Contest

22 Responses to Contest

1. mike d says:

   May 4, 2006 at 6:25 am

   flying monkeys, natch.
2. Felix says:

   May 4, 2006 at 7:30 am

   That’s a fantastic answer, Mike. Not the one I was looking for, but fantastic nonetheless.
3. Matthew says:

   May 4, 2006 at 9:18 am

   They all are, or make references to, a city on a hill.
4. Felix says:

   May 4, 2006 at 9:49 am

   That, Matthew, by contrast, is just weak. You might as well say that they’re all concerned in one way or another with natural disasters.
5. Matthew says:

   May 4, 2006 at 10:04 am

   It wasn’t that bad; I suspect you don’t get the significance of the term.
6. Stefan says:

   May 4, 2006 at 6:29 pm

   I know. They all came in over budget.
7. Todd Gibson says:

   May 4, 2006 at 7:47 pm

   I know the answer. I know the answer. But I’m not telling.

   I’ve got another quiz-type question. Does anyone know why Felix’s recent posts are done in bullet point format?
8. Matthew says:

   May 5, 2006 at 10:43 am

   Ooo, ooo, it’s aaaaaaart and I bet it has something to do with large, randomly spaced blocks of concrete, steel and other leftover bits of airport scattered around a desert somewhere.
9. Felix says:

   May 5, 2006 at 11:16 am

   OK, I’ll give you a hint. You know those large pieces of concrete in Marfa? They’re, like, the opposite of the answer I’m looking for here. In a weird way, Matthew, you really couldn’t be more wrong.
10. 99 says:

    May 5, 2006 at 5:03 pm

    They were designed by committee?
11. Stefan says:

    May 5, 2006 at 5:25 pm

    So the opposite of big blocks of concrete would be… little blocks of… brick. Yellow bricks, about the shape of the King James bible, used to build the side walls of the UN Secretariat building, making them vertical yellow brick roads, sort of.
12. Matthew says:

    May 5, 2006 at 5:39 pm

    Not being a friend of Dorothy, as it were, I’m a bit stumped by what could be so different about the movie and book versions of Oz to cause you to draw the distinction.
13. Felix says:

    May 6, 2006 at 10:03 am

    It seems to me that most of Matthew’s online life of late has consisted, in some form or another, of his demonstrating or asserting his heterosexuality. But I can assure you all that such an orientation is no obstacle in this particular case.
14. Jason says:

    May 6, 2006 at 10:29 am

    invisible, omnipotent power
15. Jason says:

    May 6, 2006 at 10:30 am

    superficial omniscience
16. Matthew says:

    May 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm

    This page says the UN, the Wizard of Oz and King James were all “Crown Templars”. Which just goes to show you can find anything on google, but that doesn’t mean it’s right.

    http://www.worldnewsstand.net/history/The_Crown_Temple.htm
17. Stefan Geens says:

    May 6, 2006 at 3:19 pm

    Unicorns.
18. Matthew says:

    May 7, 2006 at 10:17 am

    Felix, you presume too much. I only meant it to mean that I’m not so familiar with the movie to know why you’d cite it specifically, instead of the book.
19. Stefan says:

    May 7, 2006 at 3:15 pm

    It’s unicorns, isn’t it? I knew it.
20. mike d says:

    May 8, 2006 at 12:37 pm

    actually- i think the big difference between the book and the movie is that in the book, the slippers are silver, not ruby? (the all-knowing of Oz seems to agree) so i’d say the answer is “fabulous footwear”, but i doubt the UN’s wingtips would make
21. mike d says:

    May 8, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    …the cut.
22. Matthew says:

    May 10, 2006 at 9:06 am

    Well? Well? What is it?

Comments are closed.