Monday, December 5, 2011

Spookymilk Survivor X: C'mon, Try It!

I didn't post last week's challenge (the create-a-challenge) because it was optional, and I was busy...

One of last week's entries ended up becoming this week's challenge. Courtesy of Bret, this week's challenge was "C'mon, Try It!" Basically, the guideline concept is that something common hasn't been invented yet. The trick being both to relate what weird idea is used instead, as well as detailing the travails of the person who is suggesting this "new fangled thing". (I'm pretty sure I absolutely butchered that explanation, but I'm pretty sure I'm not going back over it).

Here's my entry:

When I first started writing for the Tribune fifteen years ago, I made a promise to all of you that I would try to use my position to better my beloved city. With that in mind, I feel it is time to take the automobile industry to task on what I feel is an egregious oversight. 

It has been apparent for some time now that our ability to increase the speed of our automobiles has long since surpassed our ability to slow them back down. In days of old, when cars traveled no faster than twenty miles per hour, the ‘stop stick’ that we all rely on today sufficed. However, it is my opinion that jamming an iron pole into the spokes of a vehicle going sixty miles per hour is simply not an efficient way to halt one’s momentum. 

I have seen fifteen automobile accidents in the past week. Each time, I saw the horror in the driver’s eyes as the stop stick not only did nothing to slow the vehicle’s speed, but in fact became a deadly projectile, often killing innocent bystanders. I believe that it is imperative that we follow the example of the Belgians, who have begun to use a complicated system of rotors and discs to bring vehicles to quick and efficient stop. In the first year that these new “brakes” were used, traffic deaths decreased by 14000%. Progress sits patiently knocking at our door. How many more must needlessly die before we answer it?

Here are the judges' scores:

K: Heh. I’m not sure yet how to approach these from a scoring standpoint. Let me peel back the curtain a bit on the forced curve: what I do is score everything on a 1-100 scale, then sort them out at the end to see who gets what; then I do one more pass to see if I’m satisfied. This is such an insanely different challenge (and one y’all said was brutally difficult) and I have no clue what to expect. This was a grinner, though. 2

DK: Solid idea, well-written. I like the contrast here to the ‘previously accepted’ method of car-stopping. 3

It took a looooong time to figure out what I was even going to write about. I played around with ideas all week, and all I figured was that I wasn't going to do anything that had to do with sex (which is, of course, almost as cliche as nonsubbing). I spent a lot of time looking at different items around the house, trying to think of something that could be even remotely funny or poignant. It wasn't until Sunday afternoon that I was able to come up with the car brake idea (thank you, late deadlines..)

I think there might have been a way to write this one up better. Something feels a little off - whether it's the presentation (I'm not sure the whole 'editorial' route was the right way to go), or whether it just needed a little more polish, I think I undersold this one.

Of course, when people don't submit, none of that matters. This time, sadly enough, one of the nonsubbers was our own Patrick Kozicky. The Vogons and I will have to lose a member for the first time, ending any hope we had of running the table. Damn you, Patrick... Damn you...


  1. Considering our team still had the highest overall score even with the non-sub, I'd say the Vogons still Vogon'ed.

  2. On non-submissions: we're knocking on the door of history. Despite having a game with four former winners and what looks like an all-star roster, we're about to run up to seven people eliminated to open the game as a result of not showing up. The record is nine, from Survivor VIII, after which there was just one more all game long.

    The lowest of the low was IV, where week one featured 100% participation, but 13 of the next 14 people to be eliminated were no-shows. I don't miss the days before four-hour warnings. I distinctly remember weeks where 7 or 8 out of 16 people would show up. That was brutal.