On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 11:55:37 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Janet:

> > Quinn might have come across Coleridge's connection with German
> > philosophy
>
> I haven't, even though he studied at my university, Göttingen. Maybe
> there's even a plate somewhere in town "Coleridge lived here"? There
> were a lot of those, but I don't remember, and know practically nothing
> about him.
>
> Yes, there is a plate:

plaque

(also "historic marker"; Over There they note that they're usually blue)

> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:G%C3%B6ttinger_Gedenktafel_-_Coleridge,_Samuel_Taylor.jpg>

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 11:55:38 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 5:27:27 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> Someone preparing for Jeopardy has to take into account that it is an
> >> American show and should beef up their knowledge of US-specific things.
> >> For example, it's advisable to learn all the US presidents with their
> >> number - not knowledge of "worldwide" importance (that you number your
> >> presidents at all is a unique quirk.)
> > We don't, actually. It became salient only with 41 and 43 because they
> > had almost exactly the same name and the second one isn't a Junior.
> > The National Archives had to figure out how to count Cleveland, not
> > all that long ago..
> > As the guy said, he only knew Harding because Coolidge's number
> > had been given in the previous question.
>
> So Mattea's a guy now (nobody else gave any answer in that category)!

I recalled it as the (now rare) male contestant.

> Those clues, again, were quite cryptic for non-Americans. I wouldn't
> know slogans of US presidential campaigns before my lifetime (even
> German ones only exceptionally), and Teapot Dome isn't remotely as
> famous as Watergate at this point.

Tippecanoe and Tyler Too

A chicken in every pot

the New Deal

I Like Ike

Four More Years

(Goldwater, I'm sure, used both "In your heart you know he's right"
and "Vote with your head, not your heart.")

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 2:43:55 PM UTC-4, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-05-07 05:37, CDB wrote:
> > On 5/6/2022 10:40 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> CDB wrote:
> >>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>> They seem to believe that long streaks are good for ratings, but
> >>>> in fact they're boring. It was shocking last night that no one
> >>>> knew (NASA shmASA) that Apollo's twin sister is Artemis, or who
> >>>> Peter Stuyvesant was (never mind the portrait, "handed NY over to
> >>>> the Brits" was enough).
> >>> Artemis was also called Selene, which would have been a good guess
> >>> for a moonshot.
> >> Though it's not the name of the new lunar exploration program.
> > My remark addressed the idea that the contestants were shockingly
> > ignorant of the name of Apollo's sister. I doubt that they all were,
> > but they may have faced an embarrassment of choice, as my
> > formerly-siggish comment pointed out below.
>
> Shockingly? Did you study Greek, Roman, and/or Norse mythology in your
> school years? I sure didn't.

We sure did. But over his few months here, lar3 has revealed a shocking
number of lacunae in his elementary education.

It was not suggested, however, that Selene was the same entity as Diana/Artemis.

> As for Peter Stuyvesant, only a self-centred boor that thinks the world
> revolves around an eastern US state would expect every Canadian to know
> anything at all about him.

How is uit that "self-centered boors" even know about Wolfe and
Montcalm -- functionally the same outcome, but with hostilities?

Add lar3 to the crew that thinks only _their_ immediate environment
is of interest or concern to anywhere else.

> >>> Tu potens Trivia et notho es/ dicta lumine Luna.
> >>> You [Diana] are powerful Trivia [Hecate] and, for your bastard
> >>> light, are [called] Luna.

On Sat, 7 May 2022, at 11:54:01, Peter Moylan posted:
>On 07/05/22 00:34, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2022-05-06, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 06/05/22 01:50, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>>>> How big is a House district? Ours come very close to being
>>>> exactly 1/435 of the total population as counted in the last
>>>> Census, except it's messed up by the small states getting 1 Rep
>>>> regardless of size; but within a state, all the districts have to
>>>> be exactly the same size.
>>>
>>> It's the same here. All electorates have to be equal in population,
>>> as much as practicable. I don't have the numbers to hand at the
>>> moment. The redistributions are done by a non-partisan body, so
>>> gerrymandering is not a problem.

[snippo]

>>> It's not all good. The main beneficiaries are likely to be the
>>> United Australia Party and One Nation, both of which are extreme
>>> right, anti-vax, and racist. The UAP is gaining support because it
>>> is promising low-interest mortgages (while knowing that there is
>>> no way it could finance that).
>
>As in other countries, promising a chicken in every pot is a vote winner.
>
>>> On the other hand, some climate change deniers in the government
>>> run the risk of being edged out.
>>
>> Aren't extreme right kooks usually also climate change deniers?
>
>Our present Liberal/National coalition government has its share of
>extreme right kooks. Both of those parties are strong supporters of coal
>mining, and that leads them to inaction on climate change.
>
>But climate change is now, according to surveys, the top concern of
>voters. For that reason, probably, a number of independents are standing
>against government members on a platform of doing more about climate
>change. In addition, there is a body lobbying for climate action that,
>although not running candidates for election, is donating funds to those
>independents that it approves of, to give those independents a better
>chance of winning.
>
>Meanwhile, we seem to have fewer right-wing kooks running as
>independents, because they have a couple of extreme right parties they
>can join.
>
I imagine that spectrum of groupings characterised by leftness and
rightness would run from extreme left through left, centre and right to
extreme right. I mean that outer reaches are necessarily the extremes.

