This is the fourth Doctor Who Rare Entries contest. There a few minor rule changes from last time and these have been highlighted below. Note that this time round, all questions apply only to the new series which debuted in 2005. Answers relying on information from episodes broadcast before that date will be marked wrong.
SHORT RULES
The purpose of this game is as follows: for each of the questions, your objective is to give an answer that (1) is correct, and (2) will be duplicated by as FEW other people as possible.
** Answers must be submitted by email only. DO NOT POST ANSWERS HERE **
THE QUESTIONS
0. Name someone who has seen the TARDIS appear or disappear.
1. Name an actor who has appeared in both the new series of Doctor Who and in any episode or episodes of "The Bill"
2. Name something there were exactly three of in the new series.
3. Name someone who received a credit on at least one episode of the new series, but who did not in fact work on that episode.
4. Name a piece of Time Lord technology we have seen in the new series.
5. Name something which exists in the world today, which also features in the fictional world of the new series stories, and which did not exist in 1989.
6. Name somewhere the TARDIS has landed.
7. Name an alien race which we have seen at least two members of, and heard at least one speak.
8. Some people who have contributed to Doctor Who episodes have written other things. Name one such thing first made available to the public after at least one of that person's Doctor Who episodes was transmitted.
9. Name someone who has been credited on every single episode of the new series.
In order to participate in the contest, send your answers to me by email (tomsalin...@googlemail.com) before noon on Friday 21 July 2006. It is of course essential that nobody sees the answers given by other entrants before the deadline, so please do NOT post your answers here!
If there are fewer than 10 entrants, I may not bother working out who's won, so if this sounds like fun, do encourage others to play.
Make sure you have read the rules before submitting your answers.
YOUR ATTENTION IS SPECIFICALLY DRAWN TO RULE 3. Please supply the information asked for and only the information asked for. If you supply two answers, or appear to supply two answers, I will take the first one.
1. Answers For each of the questions above, your objective is to give an answer that (1) is correct, and (2) will be duplicated by as FEW other people as possible. Feel free to use any reference material you like to RESEARCH your answers; but when you have found enough possible answers for your liking, you are expected to choose on your own which one to submit, WITHOUT mechanical or computer assistance: this is meant to be a game of wits.
2. Scoring The scores on the different questions are MULTIPLIED to produce a final score for each entrant. Low score wins; a perfect score is 1. If your answer to a question is correct, then your score is the number of people who gave that answer, or an answer I consider equivalent. A wrong answer, or a skipped question, gets a high score as a penalty. This is the median of: - the number of entrants - the square root of that number, rounded up to an integer - double the largest number of entrants giving the same answer (right or wrong) as each other on the question
2.1 More Specific Variants On some questions it's possible that one entrant will give an answer that is a more specific variant of an answer given by someone else. In that case the more specific variant will usually be scored as if the two answers are different, but the other, less specific variant will be scored as if they are the same.
2.2 Scoring Example Say I ask for someone the Doctor has kissed. There are 27 entrants: 19 say "Rose" or "Rose Tyler", 2 say "Cassandra in the body of Rose Tyler", 4 say "Captain Jack", 1 says "Daphne Ashbrook" and 1 says "Lynda Moss". The 4 people who answered "Captain Jack" get 4 points each. Since "Cassandra in the body of Rose Tyler" is a more specific variant of "Rose Tyler", those who said "Rose Tyler" get 21 points each, and those who said "Cassandra in the body of Rose Tyler" get 2 points each. The Doctor never kissed actress Daphne Ashbrook (although he may have kissed Grace Holloway) nor Lynda Moss, so those answers are both wrong. The persons who gave them both get the penalty score, which is the median of: - number of entrants = 27: - sqrt(27) = 5.196+, rounded up = 6: - double the most popular answer's count = 21 x 2 = 42: or in this case, 27.
