One quiz at a time

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 14:47 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:
PhilW wrote:ok, a clue: you (almost certainly) all have an item in your position which provides the key to this puzzle.
Another clue this evening, if needed.
A front door, a piece of cheese, a corkscrew, some port, a key, a drawer full of things that don't really belong anywhere, a table, eyes, I could go on but you see what I mean.
42 essays of variable merit, a biro (from the stationery cupboard; which is also stationary, thank goodness), a phone, a Wispa (disappearing), a desire to be elsewhere, perhaps in the Bung Hole about 28 hours from now, a tote bag containing a book about Adobe Dreamweaver, a very nice Magee tweed jacket which gets compliments wherever I go and which I complement with a contrasting pocket square.
Which is it?
I have no nice tweed jacket which gets compliments wherever I go. It is assiduously ignored by those who should know better.

That rules that one out then. The Wispa? Is yours speaking to you?
Is nobody going to pick Phil up on his confusion of position and possession? I'm marking essays right now and in no mood for leniency.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 14:49 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Why did George Michael have chocolate on his collar? Because he was careless with his wispa.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 14:50 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:Why did George Michael have chocolate on his collar? Because he was careless with his wispa.

GIve that man a round of applause.

Post by **DRT** » 15:02 Tue 26 Nov 2013

I think Phil should be made to only drink water at the next tasting.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 15:02 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:Is nobody going to pick Phil up on his confusion of position and possession? I'm marking essays right now and in no mood for leniency.

Yes.I am.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 15:03 Tue 26 Nov 2013

DRT wrote:I think Phil should be made to only drink water at the next tasting.

That will be a two-litre bottle of WHAT??? (Is that an Imperial?)

Post by **PhilW** » 16:05 Tue 26 Nov 2013

DRT wrote:I think Phil should be made to only drink water at the next tasting.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 17:21 Tue 26 Nov 2013

PhilW wrote:ok, a clue: you (almost certainly) all have an item in your position which provides the key to this puzzle.
Another clue this evening, if needed.

I resent the implication in the word 'another' that you have given a clue. I assume that you have been to the Jewesbury school of clues, ie clues that have no inherent clueness in them.

Post by **PhilW** » 19:13 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
PhilW wrote:ok, a clue: you (almost certainly) all have an item in your position which provides the key to this puzzle.
Another clue this evening, if needed.
I resent the implication in the word 'another' that you have given a clue. I assume that you have been to the Jewesbury school of clues, ie clues that have no inherent clueness in them.

ok, TWO more clues:
1. The letter A does not represent the number 0 or 1... In fact no letter represents 0 or 1
2. Despite LGTrotter's resentment, the previous clue did cause someone to mention the item which provides a key to the puzzle (and yes, "possession")

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 19:22 Tue 26 Nov 2013

The item is a phone. It's something to do with the allocation of letters to numbers on the phone dial. 0 and 1 traditionally have no letters allocated to them; although I seem to remember Q and Z were allocated to 0 on our old dial phone when I was a bairn.

Am I correct?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 19:27 Tue 26 Nov 2013

So WARRE is 92773. Are we adding the numbers together like a numerologist? 9+2+7+7+3=28. 2+8=10. 1+0=1.

Now what?

Post by **DRT** » 19:30 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:So WARRE is 92773. Are we adding the numbers together like a numerologist? 9+2+7+7+3=28. 2+8=10. 1+0=1.

Now what?

Add up the values of the drinkers and the port houses and compare the results to see is there is a pattern that explains why some drink alone and some in pairs. Then work out what is so unusual about Water. Then tell us the answer and ask a question about whisky cask numbers.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 19:33 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Not my turn. But AHB+DRT+JDAW = 45.

Post by **jdaw1** » 19:57 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Oh no. Which keypad? Rephrased, does O=0 (UK Classic Key Pad) or does O=6 (International Standard Key Pad)? Surely on ThePortForum.com it must be UK-bottled?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 20:05 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Presumably the keypad that everyone now uses as standard...

Post by **jdaw1** » 20:34 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Is it ‘transitive’? Meaning that, if A+B can drink shipper, and B+C can drink the same shipper, is it certain that A+C can also drink that shipper?