But I hear a great deal in the public meeja about the extreme right, and
hardly anything about the extreme left. Am I biassed, or just not
noticing it, or is there a conspiracy of silence towards the leftward
extreme? Other explanations welcome, if politely put.
--
Paul

On 07-May-22 16:58, charles wrote:
> In article <e35d7h500cmihae56d3avl4rq8bvtd0ess@4ax.com>,
> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 12:25:48 +1000, Peter Moylan
>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> On 07/05/22 07:59, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 17:27:24 -0400, Quinn C
>>>> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yesterday was very sad indeed. "I've never seen Citizen Kane." Is
>>>>>> that really necessary, to know that Xanadu was involved? She's
>>>>>> probably never seen GwtW either, but wouldn't she recognize
>>>>>> Scarlett O'Hara, Rhett Butler, or even Tara?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How many of today's generations have never seen the classic films
>>>>>> -- especially the ones that aren't in color?
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never seen Citizen Kane, nor did I remember clearly about
>>>>> Xanadu,
>>>>
>>>> So never did you your stately pleasure domes decree?
>>>
>>> You are quoting from English literature. There's no reason to think that
>>> Quinn would ever have encountered Alf, the sacred river.
>
>
>> I've also never encountered Alph, nor any other sacred river.
>
> perhaps you need to take opium to discover it.
>
Just stay well away from Porlock.

--
Sam Plusnet

Den 07-05-2022 kl. 00:11 skrev bil...@shaw.ca:
> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 10:07:31 PM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Wed, 4 May 2022 17:29:35 -0400: Quinn C
> [...]
>>> In Ireland, ministers are required to be MPs.
>
>> Strange, very strange.
>
> Not strange to me. In Canada, cabinet ministers are nearly always MPs,
> though it is not mandatory.

Same here.

> Very rarely, a non-MP is named to the cabinet,
> usually a prominent person.

Quite the contrary: Most non-MPs appointed minister are "experts" in
some sense of the word; some already well-known to the public, but
more, I think, have been non-public figures.
Another category is politicians who are EPs

> If there is no general election in sight, another
> MP in a "safe" seat will usually resign to allow the newcomer to win the seat
> in a byelection so that he can be accountable in Question Period.

Unknown here: Ministers are by definition accountable, also during
Question Period, where they will be guests in parliament. Also, we have
no by-elections - seats which for some reason become vacant are filled
by "suppleanter"; essentially persons who missed the cut in the previous
election.
Very often, non-MP ministers will get a safe seat in the next election.

/Anders, Denmark

On Sat, 7 May 2022 23:54:45 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
<news2012adn@gmail.com> wrote:

>Den 07-05-2022 kl. 00:11 skrev bil...@shaw.ca:
>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 10:07:31 PM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> Wed, 4 May 2022 17:29:35 -0400: Quinn C
>> [...]
>>>> In Ireland, ministers are required to be MPs.
>>
>>> Strange, very strange.
>>
>> Not strange to me. In Canada, cabinet ministers are nearly always MPs,
>> though it is not mandatory.
>
>Same here.
>
>> Very rarely, a non-MP is named to the cabinet,
>> usually a prominent person.
>
>Quite the contrary: Most non-MPs appointed minister are "experts" in
>some sense of the word; some already well-known to the public, but
>more, I think, have been non-public figures.
>Another category is politicians who are EPs
>
In the US, we have Cabinet secretaries instead of Ministers. They are
nominated by the President but must be confirmed by the Senate before
they take office.

If a sitting Senator or Representitive would be nominated, he/she
would have to resign their seat as a Senator or Representive to serve
as a Cabinet secretary.

A President will normally nominate either a member of his/her own
poltical party or at least a person who is in alignment with the
President's party's positions.

If a President nominated a sitting Senator or Representitive, that
seat would be up for appointment by the state's Governor to fill the
position until the next election, and the replacement would have to be
elected to the seat. That might not be a good political move for the
President.

I don't think that a Cabinet secretary has to be particularly
qualified as an expert in the field of his/her area. He/she does have
to be good at selecting staff, getting things accomplished, and
putting a good face on the department. An effective figure-head, if
you will.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On 08/05/22 06:29, Paul Wolff wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022, at 11:54:01, Peter Moylan posted:

>> Meanwhile, we seem to have fewer right-wing kooks running as
>> independents, because they have a couple of extreme right parties
>> they can join.
>>
> I imagine that spectrum of groupings characterised by leftness and
> rightness would run from extreme left through left, centre and right
> to extreme right. I mean that outer reaches are necessarily the
> extremes.
>
> But I hear a great deal in the public meeja about the extreme right,
> and hardly anything about the extreme left. Am I biassed, or just
> not noticing it, or is there a conspiracy of silence towards the
> leftward extreme? Other explanations welcome, if politely put.