3. Entries Entries must be emailed to me personally by email: tomsalin...@googlemail.com. Do NOT post your answers on the the forum! In general there is no penalty for errors of spelling, capitalization, English usage, or other such matters of form. Sometimes a specific question may imply stricter rules, though. And if you give an answer that properly refers to a different thing related to the one you intended, I will normally take it as written. Once you intentionally submit an answer, no changes will be allowed, unless I decide there was a problem with the question. Similarly, alternate answers within an entry will not be accepted. Only the first answer that you intentionally submit counts. You can expect an acknowledgement when I read your entry. If this bounces, it won't be sent again.
3.1 Clarifications Questions are not intended to be hard to understand, but I may fail in this intent. (For one thing, in many cases clarity could only be provided by an example which would suggest one or another specific answer, and I mustn't do that.) In order to be fair to all entrants, I must insist that requests for clarification must be emailed to me, NOT POSTED in any mailing list. But if you do ask for clarification, I'll probably say that the question is clear enough as posted. If I do decide to clarify or change a question, all entrants will be informed.
3.2 Supporting Information It is your option whether or not to provide supporting information to justify your answers. If you don't, I'll email you to ask for it if I need to. If you provide any explanatory remarks along with your answers, you are responsible for making it sufficiently clear that they are not part of the answers. The particular format doesn't matter as long as you're clear.
4. Scope - TEMPORARY RULE CHANGE FOR DWRE4 Unless a question indicates otherwise, all questions refer to the transmitted episodes of the BBC television series "Doctor Who" in its current incarnation which began in 2005. Only episodes transmitted at the time of posting (in this case 11 July 2006) are included, and all other Doctor Who related works are excluded. This excludes audio plays, comic strips, spin-offs, TARDISodes, novelisations and probably more from the scope of the contest.
4.1 For the purposes of DWRE4 only, the television series "Doctor Who" is considered to be a collection of discrete episodes, generally 45 minutes in length, some of which can also be thought of as comprising two parts of one story. The episode titles are those displayed on the screen at the beginning of the episode and are the only titles which should be used to identify episodes, regardless of whether or not they happen to be one part of a two-episode story.
Anything which is seen only in the "Previously on..." or "Next week on..." segments of the 2005- series is not deemed to be part of that story. Any other flashbacks, recaps or the like are deemed to be part of that story.
4.2 "Companion" refers to anyone who travelled with the Doctor for two or more consecutive stories. For the avoidance of doubt, the following all have companion status: Adam, Captain Jack, Mickey.
RULE CHANGE 4.3 "Appears" or "Seen" mean seen on-screen, as opposed to merely referred to in dialogue or implied. If a character is clearly heard to speak, then they, and the actor who played them, are deemed to have "appeared" regardless of whether we see them or not.
RULE CHANGE 4.4 "Alien" means not originating from the planet Earth. A character is considered a member of an alien race if they do not look entirely human, or if despite looking human, their planet of birth is not Earth and they are not referred to as human (or it can be shown that they are not accurately referred to as human).
4.5 "Actor" includes both male and female performers, but excludes stunt-people, stand-ins doubling for a credited actor etc. unless the question indicates otherwise. Generally a performer who does not receive a credit is not regarded as an actor.
5. Judging As moderator, I will be the sole judge of what answers are correct, and whether two answers with similar meaning are considered the same, different, or more/less specific variants. I will do my best to be fair on all such issues, but sometimes it is necessary to be arbitrary. I may rescore the contest if I agree that I made a serious error and it affects the high finishers.
6. Results Results will normally be posted within a few days of the contest closing. They may be delayed if I'm unexpectedly busy or for technical reasons.
This is not strictly a rewording of a question, but a note on interpretation. Where question 4 is concerned, absent other evidence, I am considering any item of technology originating with The Doctor to be Time Lord technology.
In article <1152634241.616534.45...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
tomsalin...@googlemail.com <tomsalin...@googlemail.com> wrote: >This is not strictly a rewording of a question, but a note on >interpretation. Where question 4 is concerned, absent other evidence, I >am considering any item of technology originating with The Doctor to be >Time Lord technology.
Thank you for the clarification. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
> This is the fourth Doctor Who Rare Entries contest. There a few minor > rule changes from last time and these have been highlighted below. Note > that this time round, all questions apply only to the new series which > debuted in 2005. Answers relying on information from episodes broadcast > before that date will be marked wrong.
