...and that's ZoomDown

For all TV game shows, past, present and future, apart from the main event.

Moderators: Lesley Hines, JackHurst

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2458
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Sun Nov 01, 2020 10:44 pm

cough cough... but I'm sure she'll be fine.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Nov 01, 2020 11:21 pm

It’s a bit like a Royal Command Performance, the Queen of Countdown in town, so we’d all better smarten up our act and stand up straight 😉

Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fiona T » Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:22 am

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Nov 01, 2020 11:21 pm
It’s a bit like a Royal Command Performance, the Queen of Countdown in town, so we’d all better smarten up our act and stand up straight 😉
And hope there's no power cuts, pissed presenters, people in their pyjamas, or cats' arses :)
8-) <-2m-> 8-)

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:39 am

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Nov 01, 2020 9:52 pm
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sun Nov 01, 2020 4:24 am
"Susie agreeing to appear on Zoomdown is the most significant thing to have happened to the Countdown community since the founding of Apterous."

That's my thought.
The most interesting part is she wants to lex rather than just be a guest. I’ve been trying to get my head around it
Is it still too early to plant the "Susie vs Rachel ZD special" seed? :D
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:00 am

Much

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:08 am

[/quote]

And hope there's no power cuts, pissed presenters, people in their pyjamas, or cats' arses :)
[/quote]

Yeah, strict Wine O’Clock rules need to be in place by then 😊
Ooh, it’ll be mulled wine season too 🍷 🎄
Technicals, we’re at the mercy of the internet gods, as ever
Cats arses... 🤔 maybe it needs inserting into the yet-to-be-written-and-making-it-up-as-you-go rules that you get immediately disqualified should your feline friend display his bottom on camera for longer than a second

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Fri Nov 13, 2020 12:24 pm

Extremely impressed with Harry's cubing....a new bar has been set

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:49 am

Wow, that was a great episode!
2 cracking games and an increased viewership!
It's shaping up nicely

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:39 pm

Paul Anderson wrote:
Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:49 am
Wow, that was a great episode!
2 cracking games and an increased viewership!
It's shaping up nicely
Definitely! Wouldn't have envied being in Damian's position watching Harry get a max game beforehand, but he did very well to overcome him! Should be some good stuff on Thursday.

User avatar
Ian Volante
Postmaster General
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Ian Volante » Thu Nov 19, 2020 1:25 pm

Only down side to all this is that Zoomdown is now clashing with Quizzy Monday, unlike back in the summer. It's knocking my habit of viewing, almost completely. I'll try to look in tonight!
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:02 am

What was the deal with PACKIES in the last episode?

Usually ye list all maxes, but in that round just the other two (COOKIES and OOPACKS) were mentioned. Was that just Fred wussing out of it for his own personal reasons, or is it Zoomdown policy to censor certain valid dictionary words?
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fiona T » Sat Dec 05, 2020 9:55 am

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:02 am
What was the deal with PACKIES in the last episode?

Usually ye list all maxes, but in that round just the other two (COOKIES and OOPACKS) were mentioned. Was that just Fred wussing out of it for his own personal reasons, or is it Zoomdown policy to censor certain valid dictionary words?
As I'm sure you're aware, the dictionary definition for that spelling is not a racist term, however the word is a homophone for a racist term, and it's perfectly understandable that our lex didn't want to "go there" - why risk causing offence when it's entirely unnecessary? Neither player declared the word, presumably for the same reason - it's just not something most of us want to say out loud.
8-) <-2m-> 8-)

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:01 pm

Risk causing offence?
Not only did ye have CUNTIER said out loud in S1, but ye went on to have it included as part of your "Highlights of Zoomdown" package, along with a close up of a cat's arse?

Odd.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Callum Todd » Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:14 pm

I saw that word first and didn't declare it because of how it sounds so I'm fully behind the decision (if it was a decision and not just an oversight) of DC to not mention it. It's hardly a big deal; there's no reason for DC to reel off all the boring maxes anyway. I know they normally do, but I'm not gonna worry about them not doing so in this case, especially considering the word in question.

As for the offence point, most Countdown people I think hear the syllables of CUNTIER being read out and think of it as an amusing word. The cat's arse thing was funny/charming. Hearing the syllables of PACKIES being read out isn't associated with much fun or frivolity to me and I predict the same is true for most people.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm

Callum Todd wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:14 pm
As for the offence point, most Countdown people I think hear the syllables of CUNTIER being read out and think of it as an amusing word. The cat's arse thing was funny/charming. Hearing the syllables of PACKIES being read out isn't associated with much fun or frivolity to me and I predict the same is true for most people.
Maybe other like-minded people share your moral code, but why should it be imposed on the majority?
On a real TV show with real producers who know what they are doing, PACKIES (with not even a hint of a racist or unpleasant definition in the dictionary) would be shown, and would not be bleeped out. CUNTIER would be reshot, or at the very least blurred and bleeped.