And if three pairs can, is it certain that A+B+C can?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 20:35 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Is he talking to us?
Does he know he's talking out loud?

Post by **jdaw1** » 20:36 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:Presumably the keypad that everyone now uses as standard...

Yes, except that this is a forum to discuss UK-bottled 1970 ports (and a few older things).

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 20:42 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Presumably the keypad that everyone now uses as standard...
Yes, except that this is a forum to discuss UK-bottled 1970 ports (and a few older things).

Not exclusively, by any definition. I rather think that Phil has used the current international keypad.

Post by **jdaw1** » 20:55 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Cookie can drink Croft.
BMHR+CMAG+THRA+PhilW can drink Tuke Holdsworth.
JDAW+DRT+THRA can drink Gould Campbell.
DRT can drink Dow.
BMHR+DRT+THRA can drink Hutcheson.
DRT can drink Cálem.
JDAW+BMHR+DRT can drink Burmester.
KZZM can drink Fonseca.

(A question with that structure would have been more elegant if ‘transitive’.)

I need a question.

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:01 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.

Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:03 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:
Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.
Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?

Hold on. Not so fast. You haven't explained your answer, nor has the question-setter approved it.
Back to your seat please, Wiseman, the exam is not over yet. You may count your pencils.

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:08 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:Hold on. Not so fast. You haven't explained your answer, nor has the question-setter approved it.
Back to your seat please, Wiseman, the exam is not over yet. You may count your pencils.

Back on page 186, immediately after the question about the bizarre port tasting was asked, djewesbury wrote:Julian's turn.

The question setter did not ask for an explanation.

PhilW wrote:By determining the rules of the tasting, propose another attendee and what he/she would be allowed to drink either on their own or together with others.

jdaw1 wrote:KZZM can drink Fonseca.

The point about the question-setter is fair.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:09 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Explain your working!

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:10 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!

Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.

Post by **DRT** » 21:13 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!
Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.

We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:14 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:Sometimes a tough puzzle repays some effort. Respect the question master give it some thought.
PhilW wrote:Carefully, yes. Entirely correctly, no
I humbly apologise to Derek and Daniel for my failure to appreciate and respect the subtlety and scale of their wisdom. (Include this post by reference.)
Accepted. I spose.

And repeated, this time for the additional non-‘transitive’ reason. (I really don’t like the question and want it quietly forgotten. The explanation should come from its asker.)

Those wishing to start on the next question may do so. Those awaiting official invigilation should wait.

jdaw1 wrote:
Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.
Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:14 Tue 26 Nov 2013

DRT wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!
Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.
We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.

Agreed. Or, we sabotage it. Which would be more fun?

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:15 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:And repeated, this time for the additional non-‘transitive’ reason. (I really don’t like the question and want it quietly forgotten. The explanation should come from its asker.)

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:16 Tue 26 Nov 2013

OK, be bolder. Suggest a fair penalty payable if its asker says that I have, again, failed to understand it.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:16 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Derek, can you actually understand him when he gets all over-excited like this? Should we go into the other room until he calms down?

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:17 Tue 26 Nov 2013

DRT wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!
Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.
We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.

Boycott eveyone that is rude. It would be a quiet thread.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:18 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!
Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.
We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.
Boycott eveyone that is rude. It would be a quiet thread.

Let it be so. You're not about to cross a picket line are you?

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:20 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
djewesbury wrote:Explain your working!
Not important. Because non-‘transitive’, tiresome. So left as an exercise for the reader.
We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.
Boycott eveyone that is rude. It would be a quiet thread.
Let it be so. You're not about to cross a picket line are you?

One out, all out.

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:21 Tue 26 Nov 2013

We need the current QM to come and assert some authority. Either hand over to the pretender, or, in the presence of crowds both jeering and cheering, have him hung drawn and quartered.

(Hung, not hanged? It can’t mean that. So it must be a pint of Pride.)

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:23 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:We should boycott JDAW's question until he stops being rude and explains what the answer is and how to get there.
Boycott eveyone that is rude. It would be a quiet thread.
Let it be so. You're not about to cross a picket line are you?
One out, all out.