Answers were slower than usual to come in, but we ended up with 30; a decent number, but less than I hoped given for the theoretically greater appeal of the New Series contest. Joint winners are Neil Toynay and Wilf with an excellent score of just 16. First-time entrant Dannyboy is third with a very impressive 60, despite one wrong answer - and these in a contest with the worst scores well into the millions! Congratulations to them, Here are the top answer slates (slightly abbreviated). Use a monospaced font for proper alignment.
NEIL TOYNAY WILF DANNYBOY 0 Matt K9 Mark IV Captain Reynolds 1 Lucy Robinson Simon Greenall Jo Stone-Fewings 2 Stories w/ Pete Tyler Eps w/ P. Wilton Writers start w/M 3 Dave Martin Marc Platt Kit Pedler 4 K9 Mark IV Ghost hunting kit Dimens'l Trans'ism 5 National Lottery Big Brother News clips on phones 6 Tizana's pizza Albion Hospital Between two crates 7 Sisters of Plenitude Sisters of Plenitude Sycorax 8 Jump Mr Malinoff,Jump DWM diary [WRONG] 9 Peter Chester Dave Houghton Endaf Emyr Williams
To review the scoring: The scores on the different questions are MULTIPLIED to produce a final score for each entrant. Low score wins; a perfect score is 1. If your answer to a question is correct, then your score is the number of people who gave that answer, or an answer I consider equivalent. A wrong answer, or a skipped question, gets a high score as a penalty. This is the median of: - the number of entrants - the square root of that number, rounded up to an integer - double the largest number of entrants giving the same answer (right or wrong) as each other on the question
Here is the complete list of answers given. Each list shows correct answers in the order worst to best (most to least popular). >>> indicates that the "more specific variant" scoring was used.
There was no problem with public posting of answers this time round, I'm pleased to say.
0. Name someone who has seen the TARDIS appear or disappear.
6 The Doctor (The Parting of the Ways) 5 Charles Dickens 4 Matt (Army of Ghosts) 3 Rose Tyler 2 Adam (The Long Game) 2 Sarah Jane Smith 1 Abzorbaloff 1 Bev (Bridesmaid, Father's Day) 1 Captain Reynolds 1 Harriet Jones 1 K9 Mark IV 1 Mickey Smith 1 The Abzorbaloff 1 The Emperor Dalek
Dickens proved to be a popular answer here, maybe because seeing the TARDIS disappear is a profound moment for him. As usual, The Doctor and Rose feature strongly with several people commenting that no-one else will want to be this obvious. This strategy tends not to work. Of course, now I've said that it may... One entrant submitted "The Ninth Doctor", but since I have previously ruled that a person who regenerates is still the same person, this is not a more specific variant here.
Matt is the chap in Army of Ghosts who sees the TARDIS on his monitor and it may be this "one-remove" plus his recent appearance which accounts for his strong showing.
The Emperor Dalek and K9 both just about scrape in as "someone"s and the other answers were uncontroversial. Other right answers not given include Jackie Tyler, Sycorax Leader, Alex (The Christmas Invasion) and various people in the church in Father's Day.
1. Name an actor who has appeared in both the new series of Doctor Who and in any episode or episodes of "The Bill"
3 Elisabeth Sladen 2 David Tennant 2 Dona Croll 2 Freema Agyeman 2 Judy Holt 2 Marc Warren 2 Noel Clarke 2 Rupert Vansittart 2 Simon Greenall 1 Annette Badland 1 Danny Webb 1 Ellen Thomas 1 Jo Stone-Fewings 1 John Leeson 1 Lucy Robinson 1 Rochelle Gadd 1 Silas Carson 1 Simon Day 1 Tim Faraday Wrong 1 No answer given
Plenty to choose from here, with familiar faces like Elisabeth Sladen, Noel Clarke, Marc Warren and Freema Agyman (who inspired the question) tending to do better than the more obscure actors. I was surprised David Tennant didn't get more votes.