How the Zoomdown people choose to move forward with this, very much depends on what Zoomdown wants itself to be.
Is it to be a cliquey thing between a small group of people who share the same set of left-wing values re language use, or do you want it to be neutral with a wide ranging appeal?

If it is the latter... I'd advise complete political neutrality about the words available in each round. View a problematic max impassively, as simply a collection of consonants and vowels, rather than giving it power by singling it out for special omission. (also: fewer cat's arses, fisting references, lavatorial and esp. sexual stuff; might be an idea if you want people to be comfortable with having their kids watch.)

If it is the former, then all is gravy, baby.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

James Haughton
Newbie
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by James Haughton » Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:38 pm

Well done, Eoin, for your brave stand against the left-wing mafia that have infiltrated Zoomdown in order to not say words that are homophones of racially offensive words. I hear that Comrades Todd, Titcombe, and Whibley are planning to go a step further during the finals. They want to replace the ZD music with The Internationale and the break after round 6 with readings from Das Kapital. They must be stopped.

User avatar
Ben Wilson
Legend
Posts: 4260
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: North Hykeham

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Ben Wilson » Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:46 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
Maybe other like-minded people share your moral code, but why should it be imposed on the majority?
What on Earth makes you think you're in the majority here?

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:15 pm

Ben Wilson wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:46 pm
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
Maybe other like-minded people share your moral code, but why should it be imposed on the majority?
What on Earth makes you think you're in the majority here?
Know, not think.

When John Chew pushed through a "Naughty list" whereby certain 'offensive' words were blacklisted in the US version of tournament Scrabble, the majority disagreed with that decision. The organisation that runs Scrabble in the rest of the world (WESPA) has voted against following America's lead on this.

It is not good practice to censor valid words for use in word games.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

User avatar
Bradley Horrocks
Acolyte
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:53 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Bradley Horrocks » Sat Dec 05, 2020 8:30 pm

Looking through my games, I noticed SPOUSE was censored. Like what is ZD's agenda against marriage? I'm sOooO tRigGerEd
"And PANTIES, thank you for that, that cheers us up enormously" - NH

User avatar
Ben Wilson
Legend
Posts: 4260
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: North Hykeham

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Ben Wilson » Sat Dec 05, 2020 8:46 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:15 pm
Ben Wilson wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:46 pm
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
Maybe other like-minded people share your moral code, but why should it be imposed on the majority?
What on Earth makes you think you're in the majority here?
Know, not think.

When John Chew pushed through a "Naughty list" whereby certain 'offensive' words were blacklisted in the US version of tournament Scrabble, the majority disagreed with that decision. The organisation that runs Scrabble in the rest of the world (WESPA) has voted against following America's lead on this.

It is not good practice to censor valid words for use in word games.
Apples and oranges. Theres quite a difference between a board game that's only seen by two people and a livestream viewed by many more. Your example would be like if Charlie bowdlerized the apterous dictionary, which I doubt anyone would be in favour of. Though FWIW, he has in the past removed DC guests that had vulgar comments (Ozzy Osbourne and Santa are two that spring to mind).

You could argue that as (and this isn't a slight on Paul's efforts) ZD only has 2-3 digit viewing figures, they may as well say the words, but why risk causing offence?

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sat Dec 05, 2020 9:56 pm

Bradley Horrocks wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 8:30 pm
Looking through my games, I noticed SPOUSE was censored. Like what is ZD's agenda against marriage? I'm sOooO tRigGerEd
Lol, totes hilair, Bradders.
(Sarcasm works best when there is some intelligence behind it, keep that in mind for next time.)

The games you refer to are from the infancy of Zoomdown, before they even had a dedicated lexing role assigned.
Remind me of any example of a DC word from Series 2 that was censored / omitted?

Yeah, thought not.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Graeme Cole » Sat Dec 05, 2020 10:15 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:15 pm
Ben Wilson wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:46 pm
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
Maybe other like-minded people share your moral code, but why should it be imposed on the majority?
What on Earth makes you think you're in the majority here?
Know, not think.

When John Chew pushed through a "Naughty list" whereby certain 'offensive' words were blacklisted in the US version of tournament Scrabble, the majority disagreed with that decision. The organisation that runs Scrabble in the rest of the world (WESPA) has voted against following America's lead on this.

It is not good practice to censor valid words for use in word games.
That was a proposal to remove slurs from the list of acceptable words in the game, which isn't what this is.

This was simply an editorial decision to remove a potentially problematic word from the list of maxes presented to the viewer. PACKIES was one of the maxes, so as the lexicographer you can do one of two things - include it, but immediately make an awkward explanation that it isn't the word you might think it is, or just don't show it at all. In my opinion either of those courses of action would have been justifiable, but this decision has to be made instantly on a live stream, and I really don't blame them for taking the easier route.

The point is that if either player had offered PACKIES, it would have been accepted, so it's not at all comparable to the Scrabble proposal you refer to.

DC doesn't have to announce every possible max, and deciding not to do so isn't what censorship is.

