Transcript 1/29/10- Clyde Wheeler (Phil Ken Sebbin)

[secondchance]

I just got to see your show, Clyde! What a terrific job you did- so happy for you! You looked great (if not squished in that chair - lol), and your wife is lovely! I'm just so upset for you and the others about the removal of PAF and the substitution of non-expert experts.. que sera

When I saw this I thought back to secondchance's point about how the writers seem to give specific questions for specific contestants. TPTB say that the order is random and the question writers don't know who they are writing for but I've seen this several times. Coincidence?

Aha! Finally, a fellow conspiracy theorist! At least it's in the players' favor, tho.

I firmly believe the producers/writers stick in a cutesy personalized question at one of the lower levels for many of the contestants. C'mon, a Bonnie and Clyde question for Clyde is a coincedence? nfw. They give the players a "get" Q to make everyone pumped and happy -- before they attempt to screw them later with the bullcrap.

... interesting how Gordon got the coin question, and Meredith was at-the-ready with her gs coin anecdote.


Here's a few recent others off the top of my head...

...Christian, with the head full O' ringlets, got the "hair detangling" Q

...Jeet the pre-med student got the medical info Q

...Juliusberger gets the fireworks Q, and he apparently had a producer-approved story at-the-ready to mention. (he laughed and quipped "I have a long history with fireworks, which we didn't go into before")


What's really pissing me off in thesee recent seasons, is how their number one goal seems to be finding players with hard luck stories, Meredith treats the show as if it's their savior, and then they set them up for failure with all these new changes. The players consistantly leave with absolutely nowhere near a million bucks -and most times not even enough to save them from their personal plights- after she's managed to encourage the players to broadcast them to the world.

That Meredith is a producer and is involved with this hoax is a travesty. I don't love Mere anymore.

No offense but I think this is a bunch of hooey. There is no way that they modify the stack for any contestants, even the first tier ones. There are so many ways that any question might mean something specific to someone that it would be odd for it not to happen, and happen with such frequency. That’s why so many folks think horoscopes are written just for them. For Clyde, what if there was a question about Cartoon Network, Harvey Birdman, Dry Cleaning, Maryland, etc. We saw Stephen Colbert pop up just before his stack, I guess they were off by one . Clyde got the Bonnie and Clyde and one on balding, I got a baby names question and a Willie Nelson question – who is certainly associated with both Austin and Texas. I saw someone who was going to use the money for dog rescue get a question on the Westminster Dog Show. There is just no way TPTB would risk their entire career’s and show on trying to fix the questions for such a miniscule reason.

As far as picking contestants on need – I doubt that would be an effective filter because my guess is that 90% of those trying out for the show would be able to use that hook – it therefore makes no sense to have a filter that would not filter virtually anyone. I haven’t a clue about what they use, but I really doubt that it is a good hard-luck story. I think they like to talk about on the show because I think they think that the viewing audience would root for that person – but I don’t think they need to screen for it and not all contestants are “Queen for a Day”.

Believe what you will, FM, but you haven't swayed me. I suppose you also don't believe there's any way the writers read our Bored and throw in shout-out Q's on a regular basis...

[Phil Ken Sebbin]

Actually, I was more referring to the overt shout out type questions like my name and Ray Reyes with the Do Re Mi question. I just wonder sometimes if the writers are having a little fun. There were some other examples I remember seeing in the past but I'm not able to recall them now.

[secondchance]

Actually, I was more referring to the overt shout out type questions like my name and Ray Reyes with the Do Re Mi question. I just wonder sometimes if the writers are having a little fun. There were some other examples I remember seeing in the past but I'm not able to recall them now.

Exactly! (And my last post was referring to both.)

The most recent Bored shout-out was to lb's Little Blue Neon a couple weeks ago.

The first question last season was something about a crazy squirrel.

Fanny's gotten two that I know of- re Sisyphus and Southpaw.

A question re a plant had two of the answer choices of Holly and Sunflower.

And that's just off the top of my head...

[secondchance]

btw, imo only extremely naive people believe that horiscopes in huge publications are written just for them. I am not one of them.

[frogman042]

Believe what you will, FM, but you haven't swayed me. I suppose you also don't believe there's any way the writers read our Bored and throw in shout-out Q's on a regular basis...

It is totally a different thing to write a few questions that would be in-jokes for the bored that no one else would get (although I think we are giving ourselves a bit of an ego boost to think the writers think about us at all – but it is within reason that they might do it for fun) since that in no way would be considered ‘fixing’ the game. That is wholly different then writing specific questions for a specific contestant and making sure they get that question – or to be generous – pull an existing question from the stack for a specific contestant. That would be insanely stupid on their part – they would be risking their jobs, the show and the reputation of all game shows – ala the game show scandals from the early days, and for what – so a contestant will feel a rush because a question comes up that has some personal reference to them? So the audience will laugh because the name in the question matches the name of the player? It just doesn’t pass the sniff test – why would they risk all that for something that statistically is going to happen on its own anyway – e.g a name in a question happens to match a contestant’s name or references the city/state/region of the contestant – or any other myriad of words in a question that will hit some sort of match with the contestant. 100 questions a week for 10 players – multiplied by the number of weeks of original shows in a year – you are certainly going to see some ‘coincidences’, based on statistics alone. So why would they risk ruining their careers and the show for such a tiny (if any) upside?

They might be writing some bored jokes, and kudos to us if they are, and TPTB probably are monitoring the bored as well, but I doubt they are doing it so they can write questions for any bored member when they appear.

[secondchance]

Believe what you will, FM, but you haven't swayed me. I suppose you also don't believe there's any way the writers read our Bored and throw in shout-out Q's on a regular basis...

It is totally a different thing to write a few questions that would be in-jokes for the bored that no one else would get (although I think we are giving ourselves a bit of an ego boost to think the writers think about us at all – but it is within reason that they might do it for fun) since that in no way would be considered ‘fixing’ the game. That is wholly different then writing specific questions for a specific contestant and making sure they get that question – or to be generous – pull an existing question from the stack for a specific contestant. That would be insanely stupid on their part – they would be risking their jobs, the show and the reputation of all game shows – ala the game show scandals from the early days, and for what – so a contestant will feel a rush because a question comes up that has some personal reference to them? So the audience will laugh because the name in the question matches the name of the player? It just doesn’t pass the sniff test – why would they risk all that for something that statistically is going to happen on its own anyway – e.g a name in a question happens to match a contestant’s name or references the city/state/region of the contestant – or any other myriad of words in a question that will hit some sort of match with the contestant. 100 questions a week for 10 players – multiplied by the number of weeks of original shows in a year – you are certainly going to see some ‘coincidences’, based on statistics alone. So why would they risk ruining their careers and the show for such a tiny (if any) upside?

They might be writing some bored jokes, and kudos to us if they are, and TPTB probably are monitoring the bored as well, but I doubt they are doing it so they can write questions for any bored member when they appear.

Hmm, is it possible that you're on the BAM legal payroll? If not, you should be. You're arguments and statistal references are sensible. But if TPTB look away from the shout-outs for shits and giggles, perhaps they do the same for the contestant-related Q's at low levels. Why would they risk it? I don't know, but it sure looks like they have been. ...Cuz it's fun, and who could prove it? If you reallly think Clyde's Clyde Q, Gordon's coin Q/Meredith's coin anecdote, Ray Reyes' "Re" Q, and your Baby Names Q's were coincidences, maybe you've been reading too many fairy tales to the youngins... Unless there's documented evidence of moment-by-moment investigation by Standard and Practices overseeing every step of the question submission process and its complete randomness (and hell, maybe there is!), you will never convince me otherwise and I'm actually not sure why you feel such a need to, anway...

Just like they used to allow contestants to not have to say "Final" at low levels in the old days, and why they allowed the "audience" to help the celebrity contestants at the low levels-- at the lower level they and we all want the players to succeed and at least get to that first plateau- it's good for the player and good for the show; who does it hurt, perhaps there's a don't ask/don't tell mentality (and in the case of them no longer allowing the lack of "Final" on the lower levels having probably been "asked/challenged" and therefore eliminated), and, who could actually prove it isn't exactly what it is you're trying to convince me of? In addition, they probably find the risk/reward factor in their favor - maybe they find that those kind of "coincidences" make the viewers swoon with awe and they'll like the show even better. And again, who could prove it? These "coincidences" have likely already been questioned and explained as just that, coincidences...