Judy Holt was Adam's mum in The Long Game and had a recurring role in The Bill in 2002. Dona Kroll was a Cat-Nun and appeared in two roles in The Bill, seven years apart. I suspect their score of 2 among the more well-known faces (in quite a flat distribution) is just coincidence.
2. Name something there were exactly three of in the new series.
4 Episodes with five word titles 2 Big Brother housemates 1 Announced Torchwood regular cast members 1 Appearances of The Face of Boe 1 Cars (not vans) Mickey Smith drives 1 Ds in 'Blaidd Drwg Project' 1 Episodes containing Daleks broadcast in 2005 1 Episodes featuring Penelope Wilton 1 Episodes featuring the Slitheen 1 Episodes set before 20th century 1 Episodes with 'The' as the first and fourth words 1 Forest of Cheem 1 Ghost-hunting pods 1 Male companions 1 Metal objects TARDIS crashed into 1 People in Rose's family 1 Reality shows on Satellite 5 1 Robot TV Presenters 1 Stories featuring Pete Tyler 1 Transmission blocks 1 Versions of end title music 1 Ways to enter Battersea Power Station 1 Writers whose first name starts with M Wrong 1 Adherents of the Repeated Meme (five) 1 People possessed by Cassandra (four) 1 Things picked up by ninth Doctor in Rose's flat (four)
A "use your imagination" rather than a "do your research" question which makes the collision on "five word titles" even more bizarre. You also have to be able to count - there were more than three Adherents of the Repeated Meme, and Cassandra possessed a patient as well as The Doctor, Chip and Rose.
The three Torchwood cast members are John Barrowman (Captain Jack), Eve Myles (Gwyneth in The Unquiet Dead) and Naoko Mori (Doctor Sato in Aliens of London).
After some thought, I accepted the answer "Ds in 'Blaidd Drwg Project'". This looks more like an answer to "What are there three of in 'Blaidd Drwg Project'?". I think if I give you a constraint, you can't add further constraints to make a wrong answer right - and there was no shortage of right answers here. Even the entrant commented that this was not a good answer. However, rejecting this would probably also have meant rejecting "Dalek episodes in 2005" and "Cars Mickey Smith drives (not vans)" and I couldn't see a clear place to draw the line.
"Things picked up by the Ninth Doctor in Rose's flat in Rose" falls into the same category, but thankfully this was an incorrect answer in any case: even if one discounts the Auton hand, the entrant forgot the letter addressed to Rose, citing only cards, book and magazine.
The three versions of the end title music are Murray Gold's original, the National Orchestra of Wales version and the combination of both heard when the "Next Episode" preview is delayed.
3. Name someone who received a credit on at least one episode of the new series, but who did not in fact work on that episode.
8 Gerry Davis 6 Ron Grainer 5 Robert Holmes 4 Terry Nation 2 Kit Pedler 1 Dave Martin 1 Fintan Coyle 1 Marc Platt Wrong 1 Jo Joyner 1 No answer given
Generally this means people whose prior work was re-used, or to whom thanks are due. Ron Grainer was a popular answer - not surprising as I think he must be the most-credited person on Doctor Who, appearing in the credits of every episode bar one, I believe (ob-puzzle: name the one). See question 9 for more on him.
I believe only two right answers were overlooked here. Dave Martin got a mention, but nobody picked fellow K9 creator Bob Baker. Similarly Fintan Coyle was submitted once, but fellow Weakest Link creator Cathy Dunning was never named. The entrant who submitted "Jo Joyner" seemed to think that she would be credited for her appearance in a flashback. This was not the case.
4. Name a piece of Time Lord technology we have seen in the new series.
If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer to question 4.
> If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright > winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord > technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time > Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added enhancements > along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer to question 4.
> Michael
In a similar vein I don't agree that K9 should be classed as a "someone" or a "somebody". It's a machine. You could argue that it's sentient (I think therefore I am) but it's still a machine. The definition is below :
person: a human being; "there was too much for one person to do" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
However...at the end of the day Tom is the quizmaster and he has the difficult task of adjudicating the entries and assigning the overall scores. That can't be an easy task so he must hold some artistic licence to say "The Judges Decision is Final"
Yes Will don't worry that was me. It is me you have been having offline conversations with also. Only worry if the poster uses a source that doesn't identify his IP address. Me - I have nothing to hide and even use my real e-mail address these days. My days of antagonistic posts are gone...I'm too old for all that shit. I will try and call you later...I'm on the late shift tonight on the help desk.