We have something called "Vote Compass" on the web; it plots political
parties on a two-dimensional graph. Something that is very obvious is
that all political parties are drifting to the right. For example, the
Australian Labor Party used to be left-wing, but now it is categorised
as centrist. The leftward extreme is disappearing from the scene. All of
the new populist parties are right-wing.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 1:38:06 PM UTC-7, Paul Wolff wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022, at 11:54:01, Peter Moylan posted:
> >On 07/05/22 00:34, Adam Funk wrote:
> >> On 2022-05-06, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >>> On 06/05/22 01:50, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >
> >>>> How big is a House district? Ours come very close to being
> >>>> exactly 1/435 of the total population as counted in the last
> >>>> Census, except it's messed up by the small states getting 1 Rep
> >>>> regardless of size; but within a state, all the districts have to
> >>>> be exactly the same size.
> >>>
> >>> It's the same here. All electorates have to be equal in population,
> >>> as much as practicable. I don't have the numbers to hand at the
> >>> moment. The redistributions are done by a non-partisan body, so
> >>> gerrymandering is not a problem.
>
> [snippo]
>
> >>> It's not all good. The main beneficiaries are likely to be the
> >>> United Australia Party and One Nation, both of which are extreme
> >>> right, anti-vax, and racist. The UAP is gaining support because it
> >>> is promising low-interest mortgages (while knowing that there is
> >>> no way it could finance that).
> >
> >As in other countries, promising a chicken in every pot is a vote winner.
> >
> >>> On the other hand, some climate change deniers in the government
> >>> run the risk of being edged out.
> >>
> >> Aren't extreme right kooks usually also climate change deniers?
> >
> >Our present Liberal/National coalition government has its share of
> >extreme right kooks. Both of those parties are strong supporters of coal
> >mining, and that leads them to inaction on climate change.
> >
> >But climate change is now, according to surveys, the top concern of
> >voters. For that reason, probably, a number of independents are standing
> >against government members on a platform of doing more about climate
> >change. In addition, there is a body lobbying for climate action that,
> >although not running candidates for election, is donating funds to those
> >independents that it approves of, to give those independents a better
> >chance of winning.
> >
> >Meanwhile, we seem to have fewer right-wing kooks running as
> >independents, because they have a couple of extreme right parties they
> >can join.
> >
> I imagine that spectrum of groupings characterised by leftness and
> rightness would run from extreme left through left, centre and right to
> extreme right. I mean that outer reaches are necessarily the extremes.
>
> But I hear a great deal in the public meeja about the extreme right, and
> hardly anything about the extreme left. Am I biassed, or just not
> noticing it, or is there a conspiracy of silence towards the leftward
> extreme? Other explanations welcome, if politely put.

Remind us where you live and what sort of parties constitute the extreme
left and right there. Here in Canada, there are no parties with significant public
support on either extreme.

But in the U.S., Donald Trump has dragged the Republicans to extreme positions
not seen previously in my lifetime, to the point where tens of thousands
of his supporters marched on Washington, broke through police lines
and stormed the Capitol building, where at least some of them were
looking to kill the vice-president for not being right-wing enough and to
overturn the results of the election their side had lost. It was incompetently
carried out, but it was nevertheless an attempted coup.

On the left? Sleepy Joe Biden. Which side do you think poses the bigger
threat to democracy?

In most of Europe, meanwhile, far-right parties are on the rise. Far-left
parties are neither on the rise, nor a threat to democracy. In Russia,
Putin has established a one-man dictatorship that resembles
fascism more than anything else, complete with the persecution of
ethnic Ukrainians and the outright invasion of Ukraine.

Feel free to point out left-wing threats equivalent to these threats
from the right. My view is that there are no equivalent threats from
the left, and that the media are correct to focus on the right,
especially in the U.S.

bill

On 8/05/22 3:55 am, Quinn C wrote:

>
>> Quinn might have come across Coleridge's connection with German
>> philosophy
>
> I haven't, even though he studied at my university, Göttingen. Maybe
> there's even a plate somewhere in town "Coleridge lived here"? There
> were a lot of those, but I don't remember, and know practically nothing
> about him.
>
> Yes, there is a plate:
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:G%C3%B6ttinger_Gedenktafel_-_Coleridge,_Samuel_Taylor.jpg>
>

He obviously travelled widely.
There is a plaque in Malta (in the main drag of Valletta, if I remember
correctly), recording where he lived for a year of so in about 1805.

--brian

--
Wellington
New Zealand

On 07/05/22 21:42, CDB wrote:
> On 5/6/2022 10:28 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> CDB wrote:
>
>>> We, on the other hand, have "Question Period", a somewhat raucous
>>> hour every sitting day in which Ministers answer questions put
>>> to them by backbenchers of all parties (but mostly opposition
>>> parties). Or don't:
>
>> We have a convention that the government and opposition take turns
>> in asking questions. That means that all the even-numbered
>> questions are Dorothy Dixers, and all the odd-numbered ones receive
>> responses that are unrelated to the question.
>
> Their big mistake was deciding to televise QP. It's more of a
> vaudeville act now than it ought to be.
>
> The proceedings are all televised, but the debates go unwatched by
> most people.

We have it on TV too, but as entertainment it's a failure because of
some bad casting decisions.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

* Sam Plusnet <PMAdK.136665$sMg.16916 @fx06.ams1> :
Wrote on Sat, 7 May 2022 21:38:08 +0100:
> On 07-May-22 16:58, charles wrote:
>> In article <e35d7h500cmihae56d3avl4rq8bvtd0ess @4ax.com>,
>> Ken Blake <Ken @invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 12:25:48 +1000, Peter Moylan
>>> <peter @pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> On 07/05/22 07:59, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>> So never did you your stately pleasure domes decree?
>>>>
>>>> You are quoting from English literature. There's no reason to think that
>>>> Quinn would ever have encountered Alf, the sacred river.
>>
>>> I've also never encountered Alph, nor any other sacred river.
>> perhaps you need to take opium to discover it.
>>
> Just stay well away from Porlock.

""Who then is Porlock?" I asked.

"Porlock, Watson, is a nom-de-plume, a mere identification mark;
but behind it lies a shifty and evasive personality. In a former
letter he frankly informed me that the name was not his own, and
defied me ever to trace him among the teeming millions of this
great city. Porlock is important, not for himself, but for the
great man with whom he is in touch."

(Valley of Fear, Arthur ConanDoyle 1915)

Thomas Quincy took care to stay away from Porlock when he was on the
sauce.

also ob<redacted>
Person from Porlock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Man from Porlock)

* Paul Wolff <WRkYUZx+atdiFA4f @wolff.co.uk> :
Wrote on Sat, 7 May 2022 21:29:50 +0100:

> I imagine that spectrum of groupings characterised by leftness and
> rightness would run from extreme left through left, centre and right
> to extreme right. I mean that outer reaches are necessarily the
> extremes.
>
> But I hear a great deal in the public meeja about the extreme right,
> and hardly anything about the extreme left. Am I biassed, or just not
> noticing it, or is there a conspiracy of silence towards the leftward
> extreme? Other explanations welcome, if politely put.

propaganda from the start to the fullstop. merely the current dominant
direction of the opinion making machine.

I remember Athel recounting that he was astounded at the levels of
propaganda and media control and sheer ignorance of the media audience
in the USSR. I am similarly astounded by the levels in the west
specifically aue. The victims are too blind and brainwashed to see it,
and they enjoy it and their livelihoods depend on not seeing it.

Ken Blake hat am 07.05.2022 um 17:40 geschrieben:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 07:09:31 -0400, CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I once had to write a letter to one "Jean Royce", and didn't know how to
>> address em.
>
>
> Did you consider "Dear Them"?

Stupid question from a foreigner, perhaps: why not "Dear Jean Royce"?

Quinn C hat am 07.05.2022 um 00:54 geschrieben:
> * Tony Cooper:
>
>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 17:27:24 -0400, Quinn C

>>> For example, it's advisable to learn all the US presidents with their
>>> number - not knowledge of "worldwide" importance (that you number your
>>> presidents at all is a unique quirk.)
>>
>> Unique quirk? Scanning a list of kings and queens numbering seems
>> quite prevalent. Only the sequence differs.
>
> There is no 16th king of England, and James Monroe wasn't James II.
> Quite different systems.

Also, names and surnames are enough to define all US presidents. The
numbers are not necessary. But Tony should tell us how he'd make the
difference between king Victor Emmanuel of Italy and king Victor
Emmanuel of Italy (same dinasty, the Savoy) without using numbers.

Just for fun, the former small German State of Mecklenburg-Schwerin was
ruled by grand dukes between the Vienna Congress and the end of World
War One. FOUR of them bore the name Frederick Francis. How could you
know which one I'm talking about if I did not use numbers?

On 5/7/2022 11:40 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com> wrote:

> I once had to write a letter to one "Jean Royce", and didn't know how
> to
>> address em.

> Did you consider "Dear Them"?

She was someone whose favourable opinion I wanted, so I looked into the
matter before writing.

On 5/8/2022 4:32 AM, Silvano wrote:
> Ken Blake hat geschrieben:
>> CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> I once had to write a letter to one "Jean Royce", and didn't know
>>> how to address em.

>> Did you consider "Dear Them"?

> Stupid question from a foreigner, perhaps: why not "Dear Jean
> Royce"?

It was a formal letter, akin to a business letter, and I don't think
that style was much used in the early '60s; but I might have had to
resort to it if I had not discovered the right pronoun.

On 5/8/2022 4:59 AM, Silvano wrote:
> Quinn C hat geschrieben:
>> * Tony Cooper:
>>> Quinn C:

>>>> For example, it's advisable to learn all the US presidents
>>>> with their number - not knowledge of "worldwide" importance
>>>> (that you number your presidents at all is a unique quirk.)

>>> Unique quirk? Scanning a list of kings and queens numbering
>>> seems quite prevalent. Only the sequence differs.

>> There is no 16th king of England, and James Monroe wasn't James II.
>> Quite different systems.

> Also, names and surnames are enough to define all US presidents. The
> numbers are not necessary. But Tony should tell us how he'd make the
> difference between king Victor Emmanuel of Italy and king Victor
> Emmanuel of Italy (same dinasty, the Savoy) without using numbers.

> Just for fun, the former small German State of Mecklenburg-Schwerin
> was ruled by grand dukes between the Vienna Congress and the end of
> World War One. FOUR of them bore the name Frederick Francis. How
> could you know which one I'm talking about if I did not use numbers?

Frederick Francis the Short, Frederick Francis the Fat, Frederick
Francis the Stupid, and Frederick Francis of the Icy Fingers.

Well, you asked.

On 5/7/2022 2:43 PM, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-05-07 05:37, CDB wrote:
>> On 5/6/2022 10:40 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> CDB wrote:
>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ruud Harmsen:
>>>>>>>>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> scribeva:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> They were also very fond of Locke. Mattea would
>>>>>>>>>> know.
>>>>>>>>> Incomprehensible, irrelevant and uncalled for
>>>>>>>>> reaction. Who is Locke? Who is Mattea?
>>>>>>>> If you don't even know who Locke is (or Berkeley or
>>>>>>>> Hobbes), you won't win in Jeopardy against Mattea
>>>>>>>> Roach, who's currently on a winning streak, one of the
>>>>>>>> biggest in history, again (there were two of those
>>>>>>>> quite recently).
>>>>>>> Last night Ken all but apologized for the "gimme" Final
>>>>>>> Question, using the excuse that the questions were
>>>>>>> written months ago and used randomly. Would that have
>>>>>>> prevented them from removing one that consisted of
>>>>>>> nothing but recognizing the second line of "O Canada"?
>>
>>>>>> Any intervention that takes the candidates into account
>>>>>> introduces subjectivity and thus unfairness.
>>
>>>>> There have been an awful lot of questions in the last few
>>>>> weeks pertaining specifically to Canada. Someone's thumb
>>>>> seems to be on the scale.
>>
>>>> Alex Trebek used to make sure there were questions about Canada
>>>> in the mix (embarrassingly few of them got more than blank
>>>> looks). They may do this in memory of him.

>>> Did he ensure there would be Midwest questions when a Chicago
>>> candidate was on?

>> I don't think I suggested that he would arrange Canadian questions
>> for Canadian contestants. My mention of blank-faced reactions
>> seems to me to rule that out.

>>>>> They seem to believe that long streaks are good for ratings,
>>>>> but in fact they're boring. It was shocking last night that
>>>>> no one knew (NASA shmASA) that Apollo's twin sister is
>>>>> Artemis, or who Peter Stuyvesant was (never mind the
>>>>> portrait, "handed NY over to the Brits" was enough).

>>>> Artemis was also called Selene, which would have been a good
>>>> guess for a moonshot.

>>> Though it's not the name of the new lunar exploration program.

>> My remark addressed the idea that the contestants were shockingly
>> ignorant of the name of Apollo's sister. I doubt that they all
>> were, but they may have faced an embarrassment of choice, as my
>> formerly-siggish comment pointed out below.

> Shockingly? Did you study Greek, Roman, and/or Norse mythology in
> your school years? I sure didn't.

OK, "shockingly". The shock was PeterTD's (see above).
>
> As for Peter Stuyvesant, only a self-centred boor that thinks the
> world revolves around an eastern US state would expect every Canadian
> to know anything at all about him.

I know a little bit, but I went to school for several years in an
eastern US state. I picture him saying that some opponent would soon be
shorter by a head (possibly apocryphal; I couldn't find it on the Net),
or looking like Charles Coburn, except black and white, and singing
"September Song".

>>>> Tu potens Trivia et notho es/ dicta lumine Luna.

>>>> You [Diana] are powerful Trivia [Hecate] and, for your bastard
>>>> light, are [called] Luna.

On 5/7/2022 10:32 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> CDB wrote:
>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> CDB wrote:

>>>> We, on the other hand, have "Question Period", a somewhat raucous
>>>>  hour every sitting day in which Ministers answer questions put
>>>> to them by backbenchers of all parties (but mostly opposition
>>>> parties). Or don't:

>>> We have a convention that the government and opposition take turns
>>> in asking questions. That means that all the even-numbered
>>> questions are Dorothy Dixers, and all the odd-numbered ones receive
>>> responses that are unrelated to the question.

>> Their big mistake was deciding to televise QP.  It's more of a
>> vaudeville act now than it ought to be.

>> The proceedings are all televised, but the debates go unwatched by
>> most people.

> We have it on TV too, but as entertainment it's a failure because of
> some bad casting decisions.

Pity the critic. I had to watch it every day for years. That's when I
became addicted to Freecell.

On 2022-05-08 05:56, CDB wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 2:43 PM, lar3ryca wrote:
>> On 2022-05-07 05:37, CDB wrote:
>>> On 5/6/2022 10:40 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> CDB wrote:
>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>> Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ruud Harmsen:
>>>>>>>>>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> scribeva:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They were also very fond of Locke. Mattea would
>>>>>>>>>>> know.
>>>>>>>>>> Incomprehensible, irrelevant and uncalled for
>>>>>>>>>> reaction. Who is Locke? Who is Mattea?
>>>>>>>>> If you don't even know who Locke is (or Berkeley or Hobbes),
>>>>>>>>> you won't win in Jeopardy against Mattea
>>>>>>>>> Roach, who's currently on a winning streak, one of the
>>>>>>>>> biggest in history, again (there were two of those
>>>>>>>>> quite recently).
>>>>>>>> Last night Ken all but apologized for the "gimme" Final
>>>>>>>> Question, using the excuse that the questions were
>>>>>>>> written months ago and used randomly. Would that have
>>>>>>>> prevented them from removing one that consisted of
>>>>>>>> nothing but recognizing the second line of "O Canada"?
>>>
>>>>>>> Any intervention that takes the candidates into account
>>>>>>> introduces subjectivity and thus unfairness.
>>>
>>>>>> There have been an awful lot of questions in the last few
>>>>>> weeks pertaining specifically to Canada. Someone's thumb
>>>>>> seems to be on the scale.
>>>
>>>>> Alex Trebek used to make sure there were questions about Canada
>>>>> in the mix (embarrassingly few of them got more than blank
>>>>> looks). They may do this in memory of him.
>
>>>> Did he ensure there would be Midwest questions when a Chicago
>>>> candidate was on?
>
>>> I don't think I suggested that he would arrange Canadian questions
>>> for Canadian contestants.  My mention of blank-faced reactions
>>> seems to me to rule that out.
>
>>>>>> They seem to believe that long streaks are good for ratings,
>>>>>> but in fact they're boring. It was shocking last night that
>>>>>> no one knew (NASA shmASA) that Apollo's twin sister is
>>>>>> Artemis, or who Peter Stuyvesant was (never mind the
>>>>>> portrait, "handed NY over to the Brits" was enough).
>
>>>>> Artemis was also called Selene, which would have been a good
>>>>> guess for a moonshot.
>
>>>> Though it's not the name of the new lunar exploration program.
>
>>> My remark addressed the idea that the contestants were shockingly
>>> ignorant of the name of Apollo's sister.  I doubt that they all
>>> were, but they may have faced an embarrassment of choice, as my
>>> formerly-siggish comment pointed out below.
>
>> Shockingly? Did you study Greek, Roman, and/or Norse mythology in
>> your school years? I sure didn't.
>
> OK, "shockingly".  The shock was PeterTD's (see above).

Ahh... right. So both were references were from the same source.

>> As for Peter Stuyvesant, only a self-centred boor that thinks the
>> world revolves around an eastern US state would expect every Canadian
>> to know anything at all about him.
>
> I know a little bit, but I went to school for several years in an
> eastern US state.  I picture him saying that some opponent would soon be
> shorter by a head (possibly apocryphal; I couldn't find it on the Net),
> or looking like Charles Coburn, except black and white, and singing
> "September Song".
>
>>>>> Tu potens Trivia et notho es/ dicta lumine Luna.
>
>>>>> You [Diana] are powerful Trivia [Hecate] and, for your bastard
>>>>> light, are [called] Luna.
>
>

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 11:55:38 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:

>>> As the guy said, he only knew Harding because Coolidge's number
>>> had been given in the previous question.
>>
>> So Mattea's a guy now (nobody else gave any answer in that category)!
>
> I recalled it as the (now rare) male contestant.

By the way, I don't think it came up in the chats, but Mattea identifies
as what people on TikTok apparently pronounce "Le-dollar-bian" to avoid
censorship by the algorithms.

If it wasn't for Matt Amodio, who seems to be so straight he couldn't go
down a spiral staircase, it'd be in danger of turning into Queerpardy.