User avatar
Bradley Horrocks
Acolyte
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:53 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Bradley Horrocks » Sat Dec 05, 2020 10:41 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 9:56 pm
Lol, totes hilair, Bradders.
(Sarcasm works best when there is some intelligence behind it, keep that in mind for next time.)
:lol: You thought a cat's backside was as offensive as a homophone for a racist slur. It's not my intelligence you need to worry about :)

I'm more interested in Zubair's potential decision to make should he win 3 and sneak into the top 8. I'd vote stay on and strive for tetrachampdom!
"And PANTIES, thank you for that, that cheers us up enormously" - NH

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Graeme Cole » Sat Dec 05, 2020 11:23 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
On a real TV show with real producers who know what they are doing, PACKIES (with not even a hint of a racist or unpleasant definition in the dictionary) would be shown, and would not be bleeped out.
As it happens, something similar might have happened on Countdown, which as I'm sure you know is a real TV show with producers who know what they are doing. This was quite a few years ago for a game for which I was in the audience. I don't remember what specific game it was (the 30BC, perhaps - I think Adam Gillard was there) but in the origins of words section, Susie read out a quote from somewhere - I'm afraid I don't remember the context - which included the word "niggardly", another word which has no racial context but is in the unfortunate position of sounding like it does.

Anyway, there was some brief discussion in the audience about whether that would make it to air. I assumed it would, but it didn't. Whether this was for time or editorial reasons I don't know, but if it was the latter, can you blame them? People avoid using such words in case they're misinterpreted, as the usage note on the dictionary link above explains.
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
How the Zoomdown people choose to move forward with this, very much depends on what Zoomdown wants itself to be.
Is it to be a cliquey thing between a small group of people who share the same set of left-wing values re language use, or do you want it to be neutral with a wide ranging appeal?
Wide ranging appeal? This makes no sense. Are you really trying to say that a word missing from a maxes list is going to alienate a wider audience? Most of a "wider audience" would probably have no idea the word exists anyway. It's a total non-issue.
L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 6:07 pm
If it is the latter... I'd advise complete political neutrality about the words available in each round. View a problematic max impassively, as simply a collection of consonants and vowels, rather than giving it power by singling it out for special omission. (also: fewer cat's arses, fisting references, lavatorial and esp. sexual stuff; might be an idea if you want people to be comfortable with having their kids watch.)
Toilet humour? A cat mooning the camera? Seriously... things have moved on a bit since this infamous BBC memo of 1948. Things change. Maybe in the 1970s, the N-word and the (shorter) P-word were everywhere, but heads would roll if someone said FUCK or CUNT on television. Now it's 2020, words with a history of discrimination (and, to some extent, words that sound like them) are far more problematic than mere curse words. You can tell that by which words I'm comfortable with writing out in full in this post and which I refer to by their initial. Two of the four words I refer to aren't even labelled as "offensive" by the dictionary, which prefers merely to refer to them as "vulgar slang". The other two are. Guess which.

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:18 am

I’m quite triggered at the suggestion we don’t know what we’re doing 🤔

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2458
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:24 am

Graeme Cole wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 10:15 pm
DC doesn't have to announce every possible max
This is slightly my fault as I've told them it makes it a lot easier to write the recap if I don't have to split DC/OT words, because the recap writer churns them out as DC-words-then-OT-words when we actually list them in alphabetical order regardless of who found them, and I seem to get it wrong quite often when doing Countdown ones.

For what it's worth, I would have said PACKIES if I were in Fred's position given its definition (isn't this just like potentially omitting CORONAS given the current state of the world?), but I respect his decision, and I'm not really that fussed about it. We had this in aptochat with this Countdown episode about a month ago and I felt that by omitting or censoring the word, it would draw, ironically, more attention to it - it's interesting how the same people (on both sides) are making the same arguments on this as they did for that.

The fact that words like FAGGOTING and QUEERNESS are currently being used as conundrums on Apterous despite their connotations, however, is more questionable, as it's a conundrum, which can be taken out without compromising the dictionary.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Graeme Cole » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:29 am

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:18 am
I’m quite triggered at the suggestion we don’t know what we’re doing 🤔
I don't know if this refers to my or Eoin's post, but just in case, this is obviously not what I was suggesting.

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:30 am

I saw the maxes too on the Apto game. I also chose to ignore the racist sounding one in favour of the more interesting oopacks, which sounded like Woolpack.
Fred made an instant call just as I did, and we both got it spot on, so I think it might be your own moral compass that needs calibrating

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:37 am

No, not you Graeme, you were spot on, it’s a non-issue.

User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 1763
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Graeme Cole » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:57 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:24 am
Graeme Cole wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 10:15 pm
DC doesn't have to announce every possible max
This is slightly my fault as I've told them it makes it a lot easier to write the recap if I don't have to split DC/OT words, because the recap writer churns them out as DC-words-then-OT-words when we actually list them in alphabetical order regardless of who found them, and I seem to get it wrong quite often when doing Countdown ones.
Is this the only reason ZoomDown's DC usually lists all the maxes? There must be a better solution than that. If the wiki house style is to list all the maxes in alphabetical order rather than the DC maxes before the other maxes, I'm sure the recap writer could be modified to re-sort the two lists of words together for the wiki recap.