Defining any technology which originates with The Doctor as "Time Lord technology" (which I am) means that there's certainly a lot of "Time Lord Technology" in K9.
Also, don't forget that K9 Mark IV is a rebuild of K9 Mark III. And the evidence suggests that K9 Mark III was built from scratch, after K9 Mark II was left behind in E-Space.
Michael Kilpatrick wrote: > If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright > winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord > technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time > Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added > enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer > to question 4.
In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >to question 4.
>Michael
You are thinking Professor Marius. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
>"Michael Kilpatrick" <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote in message >news:CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVny3w@pipex.net... >> If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >> winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >> technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >> Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added enhancements >> along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer to question 4.
>> Michael
>In a similar vein I don't agree that K9 should be classed as a "someone" or >a "somebody". It's a machine. You could argue that it's sentient (I think >therefore I am) but it's still a machine. The definition is below :
>person: a human being; "there was too much for one person to do" >wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
>However...at the end of the day Tom is the quizmaster and he has the >difficult task of adjudicating the entries and assigning the overall scores. >That can't be an easy task so he must hold some artistic licence to say "The >Judges Decision is Final"
But protests have to be noted. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
> In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, > Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: >>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>to question 4.
>>Michael
It's a bit of fun Michael, that those who enter enjoy and don't really care where we finish. Tom runs this fairly and correctly. As far as I can tell he judges openly and posts his decisions and explanations openly for all to read.
Well played Tom another good quiz. I for one thank you.
Sean wrote: > "The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message > news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca... > > In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, > > Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: > >>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright > >>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord > >>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time > >>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added > >>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer > >>to question 4.
> >>Michael
> It's a bit of fun Michael, that those who enter enjoy and don't really care > where we finish. Tom runs this fairly and correctly. As far as I can tell he > judges openly and posts his decisions and explanations openly for all to > read.
> Well played Tom another good quiz. I for one thank you.
>"The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message >news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca... >> In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, >> Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: >>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>>to question 4.
>>>Michael
>It's a bit of fun Michael, that those who enter enjoy and don't really care >where we finish. Tom runs this fairly and correctly. As far as I can tell he >judges openly and posts his decisions and explanations openly for all to >read.
>Well played Tom another good quiz. I for one thank you.
And how is the overall QM? -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
> "The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message > news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca... >> In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, >> Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: >>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>>to question 4.
>>>Michael
> It's a bit of fun Michael, that those who enter enjoy and don't really > care where we finish.
I DO!!! I thought I did really well with weird and unique answers and i came bloody 27th!!! god damnit!
>> "The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message >> news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca... >>> In article <CK6dnRzzks5cZV3ZRVn...@pipex.net>, >>> Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: >>>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>>>to question 4.
>>>>Michael
>> It's a bit of fun Michael, that those who enter enjoy and don't really >> care where we finish.
>I DO!!! I thought I did really well with weird and unique answers and i came >bloody 27th!!! god damnit!
I should check to feed for accuracy myself. I never saw this. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
>>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>>to question 4.
>>>Michael
> It's a bit of fun Michael...
Of course it is. One has to be careful with questions that have obvious ambiguities, and it must be a nightmare trying to avoid such problems when setting a quiz!
Here, if I built an identical replica of George Stevenson's "Rocket" steam locomotive, the "technology of the new Rocket" would still be Stevenson's not mine, regardless of whatever modern tools I used to produce the components. If I made the boiler 10% bigger, it would still be Victorian technology, not 21st Century, providing I didn't use titanium to make the boiler! Whilst it is true that K9 Mark IV "originated" from the Dr, in that he constructed it, it still is an object of "Prof Marius technology". I think this has to be an immutable definition of the term "technology".
