[IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Current and recently solved lateral thinking puzzles. Please post new lateral thinking puzzles here.

Moderators: peter365, Balin, kalira, JenBurdoo, Tiger

[IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Thu May 10, 2018 1:00 pm

They voluntarily did a lot more hard work than necessary. It was shameful.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby invisiblemimsy » Thu May 10, 2018 4:42 pm

'They' = HAM etc? 2 or them, 10, list of numbers?

Was the work voluntary, unpaid... Or was required, expected, paid but they went over and above with the difficulty, amount, etc?

Relevant who they were doing the work for, or what kind of work it was? Was the nature of the work itself shameful, or was it shameful how much work they did or were expected to do? Was the work in itself shameful?
User avatar
invisiblemimsy
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:16 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Fri May 11, 2018 11:40 am

invisiblemimsy

'They' = HAM etc? HAMs and HAFs. 2 or them, 10, list of numbers? Not sure, likely several dozen.

Was the work voluntary, Somewhat. unpaid...No. Or was required, expected, paid but they went over and above with the difficulty, amount, etc? The work they were doing in general was required and paid. The "lot more" was not specifically required. They were likely paid for it.

Relevant who they were doing the work for, or what kind of work it was? It might help you. Was the nature of the work itself shameful, No. or was it shameful how much work they did Given the context, yes. or were expected to do? No. Was the work in itself shameful? Not the actual task, no.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby Earnest » Fri May 11, 2018 2:33 pm

Relevant the way in which they were paid? Like the more time they spend working the more they get paid? E.g. like taxi drivers for instance ...did they work together? Did they have to perform a specific task together? Were they used to work together or was it an occasional work (e.g. counting votes...)? Was the hard part of the work tme consuming? Was there another way to perform the task avoiding hard working? (E.g. instead of using technology they preferred to do something by hand spending a lot more time to do it...)
"More than necessary" = more than necessary to finish the job? More than necessary in the sense that they finished the job but then they perform some hard work even after having finished it?

Was the "hard" part mainly a mental effort? A physical one? Do "they" belong to a category of people? E.g. to a trade union?

"Voluntarily" = they agreed? Like they talked to each other face to face agreeing of doing more hard work than necessary and being aware that they would be paid more/to protest against something? If so, relevant how they agreed? Are buildings involved? Constructions? Sport? Teams?
Earnest
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby invisiblemimsy » Sun May 13, 2018 2:09 pm

Was it a specific river, eg a famous one like Swanee River, River of Babylon, River Kwai? Were they slaves, employees, in the forces?
User avatar
invisiblemimsy
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:16 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Wed May 16, 2018 9:22 pm

Earnest

Relevant the way in which they were paid? No. Like the more time they spend working the more they get paid? E.g. like taxi drivers for instance Not like this.
...did they work together? Yes. Did they have to perform a specific task together? Yes. Were they used to work together or was it an occasional work (e.g. counting votes...)? Irr. Was the hard part of the work tme consuming? Yes. Was there another way to perform the task avoiding hard working? No or irr. (E.g. instead of using technology they preferred to do something by hand spending a lot more time to do it...)
"More than necessary" = more than necessary to finish the job? Yes. More than necessary in the sense that they finished the job but then they perform some hard work even after having finished it? The extra work occurred before they were finished with the rest of the work.

Was the "hard" part mainly a mental effort? A physical one? Both. Do "they" belong to a category of people? Yesish, there are multiple specific professions involved but one main industry. E.g. to a trade union? No.

"Voluntarily" = they agreed? Most likely, at least a majority of the workers were on board. Like they talked to each other face to face agreeing of doing more hard work than necessary Yes. and being aware that they would be paid more/to protest against something? The rest is irr. If so, relevant how they agreed? No. Are buildings involved? Yes. Construction? Yes! Sport? Teams? No.


invisiblemimsy

Was it a specific river, eg a famous one like Swanee River, River of Babylon, River Kwai? Not these--I was referencing a specific river, but only tangentially relevant. Were they slaves, employees, in the forces? Paid employees and/or contractors.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby GalFisk » Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:44 pm

Was a construction made overly tall? Overly sturdy? In more numbers than necessary? Specific construction materials relevant?
WAG: did a demolition company fail to properly demolish an overengineered building?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 7900
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:55 pm

GalFisk

Was a construction made overly tall? No. Overly sturdy? No. In more numbers than necessary? Yesish, explore. Specific construction materials relevant? No.
WAG: did a demolition company fail to properly demolish an overengineered building? No.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby Earnest » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:53 am

Construction = apartment building? Palace? Bridge? Street? House? Generic building? Railways? Did they relevantly work in the private sector? Public sector? Was the building meant to represent a country? (e.g. buildings build up in Olympiads?)

