(E20) Johnny's in the basement... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - October 2005 » (E20) Johnny's in the basement « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through October 19, 2005Tony22 10-19-05  2:22 pm
Archive through October 21, 2005Tony22 10-21-05  2:13 am
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 1:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So they went to the HoP, took a seat?, watched something?, and then left?

Were they watching a ceremony?
An introduction of actual politicians?
Of other people? Of a mixture of people and objects? Of animals? of adults? of kids?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 10:34 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So they went to the HoP, took a seat?, watched something?, and then left? That's about it, yes

Were they watching a ceremony? Not so much a ceremony ...
An introduction of actual politicians? ... That's more like it. Perhaps "Presentation" would be closer than "introduction", as I'm pretty sure they had met (or at least heard of) them before
Of other people? Of a mixture of people and objects? Of animals? of adults? of kids? None of these - you got it with the earlier question
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 11:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So would this presentation be interesting to the general public?
Were the wives interested?
The audience was composed solely of wives?
Were the politicians being shown off?
Was it a charity event?
Was there a stage?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 12:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

So would this presentation be interesting to the general public? Certainly ... it was covered by the media, and it was a radio report of the event which led me to the conclusion in the puzzle statement
Were the wives interested? yes
The audience was composed solely of wives? I suspect that "spouses" might be technically more accurate, but it was certainly reported as being a meeting of "wives"
Were the politicians being shown off? Yes-ish ... but there might be a FA in there
Was it a charity event? no
Was there a stage?Probably a platform
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 3:46 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were the politicians being introduced? sworn into the hop? auctioned off for charity?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 9:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were the politicians being introduced? In the sense that someone would have got up and said "And here is ...", then Yes
sworn into the hop? no
auctioned off for charity? an appealing thought, but no

Time for a recap. Among some other details, so far you know that ...

Around lunchtime on October 13th, a group of politician's wives and some politicians were involved in an event at the House of Parliament in London. The wives were watching a presentation of some kind. What was the event? And what was it about the reporting of the event that led to my comment "... as I would have expected"?
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 9:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did the wives do anything other than watch? was it their reaction that you would have expected?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 10:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did the wives do anything other than watch? Their role was to ask questions ...

was it their reaction that you would have expected? There was nothing relevant about their reaction
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were they asking questions of their husbands? of reporters? of lobbyists? was it the number of questions that you would have expected? the quality? the subject of the questions?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 11:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were they asking questions of their husbands? Four of them could have done, but not the rest ... good question ...
of reporters? no
of lobbyists? no
was it the number of questions that you would have expected?not relevant
the quality?not relevant
the subject of the questions? Not really ... but this is a relevant area worthy of further exploration...
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 3:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

could the rest have asked questions of someone else other than their husband? or were there only four politicians being questioned? was anyone in trouble?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 4:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

could the rest have asked questions of someone else other than their husband? any of the wives who were present could question any of the politicians who were present, but ... (see next answer)
or were there only four politicians being questioned? ... there were indeed only four poiticians in attendance
was anyone in trouble? Not really
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 4:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did these four politicians have some special role in the hop?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 7:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did these four politicians have some special role in the hop? No ... but they wanted one!!
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 8:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was this some sort of thing to see who would be the next head (or whatever the special roles are called in parliament)? or get other special roles? was everyone trying to decide between the four?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 8:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was this some sort of thing to see who would be the next head (or whatever the special roles are called in parliament)? The "head" of the parliament might be "the speaker" ... or perhaps the Prime Minister. But it was neither of these

or get other special roles? Yes - the one particular special role involved in this situation is the "leader of the opposition"

was everyone trying to decide between the four? Yes indeed! Now all that remains is to find what it was about the reporting of the event that led to my reaction ...
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were they especially noisy? especially quiet? did the person you expected win? did each wife stick up for her own husband? were the wives more argumentative than the husbands? did you expect good things? bad things?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

were they especially noisy? no
especially quiet? no
did the person you expected win? irrelevant
did each wife stick up for her own husband? irrelevant
were the wives more argumentative than the husbands? no
did you expect good things? see next answer
bad things? there was one particular bad thing which I did not expect ... and indeed it didn't happen
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did you expect that no one would yell? expect that one particular person (whom you didn't like) wouldn't win? was it a bad thing involving all the ladies? or just one? or the four men? or some combo (insert ltpf list of possible people permutations here)?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 10:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

