Tapas Quiz Night, Question 2/?

Hello, it’s nice to be home.

The wedding was fun, the bride beautiful and the speeches predictable. Rather on the posh side event and, as coincidence would have it, it seemed tailored for this blog: guests sat around big round tables, 10 people each (rather tightly I must say), and the wine was… inclusive.

And thank goodness nobody remembered to have a quick Quiz Night during the wedding!

Talking about Quiz Nights, if you remember, we’ve only made ONE question to date on our Tapas Quiz Night, and ended up without a sound conclusion as to what are exactly those papers commonly known as “Reservation Sheets”, although we’re sure about what they aren’t, we haven’t come around to explain what they’re supposed to be.

Since they’re NOT “Reservation Sheets”, we’re going to call them “Tapas Bar Sheets” instead, which is sufficiently vague and uncompromising for the intended in this early stage of the game.

QUESTION: What is it that isn’t on the Tapas Bar Sheets that should have been but is when it shouldn’t have been?
 

ANSWER: Continuity.
 

Let’s start, once again, by analyzing facts (or better said, said facts, because, as we know, there’s very little factual about them…):

- R: Rachael Manpilly says she reserves at Tapas for Tapas a table for 9, apparently with some difficulty, on Sunday April 29th, for the rest of the week.

- QN: We have between Sunday April 29th and Monday May 07th, three Quiz Nights, of which TWO have been attended by the T9.

- M: Maddie disappears on Thurday, May 3rd.

- T: A Tennis dinner is reserved at the Tapas Bar for Friday May 4th. It’s cancelled on that day.

- P: The T9 had planned to fly back home on Saturday May 5th.

That is the data.

Quite clearly we can see that BOTH the T9 as the MW OC are aware, as of Sunday 29th, where these particular guests are to have dinner until from that Sunday until Friday May 4th.

Notice that Friday May 4th is included, as, and this is an indication to be remembered later, the T9 names don’t appear because they are supposedly included in the Tapas Tennis Dinner, thus have assured a place for a meal that evening.

When one does a block booking, as was the case of Rachael’s reservation, it’s usually one continuous act. Whoever from the OC MW Staff took that reservation down did it, as is expectable, in a single CONTINUOUS action. Or not?

Let’s first see what is considered CONTINUOUS and NOT-CONTINUOUS
 

Thanks to our OC friends, they have facilitated our task in explaining these concepts because the Tapas Bar Sheets have a perfect example of a CONTINUOUS action: the time constraints for reservations between Tuesday 1st and Wednesday 3rd:

Notice how the same mistakes are exactly repeated in these three sheets. The 7 pm, instead of 7 p.m., the “màximo” instead of “máximo”; the dot on the ii with a “º” as a reader noticed, and all the letters written in the exact same way, a perfect copy of one another.

What does this indicate? All three are papers apparently written at the same time in a CONTINUOUS. When you know you have to fill the exact same information on separate sheets of paper you tend to be repetitive and do it in the exact same manner.

Logic dictates it, that you do it the same way because it’s all part of one SINGLE and CONTINUOUS physical act. Later you will see that they were not written as we’ve just described, but, for now, the idea is for you to understand what we mean by a CONTINUOUS action.

But even if they were written as described these “reservation time constraints” lack CONTINUITY when set in the larger picture. Yes, we lack the first two Tapas Bar Sheets, so we don’t know if that information is written down or not, but we sure know that it’s not on the Friday’s sheet:

Why not?

Remember that on Friday IS INCLUDED in the T9 Tapas Booking action, so whoever wrote those three, should have written also on Friday’s, but that wasn't he case, as different handwritings prove.

Stranger is the fact that whoever took Russ’s reservation, didn’t notice that the paper with the English template finished on the Thursday.

And that another totally different kind of template had, apparently, to be used. A new book would naturally start either at the beginning of the month (Tuesday) or at the beginning of a week (Sundays), but that wasn't so.

Strange for a place that offers wine by the gallon, would be so stingy and save on two or three pages…

And not even that, becuase we're not talking about new books, are we?

If you look really, really close at the time constraints, you see, that in fact, it was not a SINGLE and CONTINUOUS act, but just a SINGLE one, and then copied. All characters are not similar, they are EXACTLY alike, even the spacing between the words are identical.

It’s IMPOSSIBLE for someone to write a two-line phrase exactly alike. These are photocopies of one another.

This means there was no reservation books, just separate, loose sheets of photocopied templates.

The holes on the left clearly show that to be also.

Why then change templates in the middle of the week? Copiers down?

Why not just keeping taking copies of the same paper as many times needed? That is an answer for a following Quiz Night question…

It’s a fact that whoever wrote down Rachael's reservation, wasn’t the same person who wrote down the Tennis Dinner reservation, so we can only suppose that was done by a different person and before.

We could envisage that having been written on Saturday, but Saturday, as we all know, the Tapas is closed.

So we know, from what we’re presented, that on SUNDAY, someone knew that 12 people were to have dinner on the next Friday, and that a different person altogether, got to know that of those 12 people, 9 were all from the same group.

Not important for today’s post, but very significant for a following question on our Quiz Night.

But let’s look attentively at the reservation of our T9 friends

:

We hope that you can now understand when we say it’s not a CONTINUOUS action.

The information is NOT written in the same manner, and differs slightly from sheet to sheet. For example, when one is repeating the same information, one tends to write things like brackets in the same way, which isn’t the case.

To say that the information written on Tuesday’s sheet was the first time the information was written down, thus justifying being different and more complete, is ridiculous, because that “first” time is supposed to have been done on Sunday…

By the way, we do think that Tuesday’s sheet was the FIRST, but that's because we believe that the first two are not only missing from the PJ Files as they most likely don’t even exist.

Notice also the different slant on the handwriting between the first two and the last one, clearly demonstrating that this information wasn’t all written down in the SINGLE and CONTINUOUS action that one would expect to have been done.

Now if you look at those sheets again, you see many other incongruences in CONTINUITY. Each will provide you with important information. Entertain yourself.

One last question, in anticipation of the “inclusiveness” upcoming question: are the “gastos” a CONTINUOUS or a NON-CONTINUOUS action? (please do not limit yourself to the wine details, there are many, many other interesting things to see…)

We hope you’re finding our Tapas Quiz Night interesting… by the way, would it cross your mind to have dinner at the same time?

Post Scriptum:
We stand correction. A reader has noticed that we were saying that the T9 were expected to fly back on Sunday May 6th, when, in fact, it was to be on Saturday May 5th. The post has been corrected accordingly.

Non-relevant information such as this one should undergo the exact same verification procedures as the relevant one. Our sincere apologies.