Whilst on strike, continue the story that starts ‟A Scotsman, an Ulsterman, and a Zommerset Man met !”.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:25 Tue 26 Nov 2013

I hear no cheering.

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:31 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Though I have realised that LGTrotter+JDAW+PhilW can drink Quinta do Noval Nacional.

Post by **PhilW** » 21:41 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:Cookie can drink Croft

yes

jdaw1 wrote:BMHR+CMAG+THRA+PhilW can drink Tuke Holdsworth.

yes

jdaw1 wrote:JDAW+DRT+THRA can drink Gould Campbell.

yes

jdaw1 wrote:DRT can drink Dow.

yes

jdaw1 wrote:BMHR+DRT+THRA can drink Hutcheson.

no

jdaw1 wrote:DRT can drink Cálem.

yes

jdaw1 wrote:JDAW+BMHR+DRT can drink Burmester.

no

jdaw1 wrote:KZZM can drink Fonseca.

yes (damn!)

JDAW does indeed need a question, having supplied a new attendee together with drink

Daniel, you were right about the phone; using the keypad available on everyone's phones, you showed that AHB+DRT+JDAW = 45, and as mentioned they can drink Martinez, which also =45 by the same means; you were so close!

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:46 Tue 26 Nov 2013

PhilW wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:JDAW+BMHR+DRT can drink Burmester.
no

AH-HA. Think; 'hanging chad'.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:48 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
PhilW wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:JDAW+BMHR+DRT can drink Burmester.
no
AH-HA. Think; 'hanging chad'.

PhilW wrote:Daniel, you were right about the phone; using the keypad available on everyone's phones, you showed that AHB+DRT+JDAW = 45, and as mentioned they can drink Martinez, which also =45 by the same means; you were so close!

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:50 Tue 26 Nov 2013

I demand a recount in Florida and Nebraska. Julian Bush jnr. has stolen the election.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:51 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:I demand a recount in Florida and Nebraska. Julian Bush jnr. has stolen the election.

What you both seem to be saying is, "Daniel's question".

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:51 Tue 26 Nov 2013

PhilW wrote:JDAW does indeed need a question, having supplied a new attendee together with drink

jdaw1 wrote:
Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.
Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?

(Though if Daniel actually wants the question, I will gladly concede to him.)

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:52 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:
PhilW wrote:JDAW does indeed need a question, having supplied a new attendee together with drink
jdaw1 wrote:
Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.
Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?
(Though if Daniel actually wants the question, I will gladly concede to him.)

Did anybody hear something!? Is there somebody in the cellar?

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:53 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:I demand a recount in Florida and Nebraska. Julian Bush jnr. has stolen the election.
What you both seem to be saying is, "Daniel's question".

Both?

jdaw1 wrote:
PhilW wrote:JDAW does indeed need a question, having supplied a new attendee together with drink
jdaw1 wrote:
Back on page 183 jdaw1 wrote:I have a good question, but it has only a few hours shelf life remaining. So I’d like to win. But this objective is slightly hampered by my having no idea what the answer might be.
Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?
(Though if Daniel actually wants the question, I will gladly concede to him.)

Don't get all magnanimous, throw a hissy, anything. Mr Bush didn't walk away.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:55 Tue 26 Nov 2013

djewesbury wrote:Did anybody hear something!? Is there somebody in the cellar?

That's a good point. What have you done with the real Julian you impostor?

Post by **jdaw1** » 21:55 Tue 26 Nov 2013

LGTrotter wrote:Don't get all magnanimous, throw a hissy, anything. Mr Bush didn't walk away.

I have offered to be magnanimous, causing Daniel to run away. The problem appears to be solved.

Does the question need to be repeated? If not, that’s fine, I have other things to do (like, err, work on a book on Port).

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:57 Tue 26 Nov 2013

Run away? Not at all. Here I still am. Your magnanimity is a sham, hence I refuse to accept it and give you the pleasure of appearing to be vindicated.

Post by **PhilW** » 21:58 Tue 26 Nov 2013

jdaw1 wrote:Something happened last Friday. Something similar happened previously, and was important to this thread. What did the two things have in common?

Both involved registering a domain name?