TOOTS wrote:
We were all on stringy. Even called it before the answers came up.
Stringy, thin....is what I meant. Whatever the choice said, we were on that one!
| New Scaratings http://www.scaratings.com/newScaratings/ |
|
| Sinewy.... http://www.scaratings.com/newScaratings/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=667 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | lewser [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
Well, was tendon a choice? That steak was sinewy. (Tough and robust) Hershel Walker is very sinewy. (powerful and muscular) |
|
| Author: | ranger [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
I agree with Eric. This was a terrible question. |
|
| Author: | Akbar71 [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
We tanked it, too. Crappy, crappy answer choices. |
|
| Author: | tiefly [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
That was one of the few I got right last night. Horrible game for me. To quote GOBLUE via text: F'N WORDS!!! |
|
| Author: | scar [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
I was on stringy and received guff for proclaiming it. |
|
| Author: | MitchWolf [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
ERIC wrote: Just checked dictionary.com ...which is Lexitopia's sponsor http://buzztime.com/lexitopia.html |
|
| Author: | TOOTS [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
We were all on stringy. Even called it before the answers came up. |
|
| Author: | TomD [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
Believe it or not, stringy was not a choice. The four possible answers were: powerful, robust creepy thin, limited ghostlike In my opinion, the question is okay. |
|
| Author: | scar [ Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
TomD wrote: Believe it or not, stringy was not a choice. The four possible answers were: powerful, robust creepy thin, limited ghostlike In my opinion, the question is okay. Thanks TomD, I missed it so it msst have been thin that I went on. |
|
| Author: | FrankC [ Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
scar wrote: TomD wrote: Believe it or not, stringy was not a choice. The four possible answers were: powerful, robust creepy thin, limited ghostlike In my opinion, the question is okay. Thanks TomD, I missed it so it msst have been thin that I went on. I always thought sinewy met thin. You can see the sinews but not muscles. |
|
| Author: | TOOTS [ Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
TOOTS wrote: We were all on stringy. Even called it before the answers came up. Stringy, thin....is what I meant. Whatever the choice said, we were on that one!
|
|
| Author: | Gogetem [ Sat Oct 02, 2010 12:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
TOOTS wrote: TOOTS wrote: We were all on stringy. Even called it before the answers came up. Stringy, thin....is what I meant. Whatever the choice said, we were on that one! It still was a BS question and answer. Mainly, because we missed it. 
|
|
| Author: | Falcon [ Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
TomD wrote: Believe it or not, stringy was not a choice. The four possible answers were: powerful, robust creepy thin, limited ghostlike In my opinion, the question is okay. Nothing wrong with the question, but the answers are all wrong. Sinewy is the opposite of robust and is only incidentally "powerful' in the limited sense of holding together strongly (not being able to exert power like large muscles). Of course, NTN got rid of the person who was correcting the errors and improving quality of questions early last summer, so we are probably just complaining to hear ourselves. |
|
| Author: | TomD [ Wed Oct 06, 2010 10:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Sinewy.... |
Falcon wrote: TomD wrote: Believe it or not, stringy was not a choice. The four possible answers were: powerful, robust creepy thin, limited ghostlike In my opinion, the question is okay. Nothing wrong with the question, but the answers are all wrong. Sinewy is the opposite of robust and is only incidentally "powerful' in the limited sense of holding together strongly (not being able to exert power like large muscles). Of course, NTN got rid of the person who was correcting the errors and improving quality of questions early last summer, so we are probably just complaining to hear ourselves. I respectfully disagree. The question and answers are okay. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|