did you expect that no one would yell? nothing like this
expect that one particular person (whom you didn't like) wouldn't win? irrelevant

was it a bad thing involving all the ladies? or just one? or the four men? or some combo (insert ltpf list of possible people permutations here)? The report said that none of them were involved with this particular activity ...
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 10:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did the politicians do the bad thing? The winner? The losers? Other people? Another person?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 9:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did the politicians do the bad thing? The winner? The losers? Other people? Another person? No one did the bad thing ... as I expected! But what was it they didn't do?
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 2:01 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did they refrain from shouting? Talking? Whispering? Bidding? Questioning? Fidgeting? Rustle? Be amused? Be surprised? Be something?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 2:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Did they refrain from shouting? Talking? Whispering? Bidding? Questioning? Fidgeting? Rustle? Be amused? Be surprised? Be something?
Not really any of these - except possibly the last. I refer the honourable puzzlers to the final statement of my reply of 11.57 pm on October 26th
Tony (E20)
Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 2:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

BLOOPER ALERT

In my posting at 9.08 on October 24th, I made reference to "a group of politician's wives". It was in fact "a group of politicians' wives". Apologies to all monogamous politicians for any offence caused by the misplaced apostrophe.
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 9:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was the subject of the questions related to the political opinions of the politicians? their personal lives? their plans for reelection? their views on one specific topic?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 - 11:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

was the subject of the questions related to the political opinions of the politicians?
their personal lives?
their plans for reelection?
their views on one specific topic?
All of these would have been covered ... but it was one particular element of their personal lives which is particularly relevant ...
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Tuesday, November 01, 2005 - 2:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

having to do with their relationship with their wives?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2005 - 9:08 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

having to do with their relationship with their wives? Good idea, but that wasn't it!
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2005 - 1:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

having to do with their hobbies? their health? their hygiene? their spending habits? something else about their family?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2005 - 4:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

having to do with their hobbies? no
their health? not directly ...though this would have been affected ...
their hygiene? no
their spending habits? well ... it would have involved buying something ...
something else about their family?not so much this - more of a personal matter ...
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Wednesday, November 02, 2005 - 8:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was the matter:
Investments?
Fitness?
Eating habits?
Food?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 12:35 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was the matter:
Investments? no
Fitness? no
Eating habits? no ... but this is closest
Food? no
Jennifer (Tigger32382)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 2:46 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

drinking habits?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 10:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

drinking habits? closer still...nearly there now
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 11:55 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Habits to do with nutrition? Or medicine? Or something digestible? Indigestible?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 12:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Habits to do with nutrition? no
Or medicine? Could be used for medicinal purposes, but I don't think this was the purpose under consideration ...
Or something digestible? Indigestible? Digestible, I would think
Vae (Vaetrus)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 2:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Concerning marijuana?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 7:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Concerning marijuana? That's the one ... we could battle on to find out that in fact the newsworthy item was that the question wasn't asked, and to find out why my reaction was at it was, but I think we're close enough now ...$poiler to follow
Tony (E20)
Posted on Thursday, November 03, 2005 - 8:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

***SPOILER***

The British Conservative party were recently trying to find a new leader. As part of the process, the four remaining candidates were required to attend a meeting with the wives of the MPs from their party (… together with the occasional husband, but that’s another story). Before the meeting, there was speculation that the candidates might have been asked about any previous experience with taking drugs, and it was anticipated that one of the candidates in particular might have found this a difficult topic to address ( …”I tried it once, but I didn’t inhale” … that sort of thing). In the event, the question was never actually asked.

In reporting the meeting, the radio news bulletin ended with the (deliberately?) ambiguous statement “The candidates were asked several questions by the MPs' wives. None of them were on drugs”. The last sentence was presumably supposed to refer to the questions, but it could be interpreted as meaning that the candidates were not on drugs, or the wives were not on drugs .… as I would have expected!

Thanks to Jennifer and Vae for their patience and determination ...

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: