Forums-->Off-game forum-->
1|2|3|4|5|6
| Author | The Great Etymology Throwdown |
|---|
| I also misspelled honey the first time as well. But the woolly was a real mistake i did not realise in all my years of existence that there were two os there | | That's what happens when you grow up in India where wool has never needed to exist | | You do know that india is massive right? We have every terrain and climate available in the world. I mean my home state is bigger than the uk and has more diverse climate than the sad overcast rains you have. That being said you are right about me not needing to know about it. | I didn't even realize that this was the last round, so I guess I have that going for me. I'm not sure I could judge any more of these rounds anyways; I recently rediscovered League of Legends and most of my time has been spent losing to trash talking 13 year olds. Still arguably more fun than Lords though
I'm not sure how to judge these rebuttals anyways. I guess they're supposed to be modifications to the original definitions, but I'll just pretend that both of you made two submissions and take the best out of the four. I don't think that's what Igles's original intention, but I guess since I'm the judge, I get to make the rules. Yay, me
First, before I begin, RIP virtual_vitrea. We will remember your short bout of brilliance for at least three days. Let us take a moment to pray for his well being.
Ok, now on to the actual voting. I'll be honest, none of these definitions are really making much of an impact on me.
Let's start at the very end. Bees fed on the blood of woolly mammoths? Really? I'm willing to entertain some wild theories, but you can't just write anything you want and expect me to be pleased. Yes, I know that it's the last round, so you figured you might as well shoot for the moon, but in this case, you missed, and now you're going to suffer a long agonizing fate travelling in the vacuum that is space.
Also, your final explanation is essentially that baked cats -> catatonic. Not very brilliant, which is why I guess you had to dress up your etymology with a bunch of stuff about woolly mammoths. I'm not impressed.
Lord MilesTeg, I'm also not very enthusiastic about your cat etymology. That's a lot of words to basically say that "cats like to sleep on people's laps". Sure, it's true, but it's not very illuminating, you know?
Ok, so we go to the original etymologies. So Igles, "post-newt-cognitive clarity" is one of your many uh... impressive applications of our language - I guess I can hesitantly commend you for that. There's just one issue though - Mountain Dew didn't exist in the time of wizards. Zero points. This is non-negotiable. (Also, I don't really like Mountain Dew either. Maybe if you said Orange Crush. Well, it's too late now.)
And Lord MilesTeg, I actually appreciate your original etymology based on the drug trade. It's nice to get one that's actually not just a bunch of jokes, especially since virtual_vitrea decided to drop out. An educational post is appreciated every now and then. It's just... I don't know, it didn't do much for me. Have you ever read something that you agreed with but didn't really feel passionate about? That's how I feel with your etymology. It's great, but I'm not sure I can give you the victory for it.
I guess I'll give Lord MilesTeg half a point.
From my perspective, neither of you figured out the actual etymology of the word catatonic. You were both right to think about the relationship to cats, but otherwise, your explanations were off the mark.
The actual truth of the matter is that, a long time ago, there was a jolly old fella named Nick who really loved his one and only cat. Unfortunately, this cat liked to play tricks on his owner, so one day, he pretended to play dead when Nick woke up to greet him. Nick became so distraught by the death of his only cat that he decided to spend the day enjoying some... dangerous activities. I won't bore you with the details; just know that by the end of that same day, Nick was not with us anymore.
Now, of course, this (unnamed) cat couldn't know that his activities would cause this to happen. But God knew, and that was enough for God to curse the cat for his ill-advised behavior. God declared that it would be the cat's duty to atone for his owner's death. Now, normally, the punishment for pretending to be something one was not would be to actually suffer that exact fate. However, it felt unfair to God to kill the cat for playing dead - after all, there's no atonement after death. Thus, instead, the cat had to suffer the fate of being amongst the living dead - that is to say, while the cat would technically be alive, it would be as if it he were dead. To describe this state, the words cat + atone + Nick were combined to form the word catatonic. (The disappearance of the letter k has been the subject of many unresolved debates.)
Oh snap, it seems I have submitted my own etymology for this contest. And you know what, I like it so much that I'll give myself five points for it.
So I guess the final standings for this contest are:
Another Player (Dan): 5
Igles: 2
Lord MilesTeg: 1.5
virtual_vitrea: 1
Woohoo, I win this contest.