As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
>>>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >>>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >>>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >>>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >>>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >>>>to question 4.
>>>>Michael
>> It's a bit of fun Michael...
>Of course it is. One has to be careful with questions that have obvious >ambiguities, and it must be a nightmare trying to avoid such problems >when setting a quiz!
>Here, if I built an identical replica of George Stevenson's "Rocket" >steam locomotive, the "technology of the new Rocket" would still be >Stevenson's not mine, regardless of whatever modern tools I used to >produce the components. If I made the boiler 10% bigger, it would still >be Victorian technology, not 21st Century, providing I didn't use >titanium to make the boiler! Whilst it is true that K9 Mark IV >"originated" from the Dr, in that he constructed it, it still is an >object of "Prof Marius technology". I think this has to be an immutable >definition of the term "technology".
>As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the >English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or >artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the >back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
Careful not to get mocked. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
The Doctor wrote: > In article <QYGdnVOc28vcuF_ZRVn...@pipex.net>, > Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote: >>As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the >>English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or >>artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the >>back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
> Careful not to get mocked.
Why?
I don't have a problem with being mocked if it makes someone else feel good. Be my guest.
>> In article <QYGdnVOc28vcuF_ZRVn...@pipex.net>, >> Michael Kilpatrick <mich...@mtkilpatrick.SPAMfsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the >>>English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or >>>artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the >>>back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
>> Careful not to get mocked.
>Why?
>I don't have a problem with being mocked if it makes someone else feel >good. Be my guest.
Too much fuel for trolls. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
Maybe it still looks like K9 but inside it has whizzy Time Lord technology Marius could never have dreamed of!
It's still an irrelevant point, since I made it clear how I was interpreting the phrase "Time Lord technology". You don't have to agree with that interpretation (and I make no particular claims about its truthfulness or usefulness outside of this contest) but once you know it, you have a fair shot at playing.
> >>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright > >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord > >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time > >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added > >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer > >>>to question 4.
> >>>Michael
> > It's a bit of fun Michael...
> Of course it is. One has to be careful with questions that have obvious > ambiguities, and it must be a nightmare trying to avoid such problems > when setting a quiz!
> Here, if I built an identical replica of George Stevenson's "Rocket" > steam locomotive, the "technology of the new Rocket" would still be > Stevenson's not mine, regardless of whatever modern tools I used to > produce the components. If I made the boiler 10% bigger, it would still > be Victorian technology, not 21st Century, providing I didn't use > titanium to make the boiler! Whilst it is true that K9 Mark IV > "originated" from the Dr, in that he constructed it, it still is an > object of "Prof Marius technology". I think this has to be an immutable > definition of the term "technology".
> As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the > English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or > artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the > back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
tomsalin...@googlemail.com <tomsalin...@googlemail.com> wrote: >Maybe it still looks like K9 but inside it has whizzy Time Lord >technology Marius could never have dreamed of!
>It's still an irrelevant point, since I made it clear how I was >interpreting the phrase "Time Lord technology". You don't have to agree >with that interpretation (and I make no particular claims about its >truthfulness or usefulness outside of this contest) but once you know >it, you have a fair shot at playing.
>Plus Wilf has won once already.
>Cheers
>Tom
>Michael Kilpatrick wrote: >> Sean wrote: >> > "The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message >> > news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca...
>> >>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright >> >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord >> >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time >> >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added >> >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer >> >>>to question 4.
>> >>>Michael
>> > It's a bit of fun Michael...
>> Of course it is. One has to be careful with questions that have obvious >> ambiguities, and it must be a nightmare trying to avoid such problems >> when setting a quiz!
>> Here, if I built an identical replica of George Stevenson's "Rocket" >> steam locomotive, the "technology of the new Rocket" would still be >> Stevenson's not mine, regardless of whatever modern tools I used to >> produce the components. If I made the boiler 10% bigger, it would still >> be Victorian technology, not 21st Century, providing I didn't use >> titanium to make the boiler! Whilst it is true that K9 Mark IV >> "originated" from the Dr, in that he constructed it, it still is an >> object of "Prof Marius technology". I think this has to be an immutable >> definition of the term "technology".
