why does this thread have 5 pages?
The unmentionable aspect is purely for purposes of this game. A typical 21st Century family may or may not have one as its member: said role is becoming more and more commonplace.
It ain’t Uncle Joey (or Uncle anybody).
The thread has 5 pages because it hasn’t reached 6 yet.
I’ve returned! Have we determined if stepfather is the one not to be mentioned?
Vita Beata! You’ve returned just in time to be the one to successfully violate the rule! Congrats! It’s your turn now.
Yay! Okay, my rule is a recognizable defining phrase.
Is it in the form of a question?
No, my phrase is not a question, and, in fact, is not a complete sentence.
Your post above did not violate the rule. My answer violated the rule.
Would it fall in the slang category?
You’re back, Zeldar! No, the rule phrase does not contain slang words.
Your post above did not violate the rule, nor did mine.
While not actual slang, does the phrase fall into a jargon category such as corpspeak, military terms, or the like?
No, Zeldar, the rule phrase consists of simple English words and has been around since the 1600’s.
Both your post and my answer violated the rule.
Is the phrase a catchphrase from a TV show. commercial or movie?
No, Prof. Pepperwinkle, It’s a common phrase, but I don’t believe it to be a catchphrase from TV, commercials, or movies.
The rule has been violated by your post and my reply.
I am able to mention a celebrity which may give you a strong clue. Should I post this?
My post did not violate the rule.
I’d love a clue, celebrity or not. 
The clue is: Anthony Bourdain
Zeldar, your post violated the rule; my response did not. (ignore this, a mistake. Neither post violated the rule.)
Correction, sorry: directly above, neither post violated the rule.
I’ve heard Bourdain’s name and assume he’s a chef of note. Other than that, nothing. Would Justin Wilson or Emeril use the same sort of phrase?
Zeldar, Your first sentence violated the rule. Your other two sentences did not.
The clue comes from Anthony Bourdain’s show title.
My response does not violate the rule.
:smack: This sentence did NOT violate the rule. :smack:
The word “or” is contained within my phrase, but usage of “or” does NOT violate the rule.