(Igles, this is what you get for rushing me.)
Actual etymology of catatonic: https://www.etymonline.com/word/catatonic + https://www.etymonline.com/word/catatonia. | Well guess dan won!
Thats all folks. | Oof, I didn’t expect you, Igles, to take my response so seriously. My mistake yet again
Of course I’m not eligible for the contest anyways, so you would naturally be the winner. Or I guess it would be a tie if Lord MilesTeg got the full point for his definition in the last round. You can choose the result that would appeal to you the most. | He beat us all hands down, we only managed 4.5 points collectively to his 5.
That's an absolute thumping | | He did beat us all combined miles, but most importantly he did a last minute plot twist like any good heist movie. We have been heisted miles. Dan’s iron fist has grabbed the trophy. What are we to do. | Put on a stiff upper lip, pretend nothing has happened and have a cup of tea?
Remember this is not real and is all just a game?
Learn how to interpret that the question I'm responding to was rhetorical?
Stop typing and get on with the job I'm paid to do..? | | I propose a fresh contest to settle this score. We can work out what the contest’s going to be but we gonna rooe in even more people, make it bigger and grander the stakes are gonna be so high it will turn the world vegetarian. It will be wilder and crazier and we will insult every molecule merlin posesses. Ahem. lets go! a hundred year igles and miles! | I propose a fresh contest to settle this score
+1 | | Surprised you managed to get 5 pages out of this one tbh mate. Especially given the quality of the majority of your submissions.. | I'm not doing this again unless I'm a participant
As it turns out, judging isn't that fun | | Oh i could cook up a game where judging would not be required :) you can be evil alongside us as a participant all you want. | I was going to suggest that if people want a continuation, we just do it as a simple open format, anyone get stuck in, and then community judged by whomever wants to stick their oar in just as a tally of total number of votes after each word has reached a natural point.
That way everyone can get involved, there is no pressure on any one person and the criteria can be whatever each individual happens to value. | the problem is that the lurkers in this forum would only vote if there were anonymous upvote and downvote buttons and that would be unfair to me as i am one of the most hated.
in my opinion we should have a cards against humanity-esque voting system amongst the players at best and a random number generator or a dice roll for the points by everyone introducing randomness and more potential for baseless trash talk.
i still think dan's judging was hilarious, in depth and fair and i would prefer to have a judge but if my guy didnt have any fun maybe its not worth it doing it that way.
all in all i think participant voting would be the best and dice rolling the second best. | I had a go at the trash talk, but it's just not me at least not in a written format,). I don't know any of you well enough to feel like that would be ok. Intellectually I know it's probably fine, but I still feel rude.
Not a clue on cards against humanity. I tend to go with the logic that the simpler the system the better, especially in circumstances of no easy consensus.
Especially since the judging aspect is the decisive bit that generally gets in the way. The bit I like is coming up with a plausible answer. It is that creative expression with defined limits. Similarly I enjoy how others come up with that.
Whether I win or lose is mostly immaterial, but collectively people feeling good about coming up with something innovative and amusing, that's the win. That feeling is shared more with decentralised judging.
Personally my instinct is that people that are still here and readibg it, are not the trolling sort. | i was laughing at the dense thing out loud in real life. i quite enjoyed that dont worry too much about offending people, as long as the joke is more creative/ funny than it is offensive it usually works out.
The cards against humanity voting system is just players voting after each round. we could make it so that the players are obligated to vote but the lurkers can vote too.
we could do a more creative contest with word limits and requirements that have to be hit apart from the creative aspect. | | I agree totally with Miles post 97, no votes needed and not everyone is on the trolling sort. | I think we will need some kind of structure to what we are doing however. So would suggest a rough format like this
Anyone who is interested in getting involved suggests a list of words to choose from
Someone starts (perhaps Anotherplayer since he judged the last one, and won)
Anyone who feels inspired to do so has a crack at it
When it seems like new comments have ebbed, whoever put the word forward selects who from the previous submissions should choose the next word. This could nominally be because they preferred a certain response, but need not be. Equally between that point anyone can give their views in a positive way.
I think that is fairly straightforward and should be able to proceed at a point until people become bored by the concept. It also allows people to dip in or out at any point, thus removing a sense of obligation or pressure.
Thoughts? |
1|2|3|4|5|6Back to topics list
|