--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

* Tony Cooper:

> On Fri, 6 May 2022 20:54:39 -0400, Quinn C
> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>
>>* Tony Cooper:
>>
>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 18:54:23 -0400, Quinn C
>>> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>>
>>>>* Tony Cooper:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 17:27:24 -0400, Quinn C
>>>>> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>* Tony Cooper:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 12:48:34 -0400, Quinn C
>>>>>>> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>* Tony Cooper:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:44:32 -0400, Quinn C
>>>>>>>>> <lispamateur@crommatograph.info> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>* Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:05:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But Mattea knew Thomas Dewey and Antietam. Both of those are too deep
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Dewey Defeats Truman" should be well enough known that the dates
>>>>>>>>>>> that were given would suffice
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Why would that be well known more than 50 years later?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why shouldn't it? It comes up every time there's a US election on the
>>>>>>>>> horizon where the polls indicate someone is a sure thing. There'll be
>>>>>>>>> an article about previous upsets and not counting the chickens before
>>>>>>>>> they're hatched. This photo will accompany the article:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fitsnews.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F11%2Fdewey-defeats-truman.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I see.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I'm following US presidential elections about as closely, I think, as
>>>>>>>>any foreigner can be expected, sometimes closer, at least since 2000,
>>>>>>>>and using mostly US sources, but I wasn't aware of it. So I guess it's
>>>>>>>>one of those things that Americans can be expected to know, but not
>>>>>>>>foreigners. So I stick with my opinion that Mattea is deeper into it
>>>>>>>>than is reasonable to expect from a non-American.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't watch "Jeopardy", but I know that Mattea Roach has been a
>>>>>>> contestant on the show. I would not think someone who qualifies as a
>>>>>>> contestant for "Jeopardy" is an average Canadian as far as knowledge
>>>>>>> of worldwide events goes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is an audition process to get on the show, and I would assume
>>>>>>> some ability to answer questions of a broader nature than Canadian
>>>>>>> history and events would be required to get through that process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're framing this wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidently, since I am not thinking about this the same way that you
>>>>> are thinking about this, I am "wrong". Interesting.
>>>>
>>>>You were wrong, because you made it about "Canadian vs worldwide", when
>>>>the much more prevalent opposition in Jeopardy is "American vs.
>>>>worldwide".
>>>
>>> In this context, a Canadian is a foreigner. The context is
>>> established by your use of "non-American". I framed it as "American
>>> vs foreigner".
>>
>>No you didn't. You better leave both the kickoff spot and the goalposts
>>where they were.
>>
>
> A Canadian is a non-American, Mattea is a Canadian. Can you take
> that one step further? Is she, or is she not, a "foreigner" when
> appearing on an American television show?

Stop retconning. What I answered to is right up there:

| I would assume some ability to answer questions of a broader nature
| than Canadian history and events would be required

It's not the broader than Canadian that is the problem, but the narrowly
American nature.

>>> Frankly, I don't understand your complaint. You mentioned somewhere
>>> "if Canadians are allowed to enter". As far as I know, anyone - from
>>> anywhere - can apply to enter.
>>
>>No, only Americans and Canadians. Or maybe residents of those two
>>countries. But certainly not people living elsewhere.
>
> This page does not indicate that only Americans and Canadians are
> eligible:
>
> https://www.jeopardy.com/be-on-j/faqs

What do you think is the point of this one, then?

| ARE CANADIANS ELIGIBLE TO TAKE THE TEST?
|
| Yes, Canadians are eligible.
>>> Your perspective seems to be that as a viewer of the show you are
>>> being discrimated against because you are at a disadvantage as a
>>> non-American and not conversant with all things American.
>>>
>>> I don't see how that's a valid complaint.
>>
>>I'm just making the observation, contradicting PTD who surmises they
>>make it easy for the Canadian. No, it's harder for her than for
>>Americans. For other foreigners than Canadians, it would be even harder.
>
> And that's exactly where you lose me. There's no obligation for
> anyone to apply to be on the show. The person applying would be
> expected to know exactly what they're applying to be part of.

I sum it up once more, because you probably didn't get what this was
about in the first place.

PTD implied that they make it easy for the Canadian contestant (Mattea
Roach) by asking easy questions about Canada.

I pointed out that that's not nearly enough for her to win, but that she
answered some pretty advanced questions about the US, e.g. about Thomas
Dewey and Antietam.

Yes, the questions about Canada they have are usually easy for
Canadians. The questions they have about France are usually easy for
French people. But the questions about the US aren't all easy for
Americans, because that would defeat the purpose of a game where most
contestants are American. So the cards are still stacked against a
Canadian - or a person who immigrated later in life. That was my point,
not any complaining. I wanted to underline what an achievement it is for
a Canadian to win.

PTD doesn't seem to realize how remote knowledge of someone like Thomas
Dewey is for non-Americans. Questions of that level are very rarely
asked about other countries.

> But it's you, not Mattea, who's claiming that it's harder. She knew
> the answer, you didn't.

I think I'm not a bad yardstick as someone well-informed about US
issues for a foreigner. I've explained things to other non-USAns in
this group. The questions I can't answer typically require any
foreigner to intentionally study up on US history or such topics, while
Americans often had a chance to pick those up in passing by going to
school in the US or living there for a long time. Canadians are a bit
in between because at least they often have watched a lot of US TV
throughout their lives.

--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 6:39:37 PM UTC-4, Tony Cooper wrote:

> If a sitting Senator or Representitive would be nominated, he/she
> would have to resign their seat as a Senator or Representive to serve
> as a Cabinet secretary.
>
> A President will normally nominate either a member of his/her own
> poltical party or at least a person who is in alignment with the
> President's party's positions.

