Brain Teasers
Brain Teasers Trivia Mentalrobics Games Community
Personal Links
Your Friends
Your Watchlist
Public Forums
Games
Writing Teasers
Teaser Answers
Ask a Question
The Human Mind
Trivia and Quizzes
New? Start Here!

General Discussion
Entertainment
Sports
Current Events

Announcements
Bugs & Requests

Subscribers
High Scorers
Moderators
High Karma
Debate
Grownups
More Community
Newsgroups
Wiki
Teaser Comments
Trivia Comments

User Rankings
Search for User
Add to Google delicious Add to del.icio.us

More ways to get Braingle...
rss

Braingle Time
2:36 pm

Public Forums >> Writing Teasers >>


Forum Rules View Watchlist Post Reply


Skip to Page:  1   2  

Rejected Rebus

AuthorMessage
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 05:57PM Sep 27, 2013

Thanks for the encouragement fishmed. That all makes sense!

Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 01:46PM Oct 26, 2013

Category: Rebus

Body:
bad
dead good

Answer: Better off dead.

"Bad" is on top of "dead." "Good" is off of "dead," to the side. Apparently, the position off of dead is better than the position on top of dead. So, it's better off dead.

Accept: 1
Reject: 5

Comments:
Your teaser does not work as presented. We simply do not see the phrase represented.

My Rebuttal:
I thought I explained it pretty well... I mean, imagine the words are sitting on a floor and you're looking at them from a frontal perspective. "Bad" is on top of "dead," as if "dead" is a table of sorts. The position upon dead is bad. "Good" is on the floor next to "dead," not on "dead," but off of "dead." The position off dead is good. Things that are good are better than things that are bad. The position off dead is better than the position on dead. If one wanted to state this information in a succinct summary, he might say it's "better off dead."
Anyone have any advice? Have I gone over everyone's heads a bit too much again? I sure didn't think I had when I came up with it.


Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
AwwwSweet

Posts: 217

new Posted: 11:07AM Oct 28, 2013

I get what you were going for. However, it goes against the rebus guidelines.
Teaser Guidelines

Even if the target phrase itself does not use the "on" construction, it has to be used to get to the premise of "off" versus "on". Additionally, even though "off" is not specifically called out, I think it still falls within the spirit of the guidelines of avoiding orientation usage only. I am surprised it was not rejected for that reason since I think the idea was cute.


-----
Are there any special rules for Rebus Teasers?
Rebuses are common phrases that have been disguised by the clever writer. A good Rebus brain teaser uses words or letters (not full sentences/storylike bodies) in interesting orientations to represent these phrases. There are several types of Rebus construction that have already been done a bunch of times on this website and will no longer be approved if they are the only thing in the Rebus:

+Putting a word or letters on another word to make "on" or "over".
+Putting a word or letters under another word to make "under".
+Putting a word or letters in another word to make "in".

Your Rebus should not rely entirely on these types of construction. It should have something else clever. Also, these are some common constructions that are confusing and difficult to read. You should avoid these:

+Using lowercase letters to create the word "lower", "little", or "small".
+Using uppercase letters to make the word "big" or "large".
+Spelling a word backwards to make the word "back".
+Spelling a word/letters up to make the word "up".
+Spelling a word/letters down to make the word "down".
+Arrows or ** to emphasize a certain word/words.


---This message was edited on 11:09AM Oct 28, 2013---

"The possession of knowledge does not kill the sense of wonder and mystery. There is always more mystery." - Anais Nin
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM    
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 02:20PM Oct 28, 2013

I agree with that to some extent... However, I do feel that a little more creativity was added than simply orientation. For one, it is two separate orientations ("on" and "off," which is more than just "on.") Also, the fact that the word "better" must be derived from one position's being labeled "good" and the other's being labeled "bad." The word "better" is thereby masked behind the rebus. I think this teaser should be accepted; however, I see your point, and because I think your reasoning is close to being a valid reason for rejection, and also because I do not find this rebus to be brilliant like some of my others, I will not bother altering/resubmitting it.

Thanks A.S.!


Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
AwwwSweet

Posts: 217

new Posted: 04:14PM Oct 28, 2013

Are you going to (or have you already) resubmit the "the best things in life are free" rebus? I thought it was really creative and only needed a few tweaks!