>> As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the >> English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or >> artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the >> back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
>> Michael
Still Marius created K-9. I still love the TARDIS trained line. -- Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
Professor Marius only built K9 Mark I. K9s marks II, III and IV were all built or rebuilt by The Doctor. K9 Mark I stayed on Gallifrey with Leela, Mark II in E-Space with Romana, Mark III was sent to Sarah Jane Smith was destroyed/damaged at Deffry Vale School and Mark IV was left behind for Sarah by the Tenth Doctor.
The Doctor wrote: > In article <1153784857.003491.38...@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > tomsalin...@googlemail.com <tomsalin...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >Maybe it still looks like K9 but inside it has whizzy Time Lord > >technology Marius could never have dreamed of!
> >It's still an irrelevant point, since I made it clear how I was > >interpreting the phrase "Time Lord technology". You don't have to agree > >with that interpretation (and I make no particular claims about its > >truthfulness or usefulness outside of this contest) but once you know > >it, you have a fair shot at playing.
> >Plus Wilf has won once already.
> >Cheers
> >Tom
> >Michael Kilpatrick wrote: > >> Sean wrote: > >> > "The Doctor" <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote in message > >> > news:e9rhg4$9h8$2@gallifrey.nk.ca...
> >> >>>If I were Wilf I would feel pretty miffed at not being declared outright > >> >>>winner, because you classed "K9 Mark IV" as a piece of Time Lord > >> >>>technology, question 4. K9 was invented by someone definitely not a Time > >> >>>Lord. That the Dr rebuilt K9 several times and no doubt added > >> >>>enhancements along the way hardly, in my view, makes this a valid answer > >> >>>to question 4.
> >> >>>Michael
> >> > It's a bit of fun Michael...
> >> Of course it is. One has to be careful with questions that have obvious > >> ambiguities, and it must be a nightmare trying to avoid such problems > >> when setting a quiz!
> >> Here, if I built an identical replica of George Stevenson's "Rocket" > >> steam locomotive, the "technology of the new Rocket" would still be > >> Stevenson's not mine, regardless of whatever modern tools I used to > >> produce the components. If I made the boiler 10% bigger, it would still > >> be Victorian technology, not 21st Century, providing I didn't use > >> titanium to make the boiler! Whilst it is true that K9 Mark IV > >> "originated" from the Dr, in that he constructed it, it still is an > >> object of "Prof Marius technology". I think this has to be an immutable > >> definition of the term "technology".
> >> As for the "someone" argument: well, perhaps we need a new word in the > >> English language that denotes something that is either intelligent or > >> artificially intelligent whether alive or mechanical! Answers on the > >> back of a postcard, maximum ten words....
> >> Michael
> Still Marius created K-9. I still love the TARDIS trained line. > -- > Member - Liberal International > This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca > God Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! > Beware Linux the MS Windows of Unix! Demand UseNet an integral part of Internet!
Here are my rulings, based on feedback both here and on OG.
Errors: The Abzorbaloff was listed twice as two different answers, and scored like this. This has been corrected. Florizel Street should have been scored as a More Specific Variant of London, and the Tyler flat as a More Specific Variant of The Powell Estate.
K9 Mark IV: All evidence suggests that K9 Mark IV was built by The Doctor. He therefore qualifies as Time Lord technology according to the interpretation note provided. He also qualifies as a "person" for the purposes of Question 0.
Psychic Paper: While this is also seen in Captain Jack's possession, this is not quite enough to render it a wrong answer.
Shows on Satellite 5: The entrant wrote "There were three evil reality shows in the 2002nd century" and this is a wrong answer. Had they written "We saw three evil reality shows..." this would have been a correct answer, provided I accepted The Weakest Link as a "reality" show.
Housemates: One entrant wrote "There were exactly three people in the Big Brother House immediately prior to the Doctor leaving." and the other "Big Brother housemates when the Doctor arrived." These are both correct answers, and I treated them as equivalent (a little harsh that, but I'm satisfied with my ruling).
Here is the new table of scores - there are no changes in the top rankings.