Did he think he was showing up for an IT interview, but it was really an interview to be a character on the show?
Sorry, too late to edit.
Did he think he was showing up for an IT interview, but the interview was not real and ended up being part of the show? (whether or not he became a recurring character)
I’m going to call this close enough.
Guy Goma showed up at the BBC for a job interview as an accountant. On the same day, Guy Kewney, a technology expert, was there to be interviewed on the news about some case involving Apple and the music industry.
Someone got their wires crossed and went to the wrong waiting area before the TV interview and called Guy’s name. When he sat down for his interview, it turned out to be not just about something he had no expertise in or preparation for… but also on live TV. When they introduced him as Guy Kewney, tech expert, he was visibly panicked for a split second, but then he played along and answered the interviewer’s questions.
You can watch it here.
Specifically, it was the long lasting trademark dispute between The Beatles’ Apple label and Apple Computers.
I want to try one…
His deep appreciation for his favorite snack nearly killed him
Is he human?
Is the story fiction?
Did the near death come from eating the snack?
No, not from eating it
Did his snack distract him from impending doom?
Did he try to cross a road? a railway track?
Have most of us heard of this incident before?
No
No
I’m not sure how to answer that, because I found it through a special interest of mine, but it might have made the general news.
Is there any wordplay in this puzzle?
Are all the pronouns the same person?
Was he injured during his near-death experience?
Would the potential death have been through falling?
blunt impact?
gunfire?
sharp objects?
poisoning?
heart attack?
oxygen deprivation?
drowning?
Next?
Not that I’m complaining, but how do you guys get away with inserting your answers into quoted material? Isn’t altering quotes like that an SMDB no-no?
I hadn’t even thought of that, but I would say this is a spirit of the law vs. letter of the law issue.
We aren’t modifying the original post in a way to misrepresent what the other poster said, and we are making it very clear that what is our words vs. their words. But if you think we shouldn’t be doing that, you could report the posts. If the moderators think we shouldn’t be doing that, I at least will be happy to comply
Did he do, or try to do, something with the snack other than eating it?
Would it help to know what the snack was?
Would it help to know where he was located at the time?
Is “he” human? Adult?
Yes, and yes, and to make things easy, he is a he, although that is irrelevant
Was he injured?
Was food poisoning or potential food poisoning involved?
So, was the thing he did with the snack besides eating it:
– Storing / preserving it in some way?
– Mixing it with another food? A drink? A non-food item?
– Transporting it somewhere?
– Using it for a non-food purpose (for example, making an art project out of it or something)?
And no to the last