Lexigame Community
General Category => Words => Topic started by: rhino on December 15, 2020, 04:35:41 PM
-
It's been a while since I have made word suggestions or even contributed to the forum - thought it was about time when I realised that this word was not recognised in the 7 by Many puzzle of 15 December 2020:
mumps - there would definitely not be a single form of the word ...
What about other childhood diseases?
Cheers,
Rhino
-
Lovely to hear from you Rhino. Always trying to follow your lead. Completely agree. If measles is common, mumps should follow.
-
Hi, rhino. Good to hear from you.
You say, "there would definitely not be a single form of the word". That's true, but that doesn't mean there is no word mump. There is, with a number of meanings, none directly related to the disease, and mump is an accepted word in Chi. That's why mumps is not allowed at present.
It does seem to be a fairly similar situation to measles, which was discussed here (https://theforum.lexigame.com/index.php?topic=2494.msg53299#msg53299). Measles is allowed as a common word, while measle is accepted as a rare word. Maybe this is the way to go with mump/mumps.
-
Hear hear. Are you going to do it Alan?
-
I'm with Jacki.
mumps has to be allowed
-
I don't suppose hives (urticaria) will be considered, but what about rickets?
-
Mkenuk, hives was considered, nearly accepted, and then rejected in the early days of the forum - see here (https://theforum.lexigame.com/index.php?topic=1192.msg32153#msg32153) for example. It seems there's no such thing as a "ricket", so rickets is OK.
My apologies for talking about measles while it was a word that could be played in the then-current Challenge puzzle. I had played that puzzle, but hadn't thought of measles. (Just as, in all probability, I won't think of mumps if that becomes permitted.)
Over the last few years I've been wary about making any changes relating to plurals, for fear of creating more uncertainty than I eliminate. So I may not be rushing in to make this change.
-
My apologies for talking about measles while it was a word that could be played in the then-current Challenge puzzle. I had played that puzzle, but hadn't thought of measles. (Just as, in all probability, I won't think of mumps if that becomes permitted.)
Quite frankly, I am more than surprised that the spoiler police haven't jumped in by now, as both Rhino and Alan posted while the words they were discussing were part of active puzzles.
-
Quite frankly, I am more than surprised that the spoiler police haven't jumped in by now, as both Rhino and Alan posted while the words they were discussing were part of active puzzles.
Yes, it's quite shocking. Those spoiler police really should be more on the ball.
-
Can anybody explain why Pat's quote by rogue mother is dated February 05, 1975?!
Is there a spanner in the works? Or am I seeing things?
-
Can anybody explain why Pat's quote by rogue mother is dated February 05, 1975?!
Is there a spanner in the works? Or am I seeing things?
Hi Val,
You can dismiss the psychiatrist :D You weren't seeing things.
I can't tell you how it happened but I can tell you what produced the result. The first line in the code block is what should have been used. Somehow the 6 at the end got deleted to give the third line.
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=1608244346]
[/quote]
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=160824434]
[/quote]
If you copy the text in the code block to here where it will be executed you get -
I hope to see you back at the ranch sometime soon.
-
Thanks Jack. Still none the wiser. Despite your excellent attempt at explaining it to a dotty old woman. Always at the ranch. Just don't like interrupting the play. So to speak.
Hope you're enjoying the Sunshine State. It's been pathetic weatherwise down 'ere. Until today, we've had the central heating on. Go figure!
Cheers Val xxx
-
Hot and humid here. We have visitors from Hobart...our air-con is running almost constantly trying to cope with the humidity.
-
I tried mumps again in yesterday's 7-by-many. Sigh.
-
Mumps will be accepted from now on as a non-plural word. It will be classed as common.
The singular mump was actually classed as a common word. As I mentioned before, mump has various obscure dialect usages unrelated to the disease mumps. In future mump will be a rare word.
-
Yay. I knew of mump as in "a great mumping villain", but like many other players was a little surprised that "mumps" was not accepted.
-
I agree guyd.
It was a good suggestion from the rhinophile & another swell decision from Alan.
-
So is mumps still rare?
-
" Mumps will be accepted from now on as a non-plural word. It will be classed as common.
The singular mump was actually classed as a common word. As I mentioned before, mump has various obscure dialect usages unrelated to the disease mumps. In future mump will be a rare word. "
-
Mumps common, mump rare. Got it. Thirsty work! Thanks Les.
-
Can anybody explain why Pat's quote by rogue mother is dated February 05, 1975?!
Is there a spanner in the works? Or am I seeing things?
Hi Val,
You can dismiss the psychiatrist :D You weren't seeing things.
I can't tell you how it happened but I can tell you what produced the result. The first line in the code block is what should have been used. Somehow the 6 at the end got deleted to give the third line.
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=1608244346]
[/quote]
[quote author=rogue_mother link=topic=4308.msg66928#msg66928 date=160824434]
[/quote]
If you copy the text in the code block to here where it will be executed you get -
I hope to see you back at the ranch sometime soon.
There's a reason for those numbers.
The underlying PHP code references the MySQL UNIX_TIMESTAMP() function. A Unix timestamp is a unique integer, consisting of the number of seconds that has elapsed since midnight on 1st January 1970, which was agreed by convention as the starting point for time measurement when the Unix operating system was developed.
However, there's a problem with the existing Unix timestamp, namely that it's an unsigned 32-bit integer. Which means that the largest value it can take is 4,294,967,295. Therefore, the Unix timestamp cannot handle dates beyond February 7th, 2106. If a 64-bit timestamp is introduced, this will allow integers all the way to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615. A 64-bit timestamp will be good all the way to July 21st, 2554 with nanosecond accuracy, and if used only to 1 second accuracy instead, will be good all the way to the year 584,000,000,000 - around 42 times the current age of the universe. That should be future proof enough for most people's needs, though possibly not those of cosmological physicists :)
Those who want to explore arcane time measurements further, can enjoy the age of the universe in seconds (https://81018.com/universeclock/). :)