Did they voluntarily agree on that because: they want to have a monetry gain? They want to appear as efficient? Had they not would they have finish the work on time? Before the scheduled time? Relevant? Did they build something unnecessary? Something more? Did they use a different technique than the one the needed to use? Did they want to cover some mistake they made?
Were they constructing the building from scratch? Were they restoring/bringing up an old building? Relevant?

A lot more in time terms means months? Years? Days?
Earnest
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby trebor » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:37 pm

Is this modern times? If not, may I please invoke the list of centuries?

Were they building a building? Another sort of structure? Was the product of the extra work blasphemous?
trebor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:02 pm

Earnest

Construction = apartment building? Palace? Bridge? Street? House? Generic building? A specific building, none of these. Railways? No. Did they relevantly work in the private sector? Public sector? The construction workers, irr. The building is public. Was the building meant to represent a country? In a sense... (e.g. buildings build up in Olympiads?) Not this.

Did they voluntarily agree on that (I assume you mean, doing more work than necessary) because: they want to have a monetry gain? No. They want to appear as efficient? No. Had they not would they have finish the work on time? Before the scheduled time? Relevant? Irr. Did they build something unnecessary? Yesish, but not from their perspective. Something more? More than was required, yes. Did they use a different technique than the one the needed to use? No. Did they want to cover some mistake they made? No.
Were they constructing the building from scratch? This. Were they restoring/bringing up an old building? Relevant? Only in that it is a true story. :)

A lot more in time terms means months? Years? Days? I'm not sure. It probably added at least a couple weeks to the overall project.



trebor

Is this modern times? Yes, 1940s. If not, may I please invoke the list of centuries?

Were they building a building? Yes. Another sort of structure? Was the product of the extra work blasphemous? No.

P.S. This is fairly Google-able, please hold off for now. :mrgreen:
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby biograd » Thu Jun 14, 2018 1:44 pm

Did they do the work because they mistakenly believed it was necessary? If so, because someone deliberately lied to them about the necessity of it? or because they simply had a misunderstanding?

Alternately, would the construction workers have been out of work for that time if they hadn't taken on the unnecessary job? or did they mistakenly believe they would have been?
biograd
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby trebor » Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:27 pm

Is the photo of workers eating their lunch relevant?
trebor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby wolfier » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:18 am

In more number than necessary: number of rooms? Number of windows? doors?

Public building: prison? hospital? community centre? school?
wolfier
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:42 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:56 pm

biograd

Did they do the work because they mistakenly believed it was necessary? Yes, for SVV of necessary. If so, because someone deliberately lied to them about the necessity of it? Not really. or because they simply had a misunderstanding? They certainly misunderstood something...

Alternately, would the construction workers have been out of work for that time if they hadn't taken on the unnecessary job? or did they mistakenly believe they would have been? Irr.


trebor

Is the photo of workers eating their lunch relevant? No.


wolfier

In more number than necessary: number of rooms? This. Number of windows? doors?

Public building: prison? hospital? community centre? school? None of these.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby Earnest » Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:49 pm

Was the project wrong? Was there sonething wrong on the plan? Had the building relevantly more than one floor? Were rooms in general necessary? By building the rooms did they prevent the owners on using that place for other purposes? Was an empty space left for let an elevator going up and down but they did not understand it and placed rooms in that empty space?

Was it an hotel? Had it relevantly got an elevator? Relevant how many rooms more than necessary they build? Relevant in which part of the building? Were the rooms meant to be for costumers? Were there some standards to be observed? In their perspective...were the rooms necessary to complete a part of the building that was missing? Were the rooms build up in a place whwre they would have been destroyed/are in danger? (E.g. by flood tide) relevant that it was in 1940s? Was there a specific number of rooms to be build? Jews relevant? (E.g. by constructing those rooms they had destroyed the place where the future owners wanted to build hideouts for jews)? Did the owner want to exploit the place where the rooms were build?
Earnest
 
Posts: 1515
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby trebor » Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:17 pm

PMing WAG.
trebor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby wolfier » Sun Jun 24, 2018 4:52 am

Is the public building for some sort of assemblies / meetings / votings to take place among politicians? Parliament or Congress related? If so, did they expect the number of constituents / states / politicians to be higher than actual? end of WWII relevant? United Nations?
wolfier
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:42 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:34 pm

Earnest

Was the project wrong? In one sense, but I think not in the way you mean. Was there sonething wrong on the plan? DOYD of "wrong." Had the building relevantly more than one floor? Irr. Were rooms in general necessary? Generally, yes. By building the rooms did they prevent the owners on using that place for other purposes? No. Was an empty space left for let an elevator going up and down but they did not understand it and placed rooms in that empty space? No, but good guess!