As far as TPTB seeking folks with compelling money needs - the questionnaire form says it all for me. Wanting to know what you'd do with the money, asking what charities you support - - "Why would you give a portion of your money to Cancer Research?" "Oh, my husband's recovering from a rare form of nipple cancer and our bills are so high we can no longer afford diapers for grandma, yada yada..." aaand, there's the hook they're looking for. Sometimes. Not all the time... neither nor Clyde and Gordon told sob stories, but it seems they were some of the exception over the norm lately. It's actually become uncomfortable for me to watch at times- these nice, deserving people sharing their plights, Meredith swinging hope over their heads, and then watching them leave with a small check if any at all, and of course, the wonderful good fortune of getting to add some new trivia to their collections. Oh boy.

The crying contestant recently gave us a perspective. She and Meredith cry when they hear all the compelling personal stories. I don't resent anyone for having their problems aired on the show. What I do resent are all the new changes, along with the show too often making it a priority to introduce us to and having us care about people with financial hardships, hoping along with them that their dreams will come true on this day, and then seeing them leave with not enough money to help them but it's ok cuz Mere placates them by telling them, "well, now you know," and most of it's due to TDC and all the rest of the stupid changes. Whatever. I just really miss the way the show used to be - a fun, engaging and exciting game.

[thguy65]

Just like they used to allow contestants to not have to say "Final" at low levels in the old days, and why they allowed the "audience" to help the celebrity contestants at the low levels-- at the lower level they and we all want the players to succeed and at least get to that first plateau- it's good for the player and good for the show; who does it hurt, perhaps there's a don't ask/don't tell mentality (and in the case of them no longer allowing the lack of "Final" on the lower levels having probably been "asked/challenged" and therefore eliminated), and, who could actually prove it isn't exactly what it is you're trying to convince me of? In addition, they probably find the risk/reward factor in their favor - maybe they find that those kind of "coincidences" make the viewers swoon with awe and they'll like the show even better. And again, who could prove it? These "coincidences" have likely already been questioned and explained as just that, coincidences...

In "the old days" (such as my time in the HS), contestants always had to confirm their response with "Final" in the first tier of questions, but that was usually edited out by the producers. There was no background music in the studio in the first tier. It was all dubbed in during post-production.
TDC has now made it mandatory to air the contestants saying "Final", nothing else.

[secondchance]

Just like they used to allow contestants to not have to say "Final" at low levels in the old days, and why they allowed the "audience" to help the celebrity contestants at the low levels-- at the lower level they and we all want the players to succeed and at least get to that first plateau- it's good for the player and good for the show; who does it hurt, perhaps there's a don't ask/don't tell mentality (and in the case of them no longer allowing the lack of "Final" on the lower levels having probably been "asked/challenged" and therefore eliminated), and, who could actually prove it isn't exactly what it is you're trying to convince me of? In addition, they probably find the risk/reward factor in their favor - maybe they find that those kind of "coincidences" make the viewers swoon with awe and they'll like the show even better. And again, who could prove it? These "coincidences" have likely already been questioned and explained as just that, coincidences...

In "the old days" (such as my time in the HS), contestants always had to confirm their response with "Final" in the first tier of questions, but that was usually edited out by the producers. There was no background music in the studio in the first tier. It was all dubbed in during post-production.
TDC has now made it mandatory to air the contestants saying "Final", nothing else.

Interesting! Thanks for the info.

[earendel]

Clyde Wheeler (Phil Ken Sebbin)
Laurel, MD
Dry cleaning business

Clyde, a rather big man (6’ 6”), comments “I’m gonna need a bigger chair!”

Yahoo!! Another BB in the HS!

Lilianna makes her debut (picture)! As well as Clyde’s wife Leilani, in the relationship seat!

Was your wife cold in the audience wearing that off-the-shoulder number?

$10,000 (CELEBRITY Q- read by star of “Glee”, Jane Lynch- who obviously hasn’t been briefed about The Damn Clock)- The pilot episode of “Glee” memorably concludes with the cast performing “Don’t Stop Believin’”, a 1981 power ballad by what band?

A- REO Speedwagon B- Survivor
C- Journey D- The Cars

At 22 seconds, Clyde asks the audience.

ATA Results

A- 3%, B- 5%, C- 88%, D- 4%

Spoiler

C- Journey (17)

I haven't seen a single episode of Glee but surprisingly, considering my musical tastes, I knew this one anyway.

$15,000 (Airports)- Since 2008, “Mustang”, a 32-foot-tall sculpture of a blue horse, has stood adjacent to the terminal of what city’s airport?

A- Miami B- Denver
C- Pittsburgh D- San Antonio

At 21 seconds, Clyde uses the Double Dip.

Clyde’s first answer is

Spoiler

D

.

Clyde’s second answer is

Spoiler

B

.

Spoiler

B- Denver (19)

I might have blurted out "San Antonio" and gone home with $5K. Without the pressure of TDC, however, I might have associated the blue horse with the logo for the Denver Broncos and hit the right answer.

$50,000 (In Treatment)- A person who has a rhotacism would most likely seek treatment from which of these professionals?

A- Cardiologist B- Ophthalmologist
C- Speech therapist D- Massage therapist

At 37 seconds, Clyde asks the expert.

Kate has no clue- asks Clyde if he knows his Latin. “Just e pluribus unum”, Clyde answers. Kate guesses

Spoiler

B

but notes it’s just a guess.

Clyde, not knowing it, goes with Kate’s guess and leaves with $25,000

Spoiler

C- Speech therapist

Holy Toledo!! What a WWOQ this was! If they're going to do away with the PAF, then they should do away with questions that are almost designed for a Google PAF.

Sorry you ran into this buzzsaw of a question, Clyde, but you had a good run.

[frogman042]

Believe what you will, FM, but you haven't swayed me. I suppose you also don't believe there's any way the writers read our Bored and throw in shout-out Q's on a regular basis...

It is totally a different thing to write a few questions that would be in-jokes for the bored that no one else would get (although I think we are giving ourselves a bit of an ego boost to think the writers think about us at all – but it is within reason that they might do it for fun) since that in no way would be considered ‘fixing’ the game. That is wholly different then writing specific questions for a specific contestant and making sure they get that question – or to be generous – pull an existing question from the stack for a specific contestant. That would be insanely stupid on their part – they would be risking their jobs, the show and the reputation of all game shows – ala the game show scandals from the early days, and for what – so a contestant will feel a rush because a question comes up that has some personal reference to them? So the audience will laugh because the name in the question matches the name of the player? It just doesn’t pass the sniff test – why would they risk all that for something that statistically is going to happen on its own anyway – e.g a name in a question happens to match a contestant’s name or references the city/state/region of the contestant – or any other myriad of words in a question that will hit some sort of match with the contestant. 100 questions a week for 10 players – multiplied by the number of weeks of original shows in a year – you are certainly going to see some ‘coincidences’, based on statistics alone. So why would they risk ruining their careers and the show for such a tiny (if any) upside?

They might be writing some bored jokes, and kudos to us if they are, and TPTB probably are monitoring the bored as well, but I doubt they are doing it so they can write questions for any bored member when they appear.

Hmm, is it possible that you're on the BAM legal payroll? If not, you should be. You're arguments and statistal references are sensible. But if TPTB look away from the shout-outs for shits and giggles, perhaps they do the same for the contestant-related Q's at low levels. Why would they risk it? I don't know, but it sure looks like they have been. ...Cuz it's fun, and who could prove it? If you reallly think Clyde's Clyde Q, Gordon's coin Q/Meredith's coin anecdote, Ray Reyes' "Re" Q, and your Baby Names Q's were coincidences, maybe you've been reading too many fairy tales to the youngins... Unless there's documented evidence of moment-by-moment investigation by Standard and Practices overseeing every step of the question submission process and its complete randomness (and hell, maybe there is!), you will never convince me otherwise and I'm actually not sure why you feel such a need to, anway...
...

Well I won't deny I recieved a nice check from them at one point in time.
Seriously, of course they were conincidences - and far from being very amazing / interesting ones. For me, for example, any question regarding kids or family would have fit the bill as being funny given my situatiation. GSABC could easily had gotten the question regarding hair loss, or an eye problem/sight/parts of the eye, or something Disney related, Clyde could have gotten a question about that multi-million dollar lawsuit in D.C. about that dry-cleaner that supposedly ruined a pair of pants. Any of these would constitue an interesting coincidence. There are probably hundreds (if not thousands) of questions that any given contestant may get that would seem like a coincidence if you just look at that question and that contestant. People like to see this normal coincidences as indicators of something larger going on, that is why those fraudulent/fake-psychic cold readers do so well.

I don't know if you have ever been on a game show, but they are anal about keepting things seperate and firewalled. For example, those babysitting us in the green room would not talk about any details of the show, even ones that were public knowledge. I don't know to what degree S&P monitor things, but I do know that what would be required to pull off the type of tampering you imply would require a lot of effort to do it undetected at a very big risk and again, for no up-side that I can see.

One last point. It might be an easy control. Take a message board that is very active, with users that use a variety of different handles and talk about a number of things, a board that is not dedicated to any game show. Then scan the archieve and see how many questions / answers from BAM map to either user handles or hot topics on that board. My feeling is you would have the similar number of 'hits' as you would find with our bored.

[chipotle]

Well played, sir! Great job!

[andrewjackson]

Good job, Phil!

I was worried about the "rho" beginning in connection with the nose. I know that is normally "rhi" as in "rhino" for nose. I don't know what direction that would have taken me with the available answers but I got stuck on it.


Just my two cents on the "Don't Stop Believin'" issue, our soccer supporters group has been singing it since 2006, well before the Sopranos episode. It also seems to be a karaoke mainstay.

[ghostjmf]

Thought I would post this flippant but from-web-site-run-by-legit-print-publication coverage of Arnel Pineda replacing Steve Perry as Journey's lead singer.

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2007/12/journeys-replac/

Anyone following the link, note it uses that internetty sarcasm thing with the crossouts that so upset Jeemie; there abounds much evidence I didn't invent the technique, if anyone's interested ('course, my style o' crossouts comes from a pre-graphic-net era, because I'm so old & all. However, I tried pasting the quote from the article above on this board, & their graphic crossouts weren't preserved by whatever software the board is run on, so ce' la vie.).

In case CowardlyNameChanger can't get the link to work, I will quote here the part that says: "

the legendary Steve Perry stopped believin’ in ‘96

".

I had said in my post I didn't know whether he was dead or alive; I remembered his former bandmates pretty much acting in the interview I saw like they could care less, for all the interaction he'd had with them, after, of course, establishing a pretty distinctive sound they would have to recreate. Which they're doing with Pinelda.

As long as I'm at it, I will kindly point out to Bob78165, who hasn't actually directed slurs my way, but said

But being of a certain age, I knew this one cold. I strongly suspect that almost anyone born before about 1967 would have known this answer.

that I was born in '51 but I can't tell most of those "rock anthem" bands apart. I recognize the songs, the ones that are decent-to-good, & even the ones that are not so good but are inescapable, but I don't know who sung 'em. It comes from not caring enough.

[Jeemie]

Anyone following the link, note it uses that internetty sarcasm thing with the crossouts that so upset Jeemie; there abounds much evidence I didn't invent the technique, if anyone's interested ('course, my style o' crossouts comes from a pre-graphic-net era, because I'm so old & all. However, I tried pasting the quote from the article above on this board, & their graphic crossouts weren't preserved by whatever software the board is run on, so ce' la vie.).

I wasn't upset- I simply did not know what the hell it meant.

After my fifth reading, I figured it out.

FYI, a more clear non-graphics way of doing this would have been:

"the only reason somebody not mired/lost/admiringly ensconced in the 80s power ballad world..."

That I would have understood right away.

[Phil Ken Sebbin]

Anyone following the link, note it uses that internetty sarcasm thing with the crossouts that so upset Jeemie; there abounds much evidence I didn't invent the technique, if anyone's interested ('course, my style o' crossouts comes from a pre-graphic-net era, because I'm so old & all. However, I tried pasting the quote from the article above on this board, & their graphic crossouts weren't preserved by whatever software the board is run on, so ce' la vie.).

I wasn't upset- I simply did not know what the hell it meant.

After my fifth reading, I figured it out.

FYI, a more clear non-graphics way of doing this would have been:

"the only reason somebody not mired/lost/admiringly ensconced in the 80s power ballad world..."

That I would have understood right away.

I didn't understand it either. I just feigned understanding by nodding and smiling.

[frogman042]

Anyone following the link, note it uses that internetty sarcasm thing with the crossouts that so upset Jeemie; there abounds much evidence I didn't invent the technique, if anyone's interested ('course, my style o' crossouts comes from a pre-graphic-net era, because I'm so old & all. However, I tried pasting the quote from the article above on this board, & their graphic crossouts weren't preserved by whatever software the board is run on, so ce' la vie.).

I wasn't upset- I simply did not know what the hell it meant.

After my fifth reading, I figured it out.

FYI, a more clear non-graphics way of doing this would have been:

"the only reason somebody not mired/lost/admiringly ensconced in the 80s power ballad world..."

That I would have understood right away.

I didn't understand it either. I just feigned understanding by nodding and smiling.

Falling back on the good ol' Chauncey Gardiner defense, I see.

[Phil Ken Sebbin]

Falling back on the good ol' Chauncey Gardiner defense, I see.

To quote Mark Twain...

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

[ghostjmf]

Separating words by "/" is generally taken to mean "pick one of these, they'll all work".

Crossing out words is internet sarcasm for "I'm gonna cross out what I really mean, but still want you to see it".

Clear enough?

You've all been around you say how long?

[frogman042]

Separating words by "/" is generally taken to mean "pick one of these, they'll all work".

Crossing out words is internet sarcasm for "I'm gonna cross out what I really mean, but still want you to see it".

Clear enough?

You've all been around you say how long?

You don't really think morons^H^H^H^H^H^H people still did that, did you?

[Jeemie]

Separating words by "/" is generally taken to mean "pick one of these, they'll all work".

Crossing out words is internet sarcasm for "I'm gonna cross out what I really mean, but still want you to see it".

Clear enough?

You've all been around you say how long?

So, let me get this straight?

Three different people explained you hadn't clearly communicated what you meant...and your response is to not try and be clearer but instead insult them for not "having been around long enough" to understand your sentence construction?

And you wonder why people have issues with you from time to time?

[ten96lt]

Then scan the archieve and see how many questions / answers from BAM map to either user handles or hot topics on that board. My feeling is you would have the similar number of 'hits' as you would find with our bored.

Wouldn't that be funny if I get on and they ask what police 10 code means mental patient?

[frogman042]

Then scan the archieve and see how many questions / answers from BAM map to either user handles or hot topics on that board. My feeling is you would have the similar number of 'hits' as you would find with our bored.

Wouldn't that be funny if I get on and they ask what police 10 code means mental patient?

If that happened I would gladly retract everything I wrote!

[secondchance]

Then scan the archieve and see how many questions / answers from BAM map to either user handles or hot topics on that board. My feeling is you would have the similar number of 'hits' as you would find with our bored.

Wouldn't that be funny if I get on and they ask what police 10 code means mental patient?

If that happened I would gladly retract everything I wrote!

Just to clarify- ten96lt has Frogman's quote listed as mine... I didn't write that. Actually, I don't even understand it. lol.

In answer to Frogman's inquiry of whether I've ever been on a gameshow -- only on 5 of them, the most recent in 2009

[ten96lt]

Wouldn't that be funny if I get on and they ask what police 10 code means mental patient?

If that happened I would gladly retract everything I wrote!

Just to clarify- ten96lt has Frogman's quote listed as mine... I didn't write that. Actually, I don't even understand it. lol.

In answer to Frogman's inquiry of whether I've ever been on a gameshow -- only on 5 of them, the most recent in 2009

Pardon me, I accidently erased the wrong quote part. I hate editing quotes.

Edit: Fixed the quote.

[Phil Ken Sebbin]

SC, haven't you learned? Just nod and smile.Nod and smile.