You may be interested to hear there is precedent for using the apterous ticket system to request recap writer features.

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:11 am

Now that we seem to have moved on, I’ve agreed to face the carryover champ in the S3 opener. Will it be Zubair’s tetra match or will I face Peter or Toby? But much more importantly.....

Who should host for my one-and-only match?

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:44 am

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:18 am
I’m quite triggered at the suggestion we don’t know what we’re doing 🤔
How could that possibly trigger you?
Of course you don't know what you are doing! Everyone knows this. :) You are hobbyists on a learning curve...
The show is getting slicker all the time, but none of you have qualifications in production or hosting, so it's fair to suggest that professionals in this field have better idea of how to do these things.

Do you not remember some of the bumps there have been along the road?
-The initial audio issues.
-The 45 min limit on Zoom interrupting proceedings.
-Overlay issues.
-The episodes that froze so much they were pretty much unwatchable.
-The occasional poor adjudication decision (e.g. Tom's crucial conundrum vs Dinos)
-The way the Matthew Alicoon and James Rowan issues were handled.

I was under the impression that the fact that ye are making it up as you go, and learning on the fly was half the charm of Zoomdown, no?

Anyway, in case it was in any way unclear, I think that ye run Zoomdown in an admirable way, and that ye get better at it with each passing week... but every so often, we do get reminded that this is an amateur operation that is still on a learning curve... (e.g. most recently, the PACKIES thing from Thursday night.)
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Sun Dec 06, 2020 3:42 am

BEN:

Have you been involved in the world of Scrabble much lately? Part of the reason that NASPA took the decision to remove slurs, is due to the burgeoning popularity of Scrabble live streaming. It's become very advanced over Twitch & YouTube and they are getting thousands and sometimes tens of thousands of views. Some of these streams are like proper televised sporting events, very impressive altogether.

You mentioned that a good reason not to list PACKIES is "Why risk causing offense?"
Good point. We'll come back to that.

-----------------------------------

GRAEME:

I understand the Scrabble example is not exactly the same as the Zoomdown issue… but there are enough similarities to make them comparable.

The niggardly story is v. interesting, tx for sharing... and maybe you are right. It could have been left out for the same reason as the ZD word on Thursday. But that's just a maybe. We don't actually know, so can't count it as a valid argument.

Your coded 'bad words' bit confused me. The N-word is obvious, however the 'P' one could be a few things; POOF? PAKI? I'm not sure...

-----------------------------------

BRADLEY:

What are you like, Bradley? :lol:
Bradley Horrocks wrote:
Sat Dec 05, 2020 10:41 pm
:lol: You thought a cat's backside was as offensive as a homophone for a racist slur. It's not my intelligence you need to worry about :)
Did I think that? Nah. You assumed I thought that, and to assume makes an ass of u and me!

And are you seriously saying that a *homophone* for a racial slur (aka NOT a racial slur) is ‘offensive’? That’s almost as batshit as suggesting that your name should be censored for containing a ‘B’ and an ‘Olocks’. :P

-----------------------------------

RHYS:
Rhys Benjamin wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:24 am
The fact that words like FAGGOTING and QUEERNESS are currently being used as conundrums on Apterous despite their connotations, however, is more questionable.
Agreed that those in favour of purging the world of 'badness' would have a stronger case to make re: omission of 'problematic' conundrums... but, nope, that shouldn’t be changed either. Words in a word game should not be politicized.

-----------------------------------

PAUL:

I would respectfully disagree that you and Fred got this decision "spot on". That ye didn't, is understandable; as it was an on the spur of the moment snap decision that you had no policy in place for, so fair enough.

Since you were wondering, let me reassure you my moral compass has been freshly calibrated and points true North. ;)

-----------------------------------

TO CONCLUDE:

This complaint came about because I was playing along with ZD on Friday night, and the only 7 I could see in that round was the risky "PACKIES", but then it wasn't called out among the maxes... so I assumed it must be invalid. I checked it on Apto just to be doubly sure... and to my surprise it was there.

This was annoying because:-
a) The word isn't vulgar, offensive, or a slur.
b) The convention on Zoomdown is to list ALL maxes.
c) Since when has censorship been the ZD way?

Paul says it is a non-issue, but that's not true. It matters. Zoomdown needs to decide what sort of show it is. Here are the options it now faces:-

1. Continue to list all maxes, and define a select few.
2. Change to listing only some maxes, like they do on Countdown.
3. Continue to list all maxes, unless the word is NIGGERS or FAGGOTS or some other word that is arbitrarily considered unpalatable.


The best option is option 1.
~List all maxes.
~Define some.
~Gloss over the potentially offensive ones. See them simply as a collection of symbols arranged into something that is valid. All fans of words games understand such words to be neutral in this context. It's just common sense.

