undyingking: (Default)
undyingking ([personal profile] undyingking) wrote2006-01-16 03:51 pm
Entry tags:

Inspiration Turn 10 results and final wrapup!

The final turn! The answer was Niggardly, and my question was "2,For using what word did David Howard lose his job as head of the Washington DC Office of Public Advocate?" Again I thought this was pretty obscure, but again I was wrong as there were two essentially similar questions, which were also counted as correct. Ah well, see below for thoughts about this sort of thing.

Correct guessers were:
brixtonbrood
jiggery_pokery
liriselei
thecesspit

The clear favourite was [livejournal.com profile] mooism's "6,What word is too stingy to mean black?" -- very neat, seemed to be the verdict.

Voted-for points went 1 to [livejournal.com profile] brixtonbrood and 3 each for [livejournal.com profile] bateleur (looks like your suggestion wasn't so bad after all!) and [livejournal.com profile] jiggery_pokery.

This leaves the final score table like this:
player favourite correct voted-for total turns
mooism 3 4 11 18 9
bateleur 2 4 9 15 8
fractalgeek 0 2 10 12 7
jiggery_pokery 0 5 7 12 10
bibliogirl 0 4 7 11 7
brixtonbrood 0 7 3 10 7
dr_bob 0 3 7 10 8
liriselei 2 7 0 9 10
queenortart 0 2 6 8 8
cuthbertcross 0 3 4 7 7
nickeyb 0 1 3 4 4
wimble 1 1 2 4 5
thecesspit 0 3 0 3 5
al_fruitbat 0 1 0 1 1
ar_gemlad 0 1 0 1 1
jackfirecat 0 1 0 1 1
rotwang 0 1 0 1 1
cardinalsin 0 1 0 1 2
karohemd 0 0 0 0 1
verlaine 0 0 0 0 1

So there you have it -- a good push from[livejournal.com profile] bateleur at the end, but not enough to deny [livejournal.com profile] mooism's well-earned triumph. Hoorah!

(Interesting to note that [livejournal.com profile] liriselei and to a lesser extent [livejournal.com profile] brixtonbrood did very well on favourites and correctness, but were unable to get sufficient people to vote for their suggestions.)

Thanks all for taking part ( / putting up with it) -- I had fun, hope you did too!

I had some thoughts about what worked and what didn't. My principle when setting the answers and thus my own questions was for them to be independently verifiable (ie. no "What have I got in my pockets?"), and ideally with more than one non-trivial alternative (to allow for different right-looking alternatives) and a load of trivial ones (to allow for amusement value and for people who couldn't find a right-looking one). A few of them fell short of this ideal unfortunately, mostly because I was usually doing it in a bit of a rush. Ah well.

In one approach, I would have said from the beginning that no-one should use any form of reference either tocome up with questions or to check the accuracy of other people's suggestions. That would have made it more a contest in plausibilty a la Call My Bluff. However I thought that didn't really make sense for an online game -- looking things up could be a fun part of it (particularly as any bar would be unenforceable!) However if you know that people are going to be Googling stuff, it makes it a lot more difficult to come up with good answers -- because they need to be ones that are findable but which don't leap out.

Well, if anyone else wants to have a go at running the game some time in the future, I'm sure you'll be able to improve on this effort ;-) but for now that'll do I think!
ext_44: (games)

[identity profile] jiggery-pokery.livejournal.com 2006-01-17 12:14 am (UTC)(link)
It struck me about half-way through that it would be possible to turn this into a version of QI with a single rule change: submitting the "right" answer (well, here, question) loses you a point (and sets off bells, klaxons and so forth). The aim would be to submit answers/questions that were as creative as possible, to earn points, without submitting the one you had in mind.

Thank you for running the game!

[identity profile] liriselei.livejournal.com 2006-01-17 12:40 am (UTC)(link)
i like that suggestion a lot !
though i certainly enjoyed the game as is, and am very pleased with my score considering that i wasn't really trying to get people to vote for my question at any point (since i much preferred trying to come up with something creative and hopefully entertaining to trying to emulate [livejournal.com profile] undyingking's voice).

something creative and hopefully entertaining

[identity profile] undyingking.livejournal.com 2006-01-17 09:21 am (UTC)(link)
You certainly managed that! ;-)

Re: something creative and hopefully entertaining

[identity profile] liriselei.livejournal.com 2006-01-17 12:59 pm (UTC)(link)

<bows>
whythankeryew

[identity profile] undyingking.livejournal.com 2006-01-17 09:18 am (UTC)(link)
That's an interesting idea! Definitely worth trying out.