h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'd always assumed that the 'no wiki/no google' rule implied that ALL
external resources were 'verbotten' and the point was to work it out
from clues, memory and logic alone. You don't see the people on the
TV show looking things up in dictionaries or pulling cheat cards out of
their sleeves.
No wonder I never win.


~jwf~

That's what I thought the point was.

>I still find it a bit arbitrary.<

Oh it's absolutely arbitrary. I don't think I could pretend otherwise. This society grew out of a germ of a good idea, there's no essential rhyme nor reason to the rules we have save that they work and we tinkered as we implemented. Gaze too hard at all self-instituting bodies and I think you'll wince at the 'arbitrariness' of it.


>If you half-remember something from a book, go look it up, but if it was in a news article online, hands off? It just puts too much value on print vs. digital media.<

Blimey this is getting complex..

Is there a difference in that instance? I'm not sure I can make the case that there is.

Mostly my QIs are so riddle-like that actually google isn't of much benefit unless you know what your looking for. Something I work hard at achieving. A case of evolution by natural selection? Possibly

The thing I personally fear most is keywords.

Go back to "iron jewellery" I mean that wasn't obvious, it's not the first thing you'd chuck into a search engine - but key words like "jewellery", "Prussia", "Napoleon" - and you might have got a hit, and that's what I really want to guard against. When Bel found a reference to it while looking up "iron Crosses" I was "Meh. Damnit. Oh well. "

But Bel was looking up Iron Crosses, on a hunch. in my grand scheme of universal karmic balance, looking stuff up you don't know about is a good.

I'll entertain any and all suggestions on how we can improve QI if they are there to be heard.

I am not the guardian of this game, but I've had a fair hand in it's construction, so it's the least I can say.

Surely the game is a contest between setter and guessers? All competitors can use the points stuff to make themselves feel good (I'm a winner) or feel great (I am the worst player ever Yaaaah).

In cyberspace no one can see you answering the questions. The fun is the collaborative effort in getting to the answer, so if you know it early, what could be more enjoyable than revealing your insight in little bits, that is changing sides and joining the setter?

Sticking a few key words into Google can make you a winner but where's the fun. I believe that most if not all the competitors will try to remain within the spirit of the "rules" otherwise they just negate any point in taking part.

Unless you start offering cash prizes. Then forget everything I just said.

This looks like fun

OnTopOfABerg
U13858533

Welcome!

Hello All endered on the 2010 score board

OOoo! yes please , I have been off line for a week or so but I am back now .
Todaymueller U8053762

Hello Todaymueller
All added
Pick a smiley if you want perhaps

Bob

Pick a smiley eh , Fish please .

Well I'd better join up as I answered a Q U1287143 and will do

'You don't see the people on the TV show looking things up in dictionaries or pulling cheat cards out of their sleeves.'

QI is rehearsed before the filming day so a certain amount of dubiousness should be attributed to how much knowledge is genuinely 'in the head' of the 'contestants'.

and alan davies only used to get so many s because he was on the before during and after the show and did them pd

whats your excuse then Taff

All done Keith (Miller) check it out

now we have 10 out of 20 QI related threads on the front page

I'm back (ish)