Option 2 is a good compromise, if you must... but one of the USPs of ZD (and an advantage it has over the TV show imo), is that you get the complete set of maxes... so when playing along, you don't need to go through the hassle of double-checking words on Apto.

Option 3 is awful. If ye go with that, I'll need to unsubscribe some of my YT channels from the ZD channel, and stop recommending it to people. Either ye are listing all maxes or ye are not. Pick one!

Finally to come back to something that Ben (And Fiona) said earlier regarding packies-gate...
"Why risk causing offense?"

That is a very good question.
In the past, ZD has allowed language that would not be allowed on TV programmes... so what is the policy here? I would argue that a show that was conscious of 'risking offending people' would not have purposely included the close up shot of the cat or Dave's CUNTIER in its highlights reel. Is it ok to offend some people?

Packies-gate has made one thing crystal clear... ZD is interested in having a censorship policy, but how strict will that policy be? Hmmm. Interesting times. Do we want kids watching this? Do we consider it as a "live" show where more adult content is allowed after the 9pm watershed? Is that even feasible for a show that is available to view on YouTube at any time of the day?!

-----------------------------------

MOVING ON:

Who replaces Paul as host?
I actually am struggling to think of who might have the right personality type to do the job well. You need to be:
a) Competent
b) Relaxed
c) Chatty / witty.
d) Warm / emotionally intelligent.

Most potentials could fulfil requirements a) and b), but c) and d) are trickier [especially c)]. Many Apterites are introverted and/or find it difficult to keep the chat flowing freely and breezily... and some of the ones who are good to talk, can be a bit too much on the bitchy / sarcastic side.

With all of this in mind, my picks for host would be:-
Jon O'Neill.
Jonathan Wynn.

If it has to be someone from the ZD team, then my pick is Fiona T, with George A as a close 2nd.
Last edited by L'oisleatch McGraw on Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Callum Todd » Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:06 am

I think LMG's option 1 works well. The screen-display listing of words that DC does nowadays on ZoomDown could display all of the maxes for people to see if their word is on there, but there's really no need to read them all out verbally. Not just for words like PACKIES that sound bad said out load but are totally innocuous written down, but it's just unnecessary to read out all 15 of the 7s in a flat round. Maybe they still wouldn't want to show the N word written down if that came up, but I doubt anyone would need that confirming to them as valid anyway, and if they did then the presence of the word SNIGGER on the screen should be enough.

But I think you (LMG) are overreacting a little bit to this by viewing it as an enactment of "policy". I don't think it's crystal clear at all that ZD wants a censorship policy. They just censored (by not bothering to mention it) one bad-sounding (but not actually bad) word in an in-the-moment decision (a decision that I fully support). That's not a policy; not everything has to be guided by policy. It's a fun hobby show between mates, they can make stuff up as they go along, and the fact they've played over 1000 letters rounds by now (I think) and this is the first time such a debate has come up (I think) shows that this is going to happen rarely enough that no policy is needed and in-the-moment decisions can be made. As with every decision any human has ever made in the history of everything, some people will agree with the decision and some won't. Whatever. It's only a word game and not something important, like squash.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 10340
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Gavin Chipper » Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:32 am

Orange squash?

Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fiona T » Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:37 am

Volume 6, chapter 14, page 3 of the ZoomDown policy document explicitly deals with racist homophones. Unfortunately I spilt wine on my copy, so we're going to have to rely on our lex to use his judgement as he sees fit, which IMO was a good call in this instance.
8-) <-2m-> 8-)

User avatar
Bradley Horrocks
Acolyte
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:53 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Bradley Horrocks » Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:52 am

Gavin Chipper wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:32 am
Orange squash?
As important as that is, he (or Dylan rather) means the sport
"And PANTIES, thank you for that, that cheers us up enormously" - NH

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 11:49 am

Ye gawds, we haven’t moved on have we. I didn’t have time to read the latest moan as the days be getting short

Fred W
Newbie
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:17 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fred W » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:01 pm

Hey folks - thought I'd break my forum silence because I've apparently ruffled a few feathers. Apparently NOT saying a potentially racially charged word is now cause for controversy.

Eoin, please put yourself in my shoes if you're able to do so.
I saw the maxes about ~5 seconds before the end of the clock music, and in that quick turnaround time I had to make a decision whether to focus on the two other perfectly interesting sevens (cookies, oopacks) or potentially put off new viewers to the show by saying a word that I thought could potentially cause offence.
Where I grew up, I heard that word used derogatorily to refer to my colleagues, schoolmates. Can you really blame me for not saying it?

I believe that I'm well supported here - my decision was entirely reasonable and justified.

This entire brouhaha can be completely dismissed when you look back at live chat, too.
Many people declared the word, and thankfully George handled it in a far more gracious and diplomatic way than I could.
If you knew it was a valid word, it doesn't require me to say it. You have lexplorer, and it wouldn't take much brain power to check it for yourself.
Moreover, it has never been our "convention" to list all the maxes - sometimes we do, sometimes we don't.

