def number, Mike can do the rolling scores.
>
> --Dodi