Bush 43 tried to put a Democratic senator in his cabinet, which would
have handed the Senate over to the Republicans.

> If a President nominated a sitting Senator or Representitive, that
> seat would be up for appointment by the state's Governor to fill the
> position until the next election,

Wrong. The governor (in 45 states) appoints a Senate replacement
(historically the widow of the incumbent, though not any more), who
must then run for election to fill out the predecessor's term at the next
opportunity (that's how Georgia ended up with two new Democrats
in the 2021 runoff) and is then back on the regular six-year schedule.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/2021-08-20_IF11907_5e406f4711dbfd13ea3dee0b41a778b674690cc2.pdf

A House seat remains empty until the governor schedules an election.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/2021-01-08_IF11722_dcbc4bdca5fddd5b46b49cc06ba113d2ac8d43f0.pdf

> and the replacement would have to be
> elected to the seat. That might not be a good political move for the
> President.
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida
> I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

And misinformation.

On Sunday, May 8, 2022 at 7:56:23 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 2:43 PM, lar3ryca wrote:
> > On 2022-05-07 05:37, CDB wrote:
> >> On 5/6/2022 10:40 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> CDB wrote:
> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>> Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>>> Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>>>> Quinn C wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Ruud Harmsen:
> >>>>>>>>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> scribeva:
> >>>>>>>>>> They were also very fond of Locke. Mattea would
> >>>>>>>>>> know.
> >>>>>>>>> Incomprehensible, irrelevant and uncalled for
> >>>>>>>>> reaction. Who is Locke? Who is Mattea?
> >>>>>>>> If you don't even know who Locke is (or Berkeley or
> >>>>>>>> Hobbes), you won't win in Jeopardy against Mattea
> >>>>>>>> Roach, who's currently on a winning streak, one of the
> >>>>>>>> biggest in history, again (there were two of those
> >>>>>>>> quite recently).
> >>>>>>> Last night Ken all but apologized for the "gimme" Final
> >>>>>>> Question, using the excuse that the questions were
> >>>>>>> written months ago and used randomly. Would that have
> >>>>>>> prevented them from removing one that consisted of
> >>>>>>> nothing but recognizing the second line of "O Canada"?
> >>>>>> Any intervention that takes the candidates into account
> >>>>>> introduces subjectivity and thus unfairness.
> >>>>> There have been an awful lot of questions in the last few
> >>>>> weeks pertaining specifically to Canada. Someone's thumb
> >>>>> seems to be on the scale.
> >>>> Alex Trebek used to make sure there were questions about Canada
> >>>> in the mix (embarrassingly few of them got more than blank
> >>>> looks). They may do this in memory of him.
> >>> Did he ensure there would be Midwest questions when a Chicago
> >>> candidate was on?
> >> I don't think I suggested that he would arrange Canadian questions
> >> for Canadian contestants. My mention of blank-faced reactions
> >> seems to me to rule that out.
> >>>>> They seem to believe that long streaks are good for ratings,
> >>>>> but in fact they're boring. It was shocking last night that
> >>>>> no one knew (NASA shmASA) that Apollo's twin sister is
> >>>>> Artemis, or who Peter Stuyvesant was (never mind the
> >>>>> portrait, "handed NY over to the Brits" was enough).
> >>>> Artemis was also called Selene, which would have been a good
> >>>> guess for a moonshot.

Not different divinities?

> >>> Though it's not the name of the new lunar exploration program.
> >> My remark addressed the idea that the contestants were shockingly
> >> ignorant of the name of Apollo's sister. I doubt that they all
> >> were, but they may have faced an embarrassment of choice, as my
> >> formerly-siggish comment pointed out below.
> > Shockingly? Did you study Greek, Roman, and/or Norse mythology in
> > your school years? I sure didn't.
>
> OK, "shockingly". The shock was PeterTD's (see above).

You could inform him that we did indeed learn Classical mythology
in elementary school (how can you do Greek and Roman history without?).
If he didn't, you might look into Canadian curricula.

> > As for Peter Stuyvesant, only a self-centred boor that thinks the
> > world revolves around an eastern US state would expect every Canadian
> > to know anything at all about him.

I also pointed out that in high school there was mention of Wolfe and
Montcalm, who accomplised the same end but rather less peacefully.

> I know a little bit, but I went to school for several years in an
> eastern US state. I picture him saying that some opponent would soon be
> shorter by a head (possibly apocryphal; I couldn't find it on the Net),

Was that an option in 17th-century Dutch law? Rings a bell, but not
about P.S.

> or looking like Charles Coburn, except black and white, and singing
> "September Song".

Please. Walter Huston! (If there was a movie of *Knickerbocker Holiday*
and they used Coburn, he was horribly miscast. There's something like
a Broadway Original Cast album, and Huston does a surprisingly creditable job.)