The Exciting Game With One Rule

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

I think Vita Beata’s efforts more than credit him/her with being the next Rule Maker in EH’s absence.

[Zeldar]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

I think Vita Beata’s efforts more than credit him/her with being the next Rule Maker in EH’s absence.

Well, since Vita Beata has said she’ll be away from her computer until Monday, why don’t we see if Elendil’s Heir reports in before then to claim his prize!

That seem fair?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Sure. Hosting one of these is trickier than it looks.

[Zeldar]

Here’s an attempt at a recap of the key moments so far. Please correct (or quote) any missing links in the progress of the game:

@Zeldar

Can’t use a q?

@brujaja

Yes! That was the rule!! Dang, I shoulda picked a harder one. I was sure that **randompattern **would get it.

Now you get to pick a rule.

@brujaja

I cannot bring myself to bad-rap bears. But if I did, would it break The Rule?

@Octarine

Wait - is it a bear?

@brujaja

Pssssst! Octarine! See post #87.

@Zeldar

YES! But that’s not all! There’s more to it.

@Zeldar

Since everybody was zooming in on “The rule: you must not mention a white bear” I’m judging that the next Rule Maker is Octarine.

Thanks for helping to blow up a perfectly good Sunday!

@Zeldar

Believe it or not, I’m just now seeing this post! Sorry, brujaja, but the right to the next rule should be yours. Whichever of you gets there first has the right! Sorry, too, Octarine. I suck!

@Octarine

No worries! Besides, I can’t think of a particularily clever rule right now, and brujaja was first, so I’ll step aside.

@brujaja

Hi all, sorry, I was having a bit of an extended dessert break.

Okay! The New Rule is language-based. Since my no-Qs rule proved to be a piece of cake for randompattern and Zeldar, I have put some thought into making this one significantly harder.

Exposition is probably best accomplished by conversation. Because you, Octarine, are awesome, you are entitled to one hint by PM after the first 24 hours, or maybe sooner if everybody gets bored.

FWIW, I had to re-read this posting a couple of times to make certain I was not breaking the rule.

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Ah, double letters, eh?

(Which means I broke the rule just then.)

@brujaja

No double letters within a prepositional phrase. (I love prepositions.)
Sorry, Zeldar, I didn’t mean to hog the thread.

@Zeldar

Just so we’re clear: it’s don’t say anything about white bears. Don’t even mention them.

On with the show…

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

This is more of a “word with double letters in a prepositional phrase” rather than “don’t say bad things about white bears”.

@Elendil_s_Heir

NOW have I won?

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Looks like you have, EH. Congrats!

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@Zeldar

…Since EH may have just been “passing through” long enough to guess the right rule…

“May have been”? Harrumph! The noive.

Well, congrats, Prof. Pepperwinkle!

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

@Elendil_s_Heir

“May have been”? Harrumph! The noive.

Well, congrats, Prof. Pepperwinkle!

No, congrats to you. You start the next rule.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

I’ll pass. Take it away!

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Well, all right. The next Rule is one of the 20 Questions variety.

[Zeldar]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Well, all right. The next Rule is one of the 20 Questions variety.

I love 20Q! We call in N Questions because we don’t keep count and the questions can be as bizarre as one pleases.

That said, is this another case of “Must not mention…”?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Yes, there is something you must not mention.

And you haven’t mentioned it yet. Nor have I.

[Zeldar]

Is the “unmentionable” of the animal (as opposed to vegetable, mineral and non-material) category?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

That would be the case, yes.

[Zeldar]

Is it an animal of the human being persuasion?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Yes again.

[Zeldar]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Yes again.

Would the human being in question either be still alive or have died within the past ten years?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Possibly, but it is not one specific person.

[Zeldar]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Possibly, but it is not one specific person.

Aha! Would this be a group of fewer than 100 people?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Let’s put it this way: the one who may not be named is the name of a person’s role, e.g., a banker, a Republican or an archenemy. None of these is the one who may not be named.

[Zeldar]

@Prof.Pepperwinkle

Let’s put it this way: the one who may not be named is the name of a person’s role, e.g., a banker, a Republican or an archenemy. None of these is the one who may not be named.

Good answer. Would this role apply equally – and in roughly equal numbers – to males and females?

[Prof.Pepperwinkle]

Not in this particular case, no.