Widdersbel

There are Baking Industry Awards? Of course there are. I looked them up. And in case you’re wondering, yes, they do have a Rising Star category…

I’m starting to think this must be a parody

Being so xenophobic you’d deny yourself a post-pub kebab…

And often baked beans and hash browns from another former colony

fish and chips, the native British dish invented by sephardic Jewish migrants in the 18th century using a vegetable no one on this island had encountered before the 16th

This week:

-Three more universities rejected Trump's extortion compact
-Over a dozen airports refused to play Kristi Noem's propaganda video
-30+ press outlets refused to comply with Pete Hegseth's new restrictions

The only way to rebuke Trump's authoritarianism is solidarity.

Clues by Sam A daily logic puzzle where you deduce who are criminals and who are innocent!

Typical - having said I know how to do these puzzles, I got stuck for ages at one point today and had to use a hint… and of course I was missing something blindingly obvious… 🤦‍♂️

I solved the daily Clues by Sam (Oct 18th 2025) in less than 20 minutes
🟠🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
cluesbysam.com

I wouldn’t call myself good but this is similar to the logic puzzles I used to do a lot as a kid, and it seems I haven’t lost the technique after all these years… and it’s my kind of fun!

Okay Idk what kind of game it is, I'm wishlisting Little Rocket Lab for when I next have a working gaming PC

👇👇

All I would say is if you think you’re sure you have enough evidence and it tells you otherwise, look again at the evidence and make sure you have considered ALL possible scenarios… and use the tagging, it’s very helpful

I’ve done that a few times but always on closer inspection I’ve seen that I was incorrect - usually because I’ve made an incorrect assumption elsewhere or miscounted…

Clues by Sam A daily logic puzzle where you deduce who are criminals and who are innocent!

Does everyone have room for one more puzzle in their daily routine? I’ve been very much enjoying this fun new-ish daily logic game - it’s a neat, simple concept, nicely executed…

I solved the daily Clues by Sam (Oct 11th 2025) in less than 12 minutes
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩
cluesbysam.com

Yeah, unsurprising but it’s still a lovely one-liner

👏👏

This is begging to be turned into a cryptic crossword clue...

That's not a hot take, that's a perfectly reasonable take!

It’s really good! Far from solving all across clues but I’ve solved several down clues none the less. The real satisfaction will come from working out this “VERY dubious” instruction… 😂

Printed for the train home. Rubric looks fairly standard but I shall reserve judgment until I've worked out this "dubious" theme...

I don't normally get round to the Genius (too many crosswords, not enough time) but this has made me want to go over to the Guardian and download it right away...

Amazing! 👏😂

This is brilliant - no commentary needed, the evidence speaks for itself…

You know who doesn't integrate? People like Robert Jenrick. You think he works out at the local leisure centre? Goes to the Tuesday night pub quiz? You think his golf club lets anyone play? Or his private members' clubs let anyone in? He puts the ick in prick

I’ve not set for the Times or Telegraph but I understand they have lists of acceptable abbreviations - which differ on many points, as if to emphasise the arbitrary nature of these lists. But whether or not you agree with their selections, the principle is sound: they are playing fair by solvers

And for what it’s worth, I’ve found that the two pro editors I’ve worked with, Tom J and Mike H, show excellent judgment - not necessarily consistent with each other but consistent within their own approach and understanding of what their solvers want

For Azed, the former approach is what the solvers want, for the average daily cryptic, something towards the other end of the spectrum is more appropriate. But neither of these is absolute, there’s leeway, and this is why we need editors…

What I’m getting at is that there’s a dichotomy here - either you accept that Chambers is the sole (de facto infallible) arbiter or you exercise subjective judgment on what it’s fair to expect your audience of solvers to know. Neither approach is inherently better and there’s no definitive answer…

Completely carparked: Brits have 546 words for getting drunk In the English language it seems almost any word can be used to describe having one too many alcoholic drinks. There's a simple rule to remember when sober, just '-ed' according to researchers.

Quite right. We should limit ourselves to the “official” list of 546 words for drunk…
www.euronews.com/culture/2024...

Also acknowledge this doesn’t address the apparently arbitrary exclusion of other common abbreviations like O for organisation in your original post - Chambers doesn’t help itself by not listing citations. Do we trust their lexicographers?

To me, it comes down to the type of crossword you’re setting and who your audience is. I make no judgement but I know what type of crossword I prefer (and it’s not Azed)

I have no opinion on whether or not they *should* be in the dictionary, I’m only saying that this is the lexicographer’s justification. The pertinent question is whether this counts as sufficient grounds for their use by crossword compilers. And the answer to that is subjective…