Maybe some uniformity here is needed, and if this is the takeaway from what has been an otherwise torrid display from yourself, Eoin, then sure.

Maybe I should've placated racists by saying the word. I'll hold my hands up and say sure, maybe I made a mistake there.
But this is causing me a huge amount of stress, and if I'm honest I want this to just stop. I have shit to do with my day, and more important shit to care about

Interestingly though, it's just the forum pariah who is going to theatrical lengths to make a show about anagrams and numbers into a charged political issue, and making a case out of something that otherwise would and should be ignored and forgotten about.
Eoin, if you were that upset by me leaving it out - I apologise.

Otherwise, we have an excellent few weeks coming up on ZD! Exciting times, and I hope to see many there to enjoy it alongside us.

ZD is about bringing joy to fans of the sport, and let's keep it that way.

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:41 pm

Long story short:

Fred got it spot on.
Eoin, you have embarrassed yourself by writing down words in full that nobody else on this site would ever dream of. I hope you kept the receipt for that recent calibration. Secondly, nobody appointed you ZD Ombudsman.
We know exactly what we are doing, +/- 5%, and will roll with slightly rude words in the context of the game. Context is key.
As Fred said, we try to bring a bit of light-hearted joy every Monday and Thursday and your microanalysis triggered by closet racism is unwelcome.
Get with the vibe or do yourself a favour and stop watching. It's not compulsory

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Mon Dec 07, 2020 5:19 am

Callum Todd wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 10:06 am
the fact they've played over 1000 letters rounds by now (I think) and this is the first time such a debate has come up (I think) shows that this is going to happen rarely enough that no policy is needed and in-the-moment decisions can be made.
Agree with pretty much all of what u said there. The quoted bit ^^^ is a very pertinent point that hadn't been brought up till now. This is a tiny issue. Tiny. It shouldn't have taken up more than one or two comments here. The only reason it has generated so much discussion is that people can get uneasy / defensive around issues of PC.
Fred W wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:01 pm
Eoin, please put yourself in my shoes if you're able to do so.
I'm a size 12, so if you are 10 or lower, sry, I won't be able to... But in seriousness, I do not blame you for wussing out of saying or showing the potentially controversial of the 3 maxes, especially as there was no hard and fast rule about that, and you had a split second to make a call.

Fred W wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:01 pm
it's just the forum pariah who is...
Is that so? Well, if that is your opinion anyway, I may as well do this next:
Fred W wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:01 pm
Maybe I should've placated sensible-people-who-understand-context by saying the word. I'll hold my hands up and say sure, maybe I made a mistake there. Eoin, I apologise.
Apology accepted. :)

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Your microanalysis triggered by closet racism is unwelcome.
Get with the vibe or do yourself a favour and stop watching. It's not compulsory
Well, someone does not take criticism well! :shock:
You could change the theme music to "Everything is awesome" from the Lego movie, and forbid negative feedback, I suppose.
Everyone is a Zoomdown ombudsman... unless the "all about the CD community" stuff that you bang on about in every episode is just talk.
The "closet racism" comment is at best dumb and at worst offensive. Read up on what racism is before making such a comment.


Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Eoin, you have embarrassed yourself by writing down words in full that nobody else on this site would ever dream of.
That bit is actually hilarious to me. Do you remember the scene from "MP's Life of Brian" where they are at the stoning, and the man is due to be stoned for saying "That bit of halibut was good enough for Jehovah!"? Hope you have your stones ready, because I am liable to say one of those words again any moment now...

I dunno if you've ever watched the Harry Potter films and thought it was a bit of a silly idea that only Harry Potter is brave enough to say VOLDEMORT when everyone else will only say "He who must not be named"? Well, next time you scoff at how far-fetched that schtick is, take a look in the mirror first.

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Long story short:

Fred got it spot on.

[...4 more sentences...]

Context is key.
This is the bit I really don't get.
How can you reconcile saying "Fred got it spot on" in one breath, and then "context is key" in the next? You are right - context IS key... and in the context of a word game, word meanings are unimportant... which is precisely why Fred* did not get it spot on. It was about being shit-scared of offending people... but offending these imaginary people... how? By acknowledging that certain words are in the dictionary? No-one's going to be offended by that, because they ARE in the dictionary. It's just a cold impassionate fact. Context is the crucial factor that makes PACKIES utterly benign in this situation.

Anyway. this topic has definitely gone on long enough. You're not going to publicly agree, even though deep down, all of ye know I'm right, and ye will subtly implement changes based on this debate in the medium to long term. When that happens, I promise to have the good grace to pretend not to have noticed. ;)

*Not having a go at you Fred. You did very well given the fact that it was a spur of the moment decision in a live show. But, as you know by now, I disagree that you got it "spot on".
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fiona T » Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:41 am

Eoin, I really think that you owe Fred an apology.

The majority of people appear to support his decision, but even if the majority agreed with your point of view, using phrases like "wuss out" (twice) really isn't on.

Fred's values - whether or not they agree with yours - do not make him a wuss.

If your intention really was simply to raise the issue about language and context, you could have done so in a non personal way and there might even have been a sensible debate.
8-) <-2m-> 8-)

User avatar
Ben Wilson
Legend
Posts: 4260
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: North Hykeham

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Ben Wilson » Mon Dec 07, 2020 9:12 am

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:11 am
Now that we seem to have moved on, I’ve agreed to face the carryover champ in the S3 opener. Will it be Zubair’s tetra match or will I face Peter or Toby? But much more importantly.....

Who should host for my one-and-only match?
James Robinson is surely the obvious choice here.

Fred W
Newbie
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 5:17 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fred W » Mon Dec 07, 2020 11:20 am

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote:
Mon Dec 07, 2020 5:19 am

*Not having a go at you Fred. You did very well given the fact that it was a spur of the moment decision in a live show. But, as you know by now, I disagree that you got it "spot on".
So, I "did very well", yet you've spent the past 3 days acting like this is the hill to die on? If you're not having a go, then why are you pretending like you have a battle to fight here? Move the fuck on dude, the rest of us already have.

Also, in future I'd appreciate it if you never misrepresent my statements again. Thank you.

User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Enthusiast
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw » Mon Dec 07, 2020 5:47 pm

Fred needs no apology, Fiona. I didn't call him a name. Just because you wuss out or chicken out of something, it neither makes you a wuss nor a chicken. I wuss out of things all the time... (like declaring "PANNIER not written down" in my CD QF, for example)

Though having read Fred's ridiculous "I'd appreciate it if you never misrepresent my statements again" line, I am very tempted to deliberately misquote you again, and change the "Fred W said" part to "Fred Wuss said"... but best not take this up to Richard Brittain levels of trolling. You seem a little too thin skinned for that.

By using the term "forum pariah" you deserved the misquote. I thought that was clear from how it was prefaced?

Anyway, this is tedious.
I agree with Ben, Robbo would be a good choice of host... Mark Mills might be handy enough at it as well, actually.
But my top choices remain Jon O, Jon W, and Fiona T.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp

Fiona T
Devotee
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Fiona T » Mon Dec 07, 2020 6:16 pm

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:11 am
Who should host for my one-and-only match?
I hear Nick Hewer's got some time on his hands.
8-) <-2m-> 8-)

User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Callum Todd » Mon Dec 07, 2020 6:21 pm

Paul Anderson wrote:
Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:11 am
Who should host for my one-and-only match?
Might not be one-and-only if you win! Or are you not carrying on if you do?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Mon Dec 07, 2020 6:31 pm

No, I will, but given who I'm likely to face, it'll prob be just the one

Paul Anderson
Acolyte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Paul Anderson » Mon Dec 07, 2020 6:37 pm

And sure I'm spoilt for choice for potential replacements. Ours is a more impressive list than that hastily-convened one Ladbrokes put up.
You'd be my first choice, if you're willing

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2458
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Mon Dec 07, 2020 11:48 pm

I think Zubair made the right call personally to carry on - I think I would have made my decision based on who my QF would have been against, and I would have made the same decision against potentially playing Rob Foster!
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 586
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Callum Todd » Tue Dec 08, 2020 7:20 am

100% right decision. 3 wins has been enough to make the finals in both series so far so he's likely already done enough to qualify for next series, and it'd be silly to turn down the chance of becoming a tetrachamp just to be thrown in against Rob. The timing of next series' finals can and should accommodate him. #TeamZubair.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 9:50 am

Thought I'd do a condensed alternate version of the analysis I do for the Countdown Finals :

Rob Foster:
Seed: 1
Wins: 4
Points: 530 (132.5 per game)
Total Max: 55/60 (91.7%)

Letters Maxes: 38/40 (95%)
ZD Medals (7+ maxes never played by a contestant or suggested by DC on either Countdown or Zoomdown): Alodiary, Alienors, Outwept, Pleasurer (joint accolade alongside opponent), Inositol, Augitites, Neuraxial, Tentoria, Emulous, Labarias, Semitonal, Ocreate, Echiurid, Mesghal, Dewaxes, Teeting, Webinars, Priorite.

