You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
NOTICE: Sploofus is closing May 31st.    Click here for more details

You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message

Pages:  1    

1mks  (Level: 221.1 - Posts: 5929)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 9:25 AM


Superb clues!

Gypsylady  (Level: 149.2 - Posts: 6103)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 9:48 AM

Enjoyed your Wordpuzzle! Thanks!


Donleigh  (Level: 156.4 - Posts: 5467)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 10:06 AM

Marynuala  (Level: 141.3 - Posts: 996)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 10:09 AM

Wide-ranging subjects made it a very interesting WP. .

Asor  (Level: 162.7 - Posts: 595)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 10:19 AM

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 10:33 AM

I haven't taken this one yet, but just who is supposed to be P-brained?

The authors or the solvers?

Garrybl  (Level: 294.1 - Posts: 6803)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 12:12 PM

Most enjoyable.

Alvandy  (Level: 242.0 - Posts: 7720)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 1:30 PM


Daveguth  (Level: 268.9 - Posts: 1636)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 1:32 PM

Heck, I thought it was Perfect.

Crazy4games  (Level: 124.7 - Posts: 1019)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 2:28 PM

Good stuff!

Slicko  (Level: 223.9 - Posts: 1609)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 4:16 PM

Lotsa fun - just like its Predecessors.

Digs  (Level: 116.6 - Posts: 812)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 4:57 PM

A Perfectly Pleasing Puzzle!
Thanks .

Bbear  (Level: 168.0 - Posts: 2291)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 6:29 PM

Collioure---we were referring to the puzzle writers' p-brains. Glad everyone is enjoying it!

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 6:55 PM

The choices were quite excellent. Thank you again, you two.

However, you may find me pea-brained tomorrow when I discuss what I consider to be an error both of fact and grammar that was not corrected.

Virtus  (Level: 170.8 - Posts: 2493)
Tue, 9th Mar '10 7:36 PM

Another pleasing puzzle.

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Wed, 10th Mar '10 5:54 AM

The faulty phrase was

"Pluto is a former planet"

Both factually and grammatically incorrect.

More later.

Kaufman  (Level: 269.9 - Posts: 3941)
Wed, 10th Mar '10 6:05 AM

Grammatically it's fine. Just like "Collioure is a former US resident." As for the factual end, that's the official party line, and if you care to rebel and argue that you feel it's still a planet or it never was, I can respect that, but as shorthand for "Pluto is a former member of the list of planets kept by those who think they have the right to keep the official list," I can't argue with that either.

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Wed, 10th Mar '10 12:36 PM

It's not fine factually. And it's not fine grammatically either because it doesn't make any sense.

"Pluto is a former planet of our solar system?" No, Pluto has not changed or changed solar systems. It has always been a dwarf planet of our solar system. So it is not a former anything! Here on Earth we recently decided to change our astronomic classification of it.

Generally speaking, if Pluto still exists, it just cannot be a "former planet."

I attribute this error and the extra letters I had to draw to discover an answer I knew to be impossible to more lousy editing at Sploofus.

IMO an editor who passes on "former planet" without lifting an eyebrow should consider becoming a former editor.

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 8:23 AM

I do wish to clarify something here. I do not hold the authors of this puzzle responsible for this glitch. They wrote a very fine and interesting puzzle.

I think this should have been caught by an editor. I think when something is presented to 200 people each of whom spends an average of 1/2 hour on it, the editors need to invest sufficient time to keep us from wasting ours.

Bbear  (Level: 168.0 - Posts: 2291)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 10:06 AM

It is interesting that out of the 200 or so people who spent 1/2 hour on this, 100 of whom would have also gotten that particular phrase, there is only one objection to it.

If the phrase is bad, blame in wholely and solely on Jim and I, not our editor. S/he is extremely attentive, makes many minute changes that others may leave be just to stop silly complaints and is still editing our WP right up until publication time. I, for one, would be very upset if s/he retired due to insults such as this. We lost our last editor, and we were very attached to him/her, over this sort of stuff.

Hands off my editor, babe!

Alvandy  (Level: 242.0 - Posts: 7720)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 3:03 PM

If you haven't already , try to watch a NOVA [Public Broadcasting System] recent program.

Pluto Files

Since its discovery in 1930, Pluto has held a warm place in the public imagination. So, when the American Museum of Natural History’s Hayden Planetarium stopped calling Pluto a planet, director Neil deGrasse Tyson found himself at the center of a firestorm — a firestorm led by angry Pluto-loving elementary school students. But what is it about this cold, distant rock that captures so many hearts? NOVA joins Tyson on a quest to find out. From the scientists trying to classify Pluto to die-hard “Pluto-philes,” Tyson meets a fascinating cast of characters with just one thing in common: strong opinions about Pluto. Based on Tyson’s book The Pluto Files , this is a light-hearted look at the solar system’s best-loved non-planet

P.S. It wasn't re-classified to dwarf planet until 2006.

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 4:04 PM

Beth, thank you once again for a truly excellent puzzle. The creative choices you and Jim make for this series just get better and better

Editors should offer a questioning, critical eye. Maybe if you’ve watched a few too many episodes of Star Trek you heard a reference or two to former planets, but there are no former planets in our solar system.

IMO this was too gross a glitch to get by anyone. And, Beth, I am insulted that you have called my remarks insulting. I provide them in a constructive manner.

Moreover, I continue to offer to fill an editor's shoes because we the members should not be placed in the position of having to enter answers WE KNOW ARE WRONG.

BTW it does not matter how many people take the time to write. As consumer products companies know, just one equals 10-20-or-100 who had the same thought but didn’t act on it.

And, Al, it does not matter when it was reclassified. Very simply Pluto is not a former anything. It's just like it always has been.

Alvandy  (Level: 242.0 - Posts: 7720)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 4:35 PM

I'll take the bait and reply to Collioure. [It proves I've read his post.]

Pluto WAS classified one of nine planets until 2006. Dwarf planet was not an astronomical term until the scientific community debated all the issues involved and made a [controversial] decision on scientific grounds to re-classify solar system satellites based on new data and definitions we have learned through our space explorations. The general public is just now getting educated, but Pluto is popular [but if it wasn't also a Disney dog, I wonder how much controversy would have been generated compared to now.]. Thus the hub bub.

We have four terrestrial planets; four gas giants; several [this list is growing] dwarf planets; planetary satellites or moons; asteroids; and comet bodies making up our solar system.

So calling Pluto a former planet is not wrong. The puzzle used up-to- date information

I had that particular puzzle and I didn't blink an eye about the wording. It was AOK by me. It was factually based.

Pluto [the planet] will always be famous and actually has gained new found love and recognition because of the recent changes.
Pluto [the Disney dog] will always be famous too..

Daveguth  (Level: 268.9 - Posts: 1636)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 6:08 PM

Al, I think you missed Collioure’s point. This is all about grammar, not planetary classification systems.

Collioure believes the correct grammatical version of “Pluto is a former planet” is “Pluto was formerly classified as a planet.”

Yes, Collioure, you have identified a frequently ignored cause embraced by a handful of grammarians: literalism. These are the folks who are flummoxed over such travesties as idioms. For example, these folks would quickly advise us that one who “has an axe to grind” probably isn’t in possession of a dull axe. One can only imagine the pain that such a phrase inflicts upon the ears of the true literalist.

And it’s not only idioms that have Collioure and his fellow literalists in an uproar. Poor writers often take wording shortcuts in the name of brevity, or take other liberties to make a point. I realize, Collioure, that your preceding post was probably done without the same attention to detail you would normally give something as sacred as a Word Puzzle, but I think a few of your wording choices help make this point.

For example, you said: “The creative choices you and Jim make for this series just get better and better.” The literalist will look at this sentence and ask “better and better than what?” Better and better than other puzzles? Better and better than sliced bread? Better and better than a boot to the head?

Additionally, you said “Editors should offer a questioning critical eye.” Only one eye? Why not the other? And do eyes really question? And by “critical,” could you possibly be suggesting that the eye is near death?

And “fill an editor’s shoes”? If you have tiny feet, is this an impossible task? Or if you have exceptionally big feet, will you exceed your goal of filling those shoes?

Or how about this one: “…WE KNOW ARE WRONG.” Literally, of course, you meant “…I KNOW WERE WRONG.” At least, I think so, because only you are courageous enough to express this very serious concern about the need to write in a literal manner—context or common sense be damned.

Ah, but you wisely point to the very scientific evidence that consumer marketers estimate that one loud voice represents “10-20-100” more folks who didn’t speak up. (I wonder, Collioure, if the figure starts to approach 100 when the lone writer places his concern in ALL CAPS.)

Which leads to the question, if four of us (Kaufman, Beth, Al, and I) decided to write that your overly literal interpretation of “former planet” is pretty silly, would that mean 40-80-400 non-writing Sploofus users think the same thing?

Kaufman  (Level: 269.9 - Posts: 3941)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 6:11 PM

Al wrote: "but if it wasn't also a Disney dog, I wonder how much controversy would have been generated compared to now"

Then again, Eddie Murphy did release that abominable (or so I hear) Pluto Nash. You'd think that would sour people on the name.

After all, those who this century have come to think "Hussein" is an awful name forget that a quarter century ago, it would have been most associated with the most progressive Arab head of state around ...

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 6:28 PM

Al, it doesn't matter what the scientists decided and undecided.

Granted, it was formerly CONSIDERED to be a planet. However, whatever Pluto was, it still is. It simply is not a former anything. The idea of a celestial body in our solar system being a "former planet" is absurd.

Bbear  (Level: 168.0 - Posts: 2291)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 6:37 PM

Love ya Al.

Love ya Dave.

Every time I go to the car dealership to get anything done they send a "comment card". I have always had superior service and fair prices from my dealer. The one time that I had an issue I sent back the "comment card" with negative comments; it was the only once I ever sent. Now I realize how unfair that is.

Which leaves me to believe that Collioure absolutely, positively loves our WPs!

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 7:52 PM

Of course, I love your WPs, Beth. You're one of the very best.

But when I have a problem with the editing, I often confer with even more accomplished solvers before going public.

Of course, after 1 1/2 years years here I have been advised that editors are not responsible for fact-checking which is not my personal experience and unfortunate as well IMO.

Collioure  (Level: 115.2 - Posts: 9952)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 7:56 PM

The pain, Dave, is when you are looking for the adjective to describe PLANET and you are thinking of synonyms for dwarf, distant . . . and in fact, it's an adjective that is dead wrong.

Alvandy  (Level: 242.0 - Posts: 7720)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 9:48 PM

Here is a press release from famous Disney icons.a few years ago. Let's let a sleeping dog lie.

BURBANK, Calif., Aug. 24- 2006:
-- In reaction to news today that Pluto was demoted to the status of "dwarf planet," the Seven Dwarfs issued their own short statement:

"Although we think it's DOPEY that Pluto has been downgraded to a dwarf planet, which has made some people GRUMPY and others just SLEEPY, we are not BASHFUL in saying we would be HAPPY if Disney's Pluto would join us as an eighth dwarf. We think this is just what the DOC ordered and is nothing to SNEEZE at."

As Mickey Mouse's faithful companion, Pluto made his debut in 1930 -- the same year that scientists discovered what they believed was a ninth planet.

Said a white-gloved, yellow-shoed source close to Disney's top dog, "I think the whole thing is goofy. Pluto has never been interested in astronomy before, other than maybe an occasional howl at the moon."

Garrybl  (Level: 294.1 - Posts: 6803)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 11:29 PM

This last message reminds me of why it was that Mickey told the divorce court that he wanted to divorce Minnie.
The court asked him whether her having a gap in her teeth was really reason enough.
and he responded: "I did not say that, I said she was...."

[Gap toi be filled in according to taste]

Bbear  (Level: 168.0 - Posts: 2291)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 11:32 PM

Barry --- I'm so out of touch that Jim had to fill in that blank.

And ....... groan.....

Alvandy  (Level: 242.0 - Posts: 7720)
Thu, 11th Mar '10 11:51 PM

But this also might have been a reason:

Mickey and Minnie Mouse were at court for divorce proceedings. The judge told Mickey, "Look here Mickey Mouse, I can't grant you a divorce from Minnie!" Mickey Mouse was stunned and asked, "Why not???"

The Judge said, "I've reviewed all the information you gave to the court, but I can't find any evidence at all to support the grounds that she is crazy!"
Mickey Mouse says, "Your Honor! I didn't say she was CRAZY, I said she was [gap ] Goofy!"

Pages:  1    

Copyright © 2003-2017 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus