On 5/5/2022 11:41 AM, 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.

> 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.

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

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

On 5/5/2022 9:42 AM, lar3ryca wrote:
> CDB wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> 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"?

>> Ong frongsay, mind. She's from Nova Scotia and Toronto.

> I guessed the answer, not because I knew the line, but because it was
> obviously French. I knew I had a chance of being wrong, as I have no
> idea how many other national anthems are in, or have a translation
> to that language.

Me neither. France's and Haiti's, for two. We sang the first verse of
"La Dessalinienne" every schoolday in front of our school in
Port-au-Prince. I never knew if it was required by law or inspired by
the desire for good relations (Union School, English-speaking and
following an American curriculum, had been called "Colony School" during
the American occupation).

>> They may want to assure the audience that they don't screw with
>> the questions. That may even be true.
>
> I think game show producers have been hypersensitive to any form of
> cheating or bias toward successful contestants since the /$64,000
> Question/ scandal.

--
Pour le pays, pour les ancêtres,
Marchons unis, marchons unis!
Dans nor rangs, point de traîtres;
Du sol soyons seuls maîtres ...

On 5/5/2022 12:06 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> CDB wrote:
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> : Quinn C:

>>>> In Ireland, ministers are required to be MPs.
>>> Strange, very strange.

>> The idea is that they should be able to answer questions in the
>> House.

> ? If a Senator or Representative is made a Cabinet Secretary, they
> cease being a Senator or Representative. They regularly testify
> before congressional committees when called. Subpoenas are not
> normally involved.

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:
it has been pointed out that the proceeding is not called "Answer Period".

On 5/6/2022 1:06 AM, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com> scribeva:
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> Quinn C:

>>>> But to answer your question, they remain MPs when they become
>>>> ministers.

>>>> This is also allowed in Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary,
>>>> Italy, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania. In Austria, it's legal,
>>>> but they resign as MPs by convention.

>>>> The dual function is forbidden in Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia,
>>>> France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, and
>>>> Sweden.

>>> Not really forbidden in NL, because during a formation
>>> (goverment forming), when the cabinet is demissionary as we call
>>> it (sent away, but still handling what must be handled), they do
>>> have the dual function. It lead to strange situation, like people
>>> voting about their own fate.

>>>> In Ireland, ministers are required to be MPs.

>>> Strange, very strange.

>> The idea is that they should be able to answer questions in the
>> House.

> That is one of the basic function of the Dutch Second chamber of
> Parliament too. But there is no need for government members to also
> be members of Parliament in order to answer questions. They are
> summoned to come to the house and answer the questions there. There
> is even a special desk in Parliament where they can sit.

Witnesses are occasionally summoned before the Canadian House, standing
at the Bar. They are usually in some kind of trouble.

> Many questions are also posed and answered in writing.

Groan. Tell me about it. I used to edit those, when I worked in
Journals branch.

On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:05:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 5:22:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:

> >>> 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. They seem to believe that long streaks are good for
> > ratings, but in fact they're boring.
>
> I'd like to see statistics on that. I suspect you only notice because
> there's a Canadian candidate who's winning.

There's been at least one Canadian challenger.

> > 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).
>
> 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 (I don't think I knew he was an NYS
governor before I was born), and like her I knew Antietam only because
of the rhyme.

> into Americana for me - before my lifetime and not of international
> consequence. Maybe Stuyvesant isn't as well-known outside of New York as
> you think. Didn't we talk about this (possibly on occasion of discussing
> the cigarette brand, which is where I know the name from as well)?

Twice. The cigarettes are unknown in NY.

> I've read the name "Antietam" before, but didn't know the pronunciation,
> so couldn't identify it as a rhyme of "beat 'em" (I gave it four
> syllables in my mind).

Oh, you're so German.

Just about the only Civil War battle I know anything about is Gettysburg.

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?

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 1:06:48 AM UTC-4, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> Thu, 5 May 2022 08:08:25 -0400: CDB <belle...@gmail.com> scribeva:
> >On 5/5/2022 1:07 AM, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> >> : Quinn C:

> >>> But to answer your question, they remain MPs when they become
> >>> ministers.
> >>> This is also allowed in Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy,
> >>> Lithuania, Poland, and Romania. In Austria, it's legal, but they
> >>> resign as MPs by convention.
> >>> The dual function is forbidden in Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia,
> >>> France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden.
> >> Not really forbidden in NL, because during a formation (goverment
> >> forming), when the cabinet is demissionary as we call it (sent away,
> >> but still handling what must be handled), they do have the dual
> >> function. It lead to strange situation, like people voting about
> >> their own fate.
> >>> In Ireland, ministers are required to be MPs.
> >> Strange, very strange.
> >The idea is that they should be able to answer questions in the House.
>
> That is one of the basic function of the Dutch Second chamber of
> Parliament too. But there is no need for government members to also be
> members of Parliament in order to answer questions. They are summoned
> to come to the house and answer the questions there. There is even a
> special desk in Parliament where they can sit.

Occasionally we get brief clips of UK Question Time. It seems pointless,
with hundreds of Members yelling questions simultaneously.

When someone testifies at a House or Senate committee meeting,
they are facing a limited number of members, who are presumably
on the committee because of some specific knowledge or interest,
and the questioning is done one by one in strict order of seniority,
alternating between members from the two parties.

> Many questions are also posed and answered in writing.

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 2:16:22 AM UTC-4, Madhu wrote:

> wiki "Member of Congress" has already been severely audited.

You are using "audited" strangely.

> This is because in the United States the word Congress is used
> as a descriptive term for the collective body of legislators,
> from both houses of its bicameral federal legislature: the
> Senate and the House of Representatives. For this reason, and in
> order to distinguish who is a member of which house, a member of
> the Senate is typically referred to as Senator (followed by
> "name" from "state"), and a member of the House of
> Representatives is usually referred to as Congressman or
> Congresswoman (followed by "name" from the "number" district of

On the Floor, they are never addressed directly; they are referred
to as the Gentleman or the Gentlelady [sic] from (state), and the
name is added ("Mr./Ms." Doe) if more than one from a state is
involved in the colloquy.

> "state"), or Representative ("name" from the "number" district
> of "state"). Although Senators are members of Congress, they are
> not normally referred to or addressed as "Congressmen" or
> "Congresswomen" or "Congresspeople".

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 9:09:03 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> On 5/5/2022 11:44 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>> Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >>>> In order to say that a "handful" are involved, you must have
> >>>> some information which you haven't shared with us. Or you are
> >>>> just making it up as you go?
> >>> How many of the 65,000,000 or so Brits are paying members of a
> >>> political party?
> >> Oh sorry, yes, it's 5. Or could you be Wrong??!
> > So you have no idea, and simply don't want to admit that I have a
> > point?
>
> Perhaps if you had said "relative handful" ...
> --
> And all the fingers had large families.

I think it's been a long time since we decided that "handful" does
not mean 'five'. (Why two syllables/7 letters rather than one/4?)

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 9:29:01 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> On 5/5/2022 11:41 AM, 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?

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

* Madhu:

> * Tony Cooper <den77hd1ijg9p42bso6md81555teg2jv9t @4ax.com> :
> Wrote on Thu, 05 May 2022 10:35:23 -0400:
>> On Thu, 05 May 2022 14:49:42 +0100, Adam Funk <a24061 @ducksburg.com>
>> wrote:
>>>On 2022-05-05, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 05 May 2022 11:19:47 +0100, Adam Funk <a24061 @ducksburg.com>
>>>>>But if someone says "I'm going to complain to my congressmen [or
>>>>>congresswoman]" by default that refers to a member of the House of
>>>>>Representatives, doesn't it?
>>>>
>>>> It wouldn't have that default to me.
>>>> This page provides guidance:
>>>> https://classroom.synonym.com/file-letter-complaint-congressman-11940.html
>
> That page severely needs to be audited for gender-language compliance.
> It implies Senators are male and House is female.
>
> "Use the proper form of address. Letters to senators are
> addressed to "Senator John Doe," while letters to House
> members are addressed to "The Honorable (or Representative)
> Jane Doe."

Do you also think it implies all senators and congresspeople are named
"Doe"?

Alternating is one method to achieve not-too-gendered language, although
maybe not a highly favored one any more. It was common in textbooks I've
been using.

--
Veronica: You named your puppy "The Missus"?
Cliff: Says the owner of a dog named "Pony".
-- Veronica Mars, S04E05

* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:05:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 5:22:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
>>>>> 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. They seem to believe that long streaks are good for
>>> ratings, but in fact they're boring.
>>
>> I'd like to see statistics on that. I suspect you only notice because
>> there's a Canadian candidate who's winning.
>
> There's been at least one Canadian challenger.
>
>>> 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).
>>
>> 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?

>> I've read the name "Antietam" before, but didn't know the pronunciation,
>> so couldn't identify it as a rhyme of "beat 'em" (I gave it four
>> syllables in my mind).
>
> Oh, you're so German.

What makes you say that? I decided *not* to read the "tie" as in German,
but that's what you do, actually.

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

On 2022-05-06, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 06/05/22 01:50, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 8:53:06 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 05/05/22 00:09, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>>>> But how do they get on the ballot? Do they just need to say "I
>>>> want to be on the ballot"?
>>>
>>> They have to have the signatures of 100 supporters who are
>>> eligible to vote, and they have to be able to prove that they are
>>> qualified in terms of citizenship, etc. They also have to provide a
>>> $2000 deposit. The deposit is returned if they get at least 4% of
>>> first preference votes.
>>
>> "100" for whichever office it is? That's a very small number. "$2000"
>> looks like a lot.
>
> The 100 is an arbitrary decision. It's the $2000 that (at least partly)
> stops the cranks from running.
>
>> 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.

Good idea --- just out of curiosity, how are they appointed?

> (At least at the federal level. Gerrymandering used to be a problem in
> Queensland, but that affected only state elections.)
>
>>> Our present government has made itself unpopular, and the main
>>> opposition party has drifted to the right, so there will almost
>>> certainly be increased votes for independents and the minor
>>> parties.
>>
>> Here's hoping!
>
> 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).
>
> 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?

--
I never met a people who were better at not getting to the
point than the Brits. ---Rich Hall

On 2022-05-05, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 05/05/22 00:09, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 9:16:19 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 04/05/22 01:19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Founders saw how badly the parliamentary system was doing in
>>>> Britain in their day, so they came up with something far better
>>>> -- three separate branches, with "checks and balances." Their
>>>> judgment was only confirmed by the dismal performances of
>>>> parliamentary systems in the 20th and 21st centuries.
>>>
>>> I presume that the original concept included the idea that the
>>> judiciary would be independent of the two political branches. There
>>> must have been a time, then, when politicians were unable to
>>> influence appointments to the highest court in the land. When did
>>> that go wrong?
>>
>> With the nomination of Robert Bork.
>>
>> That fiasco paved the way for Antonin Scalia's unanimous (or nearly
>> so) confirmation.
>
> What you need is a constitutional amendment that makes it illegal for a
> president to nominate a judge candidate, and also makes it illegal for
> senators to attend the confirmation hearings. Only then will you ensure
> a separation of powers.

Somebody has to pick the judges --- at least the nomination/
confirmation split puts a bit of a check in the system.

--
If an organization had to assume that anything it did would become
public in a few years, people within that organization would behave
differently. ---Bruce Schneier

On 2022-05-06, CDB wrote:

> On 5/5/2022 11:41 AM, 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.

Do the presenters of quiz shows normally have much input into the
questions? (I was under the impression they didn't, but ICBW.)

>> 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.
>

--
Unix is a user-friendly operating system. It's just very choosy about
its friends.

* Adam Funk:

> On 2022-05-05, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
>> On 05/05/22 00:09, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, May 3, 2022 at 9:16:19 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>> On 04/05/22 01:19, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Founders saw how badly the parliamentary system was doing in
>>>>> Britain in their day, so they came up with something far better
>>>>> -- three separate branches, with "checks and balances." Their
>>>>> judgment was only confirmed by the dismal performances of
>>>>> parliamentary systems in the 20th and 21st centuries.
>>>>
>>>> I presume that the original concept included the idea that the
>>>> judiciary would be independent of the two political branches. There
>>>> must have been a time, then, when politicians were unable to
>>>> influence appointments to the highest court in the land. When did
>>>> that go wrong?
>>>
>>> With the nomination of Robert Bork.
>>>
>>> That fiasco paved the way for Antonin Scalia's unanimous (or nearly
>>> so) confirmation.
>>
>> What you need is a constitutional amendment that makes it illegal for a
>> president to nominate a judge candidate, and also makes it illegal for
>> senators to attend the confirmation hearings. Only then will you ensure
>> a separation of powers.
>
> Somebody has to pick the judges --- at least the nomination/
> confirmation split puts a bit of a check in the system.

See the German system I described in another post - there are at least
two nominating bodies, and two confirming ones, and they alternate.

--
Queer people shuttle between worlds each time they look up from
their smartphones at the people gathered around the family table;
as they climb the steps from the underground nightclub back into
the nation-state. In one world, time quickens; in the other it
dawdles. Spending your life criss-crossing from world to world can
make you quite dizzy. - Mark Gevisser

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 10:44:33 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 6:05:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 5:22:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>>>> 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. They seem to believe that long streaks are good for
> >>> ratings, but in fact they're boring.
> >> I'd like to see statistics on that. I suspect you only notice because
> >> there's a Canadian candidate who's winning.
> > There's been at least one Canadian challenger.
> >>> 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).
> >> 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?

It remains alive throughout popular culture. It's the parade example
of (exit?) polling that goes wrong.

> >> I've read the name "Antietam" before, but didn't know the pronunciation,
> >> so couldn't identify it as a rhyme of "beat 'em" (I gave it four
> >> syllables in my mind).
> > Oh, you're so German.
>
> What makes you say that? I decided *not* to read the "tie" as in German,
> but that's what you do, actually.

Presumably it's Algonquian.

How would that name be read if it were German?

Compare "Saugerties," a presumably Dutch toponym.

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:
>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>> On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 5:22:00 PM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>
>>>>>> 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. They seem to believe that long streaks are good for
>>>> ratings, but in fact they're boring.
>>>
>>> I'd like to see statistics on that. I suspect you only notice because
>>> there's a Canadian candidate who's winning.
>>
>> There's been at least one Canadian challenger.
>>
>>>> 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).
>>>
>>> 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

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

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

On Friday, May 6, 2022 at 10:45:07 AM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2022-05-06, CDB wrote:

> > 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.
>
> Do the presenters of quiz shows normally have much input into the
> questions? (I was under the impression they didn't, but ICBW.)

Did he have a producer credit?

Ken Jennings's name _is_ in the closing credits, but with a unique title.

CDB hat am 06.05.2022 um 15:46 geschrieben:
> On 5/5/2022 9:42 AM, lar3ryca wrote:
>> I guessed the answer, not because I knew the line, but because it was
>> obviously French. I knew I had a chance of being wrong, as I have no
>> idea how many other national anthems are in, or have a translation
>> to that language.
>
> Me neither. France's and Haiti's, for two.

And then Belgium, Switzerland (as an official translation) as well as at
least a dozen of African countries which use French as a national language.

Must of us won't be there to check, but I read a few years ago that
French speakers in France will be a small minority of French speakers
worldwide in 2070. And the majority will not come from Quebec. :-)

* 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.

--
"THIS IS IMPORTANT," one of the homunculi said to me. "THERE ARE
NO MEN AND NO WOMEN AND NOTHING ELSE."
-- Mieko Kawakami, Breast and Eggs

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.

I would also assume that any contestant that does get accepted would
"bone up" on a wide variety of subjects in order to continue through
the rounds. Ms Roach has said she "grew up watching Jeopardy", so she
would know that the questions would include American events.

It's not so much American vs foreigner, but someone who has prepared
for questions vs someone who has not.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

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

On 06-May-22 14:08, CDB wrote:
> On 5/5/2022 11:44 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
>>>>> In order to say that a "handful" are involved, you must have
>>>>> some information which you haven't shared with us. Or you are
>>>>> just making it up as you go?
>>>> How many of the 65,000,000 or so Brits are paying members of a
>>>> political party?
>
>>> Oh sorry, yes, it's 5. Or could you be Wrong??!
>
>> So you have no idea, and simply don't want to admit that I have a
>> point?
>
> Perhaps if you had said "relative handful" ...
>
If it wasn't question begging, it certainly seemed to be holding out a
tin cup.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 06-May-22 17:12, Silvano wrote:

> Must of us won't be there to check, but I read a few years ago that
> French speakers in France will be a small minority of French speakers
> worldwide in 2070. And the majority will not come from Quebec. :-)

I understand that the statement that:
"London is the sixth largest French city"
was just a rhetorical flourish used by Nicolas Sarkozy, but was later
picked up by some chap called err... Boris Johnson[1].

[1] Who is being blamed by a wide range of local Tory politicians for
the party's poor showing in yesterday's local elections.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 06-May-22 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:

> Do the presenters of quiz shows normally have much input into the
> questions? (I was under the impression they didn't, but ICBW.)

It might depend on how important they seem to the show's success.

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet hat am 06.05.2022 um 21:32 geschrieben:
> On 06-May-22 17:12, Silvano wrote:
>
>> Must of us won't be there to check, but I read a few years ago that
>> French speakers in France will be a small minority of French speakers
>> worldwide in 2070. And the majority will not come from Quebec. :-)
>
> I understand that the statement that:
> "London is the sixth largest French city"
> was just a rhetorical flourish used by Nicolas Sarkozy, but was later
> picked up by some chap called err... Boris Johnson[1].
>
> [1] Who is being blamed by a wide range of local Tory politicians for
> the party's poor showing in yesterday's local elections.

And the largest Francophone city in the world is now Kinshasa.