Numbers Maxes: 13/16 (81.3%)
6S: 1/3 (33.3%)
1L: 8/9 (88.9%)
2L: N/A
3L: N/A
4L: 4/4 (100%)

Conundrums: 4/4 (100%)
Last edited by Tom S on Tue Dec 08, 2020 2:31 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:06 am

Callum Todd:
Seed: 2
Wins: 4
Points: 480 (120 per game)
Total Max: 52/60 (86.7%)

Letters Maxes: 33/40 (82.5%)
ZD Medals: Defeatism (Joint accolade alongside opponent), Ipomoeas, Similor, Goafstead, Mesozoa, Upturned, Bonanza, Maniera

Numbers Maxes: 15/16 (93.4%)
6S: 3/3 (100%)
1L: 3/4 (75%)
2L: 1/1 (100%)
3L: 2/2 (100%)
4L: 6/6 (100%)

Conundrums: 4/4 (100%)
Last edited by Tom S on Tue Dec 08, 2020 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Fanatic
Posts: 2458
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm
Location: Down in the tube station at midnight

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Rhys Benjamin » Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:15 am

Callum Todd wrote:
Tue Dec 08, 2020 7:20 am
100% right decision. 3 wins has been enough to make the finals in both series so far so he's likely already done enough to qualify for next series, and it'd be silly to turn down the chance of becoming a tetrachamp just to be thrown in against Rob. The timing of next series' finals can and should accommodate him. #TeamZubair.
On the other hand Series 79 was not a particularly strong series so I would have gone into that one if I was undefeated at the end of that series.
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...

Thomas Cappleman
Series 72 Champion
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:42 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Thomas Cappleman » Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:23 am

Tom S wrote:
Tue Dec 08, 2020 9:50 am
ZD Medals (7+ maxes never played by a contestant or suggested by DC on either Countdown or Zoomdown): Alodiary, Alienors, Outwept, Pleasurer (joint accolade alongside opponent), Inositol, Augitites, Neuraxial, Tentoria, Emulous, Labarias, Semitonal, Ocreate, Echiurid, Mesghal, Dewaxes, Teeting, Webinars, Priorite.
So 45% of Rob's letters declarations have never been used on ZD or CD?!? Crazy level of play!

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:52 am

Thomas Cappleman wrote:
Tue Dec 08, 2020 10:23 am
Tom S wrote:
Tue Dec 08, 2020 9:50 am
ZD Medals (7+ maxes never played by a contestant or suggested by DC on either Countdown or Zoomdown): Alodiary, Alienors, Outwept, Pleasurer (joint accolade alongside opponent), Inositol, Augitites, Neuraxial, Tentoria, Emulous, Labarias, Semitonal, Ocreate, Echiurid, Mesghal, Dewaxes, Teeting, Webinars, Priorite.
So 45% of Rob's letters declarations have never been used on ZD or CD?!? Crazy level of play!
Yup! Most impressive indeed!

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 11:20 am

Jack Worsley:
Seed: 3
Wins: 4
Points: 469 (117.3 per game)
Total Max: 46/60 (76.7%)

Letters Maxes: 30/40 (75%)
ZD Medals: Supernova, Paesanos, Candirus (Joint accolades alongside opponents) Agatizes, Homevid, Rotaliid, Powernets, Rheadins, Eulogia, Langues, Jetboats

Numbers Maxes: 13/16 (81.25%)
6S: 1/1 (100%)
1L: 6/6 (100%)
2L: 0/1
3L: 1/1 (100%)
4L: 5/7 (71.4%)

Conundrums: 3/4 (75%)
3 Solved, 0 Lost, 1 Unsolved
Last edited by Tom S on Tue Dec 08, 2020 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 12:19 pm

Harry Savage:
Seed: 4
Wins: 3
Points: 436 (104 per game)
Total Max: 43/60 (71.7%)

Letters Maxes: 28/40 (70%)
ZD Medals: Dogmatize, Tweezer (Joint accolades alongside opponents) Alumite, Achroite, Aurorae

Numbers Maxes: 12/16 (75%)
6S; 0/2
1L: 11/12 (91.7%)
2L: N/A
3L: N/A
4L: 1/2 (50%)

Conundrums: 3/4 (75%)
3 Solved, 1 Lost, 0 Unsolved

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 12:52 pm

Noel McIlvenny
Seed: 5
Wins: 3
Points: 396 (99 per game)
Total Max: 35 /60 (60%)

Letters Maxes: 20/40 (50%)
ZD Medals: Swiping, Scummier, Dogmatize (Joint accolades alongside opponents)

Numbers Maxes: 13/16 (81.25%)
6S: 1/1 (100%)
1L: 4/4 (100%)
2L: 1/4 (25%)
3L: N/A
4L: 7/7 (100%)

Conundrums: 3/4 (75%)
3 Solved, 1 Lost, 0 Unsolved
Last edited by Tom S on Tue Dec 08, 2020 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tom S
Kiloposter
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:38 pm

Re: ...and that's ZoomDown

Post by Tom S » Tue Dec 08, 2020 1:04 pm

Ben Wilson
Seed: 6
Wins: 3
Points: 395 (98.8 per game)
Total Max:37/60 (61.7%)

Letters Maxes: 26/40 (65%)
ZD Medals: Enviro, Baronetcy

Numbers Maxes: 10/16 (62.5%)
6S: 1/3 (33.3%)
1L: 7/8 (87.5%)
2L: 1/3 (33.3%)
3L: N/A
4L: 1/2 (50%)

Conundrums: 1/4 (25%)
1 Solved, 3 Lost, 0 Unsolved

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests