salami_swami
|
The best you can do is submit a correction. The editor's will see it, and it will be taken out of the question pool. I'm just guessing... The answer was king crab? Anyway, some of these ambiguous questions will slip in every now and again, so the correction notes help. With the new system Terry has, it should be out of the pool right away. :-) Reply #1. Mar 23 10, 9:00 AM |
lesley153
|
That's good news. With the old system, dubious questions could stay in till the next clean-up. I've sent CNs for dodgy questions, almost always because they don't make sense in isolation. A couple have been when the final question from a common bond quiz has appeared in a compilation quiz. "Now anagram the initials of the previous nine answers..." One quiz-writer's response was to say that the definition should have been enough to identify the nine-letter word. I'm not convinced. I've also protested recently about a question relating to organ donation by default. What was true in the American state named in the quiz when it was written ten years ago may no longer be true in that state, and may never have been valid in other states or anywhere else in the world. Haven't heard anything about that one. Some editors are wonderful and tell you what they're doing. That's always good, seeing that someone agrees with you! Reply #2. Mar 23 10, 9:42 AM |
Cymruambyth
|
THe ambiguous questions that drive me nuts are those taken out of context of the quiz in which they first appeared. Most annoying are the questions that string together names and/or events relevant to a particular year and we don't know the year but have to pick the right name or event! Aaargh! Reply #3. Mar 23 10, 7:55 PM |
Konfuzed
|
Hopefully time & persistent corrections will weed them out. Thanks for your thoughts. Salami_swami, the answer was blue crab :-) Reply #4. Mar 24 10, 1:44 AM |
Terry
Head Honcho |
Yes, please report all such ambiguities in the "report a correction" box. Our editors are very diligent about getting such questions fixed fast. Reply #5. Mar 24 10, 10:55 AM |
salami_swami
|
Cym, usually a question like that can be answered because the quiz title can be seen, it might say "births of 1942", or something like that, so when it says "March 3, who was born?" You know it is 1942. :-) Reply #6. Mar 24 10, 1:25 PM |
spidersghost43
|
I got this question in my daily quiz: And now on to the part of the show where we get asked really odd questions. First off, is it better to look for the dolphins jumping off the right side of the bow, or the left side? The answer was neither because the quiz was regarding Lake Michigan but of course my daily quiz said nothing about Lake Michigan. Unfortunately i did not see Terry's post before I took the quiz and I could not report it. I will remember it for the next time. Reply #7. Mar 25 10, 6:39 AM |
Konfuzed
|
It must be a monumental task for the editors to sort through the millions of questions/answers and verify their accuracy. I guess players' correction submissions are the vital pointers required to flag the 'questionables'. For the record, I think these guys/gals (ie.editors) do a marvellous job. Thank you. Reply #8. Mar 25 10, 7:49 AM |
agony
|
Yes, we absolutely depend on the correction system. Although the editors are knowledgeable in their own categories, we don't verify the quiz questions beyond that. That job is up to the players - please send a correction note when you spot something wrong with a question. Reply #9. Mar 25 10, 8:55 AM |
gillimalta
|
Names and Pseudonyms: Authors' Initials 20. Gilbert Keith Answer: ( One Word ) Just found this in my Pot of Gold - got it wrong, obviously! Reply #10. Mar 26 10, 1:46 PM |
supersal1
|
That one made me pause as well Gillie - first thought was 'GK, obviously" then "d'oh - Chesterton". It was a little out of context but the penny did drop after a short time. Reply #11. Mar 26 10, 3:34 PM |
lesley153
|
#6 "...the quiz title can be seen, it might say "births of 1942", or something like that..." If it did, the question wouldn't be vague or ambiguous, would it? Nice try, s-s, but most of us are quite good at looking for clues, and we can tell when there aren't any. Reply #12. Mar 26 10, 3:45 PM |
gillimalta
|
Sal, I put GK...doh! Reply #13. Mar 26 10, 3:55 PM |
flopsymopsy
|
That well-known British writer G K D'Oh strikes again! I had one recently that read "Who was born in Rhode Island? Tom, Dick or Harry?" ... well, probably quite a lot of people born there have been called one or all of those names! And no, there was no other info to provide a clue as the quiz title was Tom, Dick, or Harry. I did report it so I hope it's gone now. Reply #14. Mar 26 10, 4:03 PM |
agony
|
I got that one too - it took a second, and then I got it. We don't allow this type of question anymore, and haven't for years. Anyone who has submitted a quiz to Music or Lit has probably read my stock phrase "We now require that you ASK a question for each question. Tournament players will not see your intro blah blah blah...." I just hope that no one complaining here about these questions has also complained when asked by an editor to ask a clear question in their quiz. Reply #15. Mar 26 10, 9:28 PM |
gillimalta
|
Just found this in Word Wizard - it doesn't offend me, in fact I thought it was funny, but I think some people may be a little upset with it... 15. Be lazy or idle Your answer: arse about Reply #16. Mar 29 10, 5:23 AM |
flopsymopsy
|
Ssssssh, Gilli, we Brits like it when our little words get past the censor! Reply #17. Mar 29 10, 9:27 AM |
gillimalta
|
You're right! Forget I said anything... Reply #18. Mar 29 10, 10:43 AM |
salami_swami
|
I got the GK one, too. Got it right away, didn't need to pause. ;-) But, playing the quiz before, I knew what it wanted.... I can see how it is a bit ambiguous, though. Haha. :-) Reply #19. Mar 31 10, 7:01 AM |
robert326
|
In Word Wizard, I got what seems to be an antonym: 4. The quality of being adequate or suitable Your answer: dominant dominant means "(music) the fifth note of the diatonic scale" The correct answer was unsatisfactoriness How is unsatisfactoriness "the quality of being adequate or suitable"? Seems quite the opposite to me. Reply #20. Apr 01 10, 11:45 AM |
|