"The possession of knowledge does not kill the sense of wonder and mystery. There is always more mystery." - Anais Nin
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM    
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 04:37PM Oct 28, 2013

Not yet... got that one on the backburner while I've been submitting a bunch of complicated mathy-logicky teasers... And shockingly, they are getting accepted usually. I am pleasantly surprised by that, because they require a lot of thought to figure out, and many parts are intentionally stated in confusing, complicated ways... I was almost expecting "This is too complex, confusing, boring and pointless, and very random information is given," hehe.

Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 03:52PM Feb 7, 2014

I completely respect the editors in their position and everything, but as this system is not a monarchy or the like, I would again like to express my opinions on my newly rejected teaser submission.

TITLE: Plus 5, Minus 5

CATEGORY: Trick

BODY:
748 + 5 = 753
748 - 5 = 743

These two numbers have the same final digit, 3. True or False: For any whole number x, x+5 and x-5 have the same final digit.

Try to give a final answer as quickly as possible.

Answer: This does not work for x=1 through x=4, because x-5 goes below zero, where the final digit increases as the value decreases, breaking the pattern. (Negative numbers are not whole numbers, but only x must be a whole number.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ACCEPT: 0
REJECT: 4

Comments:
This is not a trick, but basic math.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am aware that it is basic math, and I am okay with the fact that it was rejected. However, it IS a trick. Just because it's simple, if you're already aware of the principle, does not mean there is no tricky aspect to it. Some people might never consider the fact that negative numbers suddenly break the pattern of the last digit's repeated cycle. This is especially plausible since the example given is a large number like "748." This may draw the readers away from small numbers and keep them thinking on random, oblique, abstract, arbitrary, "crooked" numbers. Also, the restriction of "whole numbers" might trick someone into thinking that only positive numbers should be considered at all, and he might completely exclude negative numbers from his thought process. While the base number x is required to be a whole number, it can change to a negative number in the subtraction process. Not everyone around has thought about the same things before, and this may have never crossed some people's minds.

For instance, take the case of teaser #1058. I could not even find the "trick" in this teaser (although it is in the "Math" category, it's clearly intended to be a trick), it was just basic everyday math, because I am familiar with such situations of buying and selling repeatedly (stock market, etc.), and I commented accordingly (as a reader, not as an editor). Yet, at least one person was tricked, as he seemed to be commenting that the answer was incorrect. The teaser even holds a difficulty rating above 1. A trick can mystify some people, while others may see through it so clearly that they can't even tell it's there.

But I will repeat, I recognize that this is not a very entertaining or difficult teaser, and I am not surprised or offended that it was rejected. It is only the comment that I have a minor issue with. If the rejection stated "This is simply not tricky enough," I would not even be writing this in the first place.


Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
fishmedAusmod

Papa Fish
Posts: 2103


new Posted: 04:10PM Feb 7, 2014

So, i feel I should answer here, as I believe I put in the comment. i put simple math in that I pretty much meant what you were referring to, it not being tricky enough. i just could not really think of a better way to phrase it. as to whether it might be acceptable with some tweaking, I am not sure how/where you could add more trickiness... sorry if the lack of a more constructive caused concerns.

I wish I could sleep... but my mind starts to wander, and well, basically, one sheep, two sheep, cow, turtle, duck, Ol McDonald had a farm... HEEEY Macarena!!!
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 04:26PM Feb 7, 2014

It is okay my brother. I even agree with you for the most part, and I bet I would have rejected this teaser as well. I just take words very literally. And if I found this teaser submitted from someone else, I would likely be saying "Where is the trick?" too, but I tend to hold editors (of any work, not just Braingle) to a high standard of phraseology.

Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
fishmedAusmod

Papa Fish
Posts: 2103


new Posted: 05:18PM Feb 7, 2014

We try to hold ourselves to a higher standard as well. but being human means it does not always work. i look forward to future submissions.

I wish I could sleep... but my mind starts to wander, and well, basically, one sheep, two sheep, cow, turtle, duck, Ol McDonald had a farm... HEEEY Macarena!!!
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki
eighsseAus

Not Edward (Eddie)
Posts: 6694


new Posted: 05:21PM Feb 7, 2014

Absolutely

Like my honey cruller avatar? I can customize one for you.
Back to Top View Profile     Send PM     Visit Wiki

Skip to Page:  1   2    



Public Forums >> Writing Teasers >>


! Access Restricted

You'll need to create an account and sign in before you can post messages.






Users in Chat : Proph 

Online Now: 12 users and 610 guests

Copyright © 1999-2014 | Updates | FAQ | RSS | Widgets | Links | Green | Subscribe | Contact | Privacy | Conditions | Advertise

Custom Search





Sign In A Create a free account