Cryptic Clues

Justin Passing said:
Wot? Eh? There isn't a clue. I thought Up Lighter was a clue. #226 was just an answer to #224. Did you look at the spoiler....?

Ok a bit clumsy, I'm tired, but try:

Put in JohnD , to conjure the most recent style, (9).
Click to expand...
The most recent style - modern.
A 9 letter word for it - modernity?
What does JohnD have to do with it, and assuming that "to conjure" has any meaning to it whether as a sign to create something, or something to do with magic being in the answer?
 
Sponsored Links
Another word for
put in
then an anagram from it
conjure ... mix... = anagram

JD is a ...
 
An anagram of a 9 letter synonym for 'put in'
Highly unlikely.


JD is a whisky.
The clue was JohnD?
 
Sponsored Links
Justin Passing said:
Your first thought was close.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of words that are synonyms for 'put in'. So far the only 9 letter ones I've found with an anagram is inserting, but the only anagrams that I've found (sintering and integrins), and introduce (reduction), and petitions (pointiest), and installed (deinstall and landsleit) which are not even close.

Then there's the confusion over JD/ JohnD. Is it JD, or is it JohnD, that is part of he clue?
I'm guessing it's JohnD due to your reference to
Justin Passing said:
JD is a whisky. Not on here he's not
Click to expand...
Now if this refers to some personal opinion that you have of JohnD, then it's not a universally accepted fact, and if you are exploiting a word game to pursue your personal vendettas, that's a bit perverted of you.
 
Take "insert", jumble it with what JohnD is (no, not pejorative) and see what you get.
 
Justin Passing said:
Take "insert", jumble it with what JohnD is (no, not pejorative) and see what you get.
Click to expand...
What three letter word describes JohnD? o_O
A man? Can we be sure?

Mannerist? is a 16 century art form and nothing to do with modernism.
 
AngleEyes said:
What three letter word describes JohnD? o_O
A man? Can we be sure?

Mannerist? is a 16 century art form and nothing to do with modernism.
Click to expand...
Mannerist would be wrong, then ;)

JD is probably a man, but also some have noticed that posts already having replies mysteriously change without any edit note, going back a while now.
Go back to your original guess, it started right and you were close.. combine..
 
Justin Passing said:
Mannerist would be wrong, then ;)

JD is probably a man, but also some have noticed that posts already having replies mysteriously change without any edit note, going back a while now.
Go back to your original guess, it started right and you were close.. combine..
Click to expand...
So you suspect JohnD is a mod, and everyone is supposed to share your suspicions?
HTF do you think people are supposed to know what you are suspecting?

I'm fed up with your obtuseness now.
And it shows, despite your apology, you were taking the pizz before.
 
Not everyone perhaps, but many whose eyes pass across the forum, such as, recently, https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/depressing-news.583133/#post-5119727.
That doesn't say who, but there have been many such over a period which do. Probaby deleted soon after...
You've been around since before Sept 16th I suspect.

So, you're wrong, it doesn't "show" anything like you imagine, which isn't true. My anonymous nickname is not out to get yours...

If you used your imagination less cynically perhaps you'd solve more clues!

ANyway it seems you've got there so well done. Your go.
 
Justin Passing said:
Not everyone perhaps, but many whose eyes pass across the forum, such as, recently, https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/depressing-news.583133/#post-5119727.
That doesn't say who, but there have been many such over a period which do. Probaby deleted soon after...
You've been around since before Sept 16th I suspect.

So, you're wrong, it doesn't "show" anything like you imagine, which isn't true. My anonymous nickname is not out to get yours...

If you used your imagination less cynically perhaps you'd solve more clues!

ANyway it seems you've got there so well done. Your go.
Click to expand...
What's the point?
When I set a clue, you claim to know the answer but won't say what it is, and yet you claim it was too easy.
When you set the clue it's based on something that you might suspect, but is not general knowledge, or there's an obscure relevance to the words.
All of which requires several pages of questions and answers to uncover the obscure relevance.
This makes the thread unenjoyable, uninteresting and acrimonious.
 
Where did I claim it was too easy?
Yes if I get it within seconds of reading it I let someone else have a go unless I have something ready.
You complain because you can't guess some part of it as though it's the question-poser's fault. You complain eg because in your thinking the number of letters is wrong - how likely is it that YOU are wrong - 100%, your thinking must be other than what the questioner was thinking. The questioner will never be following your line of thought..
The mod thing isn't special to me, and it's something you could have guessed - you did eventually.

"How can it be a simple anagram when there aren't a combination of 15 adjacent letters?" - again, you just had to think a bit longer, though it sounds like you're complaining.

Cryptic means obscure - anyone can be infinitely obscure but as long as it works it's OK. For me, Blup's sweat and bile wouldn't link, ever, but I still guessed it.

"Too obscure" just means you haven't found/thought of it yet.

Acrimonious? I think you're the only one hurling insults.

Try
Police tricked individual supplying class A drug (9)

Or you can try another clue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top