Was it an hotel? No. Had it relevantly got an elevator? No. Relevant how many rooms more than necessary they build? Not exactly, but quite a few. Relevant in which part of the building? Yesish. Were the rooms meant to be for costumers? No. Were there some standards to be observed? Yes...or not observed... In their perspective...were the rooms necessary to complete a part of the building that was missing? No. Were the rooms build up in a place whwre they would have been destroyed/are in danger? No. (E.g. by flood tide) relevant that it was in 1940s? Yes, in part because it's a true story, and for another reason. Was there a specific number of rooms to be build? Presumably, but exact number irr. Jews relevant? No. (E.g. by constructing those rooms they had destroyed the place where the future owners wanted to build hideouts for jews)? Did the owner want to exploit the place where the rooms were build? No.


trebor

PMing WAG. You got it! Good guessing. :mrgreen:


wolfier

Is the public building for some sort of assemblies / meetings / votings to take place among politicians? Parliament or Congress related? It is a government building, none of these exactly, but its exact purpose isn't necessary to solve. If so, did they expect the number of constituents / states / politicians to be higher than actual? No. end of WWII relevant? United Nations? Neither directly; it is a military-related building.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby Balin » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:18 pm

I think I know this one too - sending a PM.
Balin
 
Posts: 6634
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:12 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:15 pm

Balin got it too! Y'all are sharp.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby wolfier » Sat Jun 30, 2018 2:54 am

hm...
is it a shelter facility? Weapon testing/storage? Manhattan project relevant?
wolfier
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:42 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Sat Jun 30, 2018 11:25 am

wolfier

hm...
is it a shelter facility? Weapon testing/storage? Manhattan project relevant? No to all, but good thought.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby markobr » Sat Jun 30, 2018 3:14 pm

Did this happen during WW II? After WW II? Is WW II relevant for the fact that the building was built? For the workers doing more work than necessary?

Did the construction of the additional rooms result in the building becoming bigger than in the case the rooms wouldn't have been built? Or was (part of ) the building just divided in more rooms than necessary? Was the building less useable for its purpose because of the additional rooms? Were the additional rooms demolished after the mistake was recognised? Did they remain but were not used? Or used for a purpose the building was originally not intended for?

Was the building located at a river? In a river?

Did they at some point realise the work was unnecessary? If the architect of the building knew about the work, would he have known immediately it was unnecessary? The officers of the governmental agency that decided about the building? The people who would use the building?

Did they misinterpret some kind of instructions? If so: written instructions? oral ones? drawings? gestures?
markobr
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Sat Jun 30, 2018 9:30 pm

markobr

Did this happen during WW II? Yes, and... After WW II? Is WW II relevant for the fact that the building was built? I think possibly, but...For the workers doing more work than necessary? Not at all.

Did the construction of the additional rooms result in the building becoming bigger than in the case the rooms wouldn't have been built? Not that I know of.Or was (part of ) the building just divided in more rooms than necessary? This. Was the building less useable for its purpose because of the additional rooms? No. Were the additional rooms demolished after the mistake was recognised? No. Did they remain but were not used? No. Or used for a purpose the building was originally not intended for? They are used for the same purpose...with a big "but."

(Hehe, "big butt.")


Was the building located at a river? In a river? Near one, but irr.

Did they at some point realise the work was unnecessary? Unlikely. If the architect of the building knew about the work, would he have known immediately it was unnecessary? No, I think he was aware. The officers of the governmental agency that decided about the building? Some of them thought it necessary, others did not. The people who would use the building? Ditto.

Did they misinterpret some kind of instructions? No. If so: written instructions? oral ones? drawings? gestures?
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby wolfier » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:50 pm

Was it built by Axis or Allies? So not a bunker or weapon-related or a prison. Was it a training facility? Command centre? Graveyard?
wolfier
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:42 am

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby WiZ » Mon Jul 02, 2018 10:42 pm

PM Sent.
User avatar
WiZ
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 8:19 pm
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: [IrishElk] At the River I Stand

Postby irishelk » Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:34 pm

wolfier

Was it built by Axis or Allies? Allies--American. So not a bunker or weapon-related or a prison. Was it a training facility? Command centre? This is close, but it isn't on or related to a battlefield. The war is not directly relevant to the puzzle. Graveyard? No.


WiZ,

Yes, you got it! Thanks to the early guessers for PMing.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish


Return to Active Lateral Thinking Puzzles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests