Do Not Avoid Not Making the Bell Not Ring | Taskmaster
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 01. 2023
- From series 12, make and wear a popcorn necklace with at least five pieces of popcorn and then do the opposite of the following: You must under no circumstances not avoid not making the bell not ring. The task is over when you have either rung the bell or not rung the bell and said "I did the right thing" three times. Fastest to not do the wrong thing wins. If you don't do the right thing, you lose five points.
------------
Follow the show at / taskmaster
Become a fan at / officialtaskmaster
Buy Taskmaster merch: taskmasterstore.com/
------------
In this Broadcast Award-winning, BAFTA and Emmy Award-nominated entertainment show, Taskmaster tyrant Greg Davies (Man Down, Cuckoo), with the help of his loyal assistant Alex Horne (The Horne Section and the show’s creator), sets out to test the wiles, wit and wisdom of five hyper-competitive comedians.
Comedians that have risked life, limb, and dignity in the hope of making the Taskmaster proud so far include: Frank Skinner (The Frank Skinner Show), Mel Giedroyc (The Great British Bake Off), Romesh Ranganathan (Asian Provocateur), Hugh Dennis (Outnumbered), Sally Phillips (Bridget Jones’ Diary), Rose Matafeo (Edinburgh Comedy Award Winner 2018), and Russell Howard (The Russell Howard Hour). Unaware of what awaits them in each wax-sealed envelope, only one competitor can become the victorious owner of His Royal Task-ness’ golden head and be crowned the next Taskmaster Champion. - Komedie
I love how Alex uses Susie Dent as the authoritative expert just like in series 2. She must get some of the most random phones calls and inquiries ever.
@@Kernel15 Yeah, he's been in dictionary corner quite a few times over the years. If they aren't friends they're certainly close acquaintances.
It's amazing they still use her even after Joe's revelation that she has too much to drink. I discount all of her opinions immediately.
@@CueyTKD The drinking, the fornication, the underwear swapping ... it all builds up doesn't it?
@@CueyTKD this isn't a dig, but genuinely curious; do you also discount your own opinions when you're drunk?
@Ravenous Cadaver I only discount my own opinions when I'm not, not eating ass.
Guz's realization that he had in fact done it right, coupled with Morgana's dance of victory, delights me so much. I miss this crew.
guz is the best
At the end Guz seemed to still be waiting to be told it was the opposite again and he actually lost
@@nk-dw2hm Hahahaha, yeah, he was side-eyeing Alex like he expected the other shoe to drop.
They lowkey did do it right im here to debunk this now
ikr, best series imho.
I could feel my brains slowly slipping out of my ears to avoid having to think about the not not not instructions.
It's easy. Just count the negatives. An even number of negatives is a positive. An odd number of negatives is a negative.
Then you'll love the mobile game "NOT NOT".
Liking this comment before I’ve even seen the vid… I only know that double negatives are my kryptonite and so a triple one is probably about to cause me to have a stroke.
Yes an even number of negatives cancel out
@@hellodavey1902 ---Math has never made me feel like stoking anything lolol. I apologize for my mind being in the gutter.
Five points to Alex for his "nuns still inhabited the place" pun.
took me a moment to get it actually
Nun puns
I didn’t get it
@@Aaaaaaaaaaaaa558 in*habit*ed. as in a nun's outfit
I was wondering why no one caught that! Lol
I did get this right, and pretty quickly. The key to this type of puzzle is to treat it like a math problem, not a language problem: An odd number of negatives is negative, an even number of negatives is positive.
There are six negatives, (opposite, no, not, avoid, not, not), so the instruction as a whole is positive: Ring the bell.
Thks so much🤣 english is my second language and I've been trying to figure out how there were 5 negatives in the original instruction.. missed the no circunstance part
Actually this logic is flawed! "Avoid" and "Make" aren't logically transitive verbs. So their meaning changes when you move the not around (the task masters are actually wrong - the correct interpretation of the task is that it doesn't really matter what happens to the bell)
yeah, it's literally just counting to 6
@@josiethompson5739
Here is the correct translation of transcription of logical values
not - opposite
not - under no circumstances
not
avoid - special case of not(which can be ignored), where it is becoming strictly positive(and can't be ignored) if joint with not in front(which is the case in this instruction) - for computer nerds avoid in most simplicified way can be expressed as y= (!x || x) - there are no simple equivalents in math as well - this is purely linguistical issue, which requires much more complex implementation to describe human logic states in mind
not
not
make in this case is another variation of a verb do - it is not about making bells but making bells to ring, which is all well in regards to transitive verb characteristics mentioned, but irrelevant for this case.
As for avoid - this could be a bit trickier, as there are differences between:
*not avoid doing* and *avoid not doing*, as they are opposite to themselves just by placement of not, so the movement of not on the other side of avoid makes it positive, while avoid itself is not positive here for this case
and we have not avoid not not doing, where actually we are left with not avoid doing and this not before avoid is not eliminated by not after, which would be an error. So, while your note is right about differences in not position in regards to avoid, this also does not apply here.
For me the "under no circumstances" was bit I failed - because by all grammar rules, this no in it has nothing to do with logic, that original poster put it as a no, but whole "under no circumstances" is actually "not" - it is not no, which is irrelevant here, because it does not apply to other parts.
Original poster perceived this as a logical math of very simplistic case, which by coincidence is working - for this case only, for all the wrong reasons, so the explanation was totally wrong why it worked. Your attempt for explaining was promising, but it went south with wrong conclusion that Taskmaster was wrong. Tsk, tsk...
The bit that might be messing with the mind of people might be avoiding part. The problem is when someone is telling you to avoid something - it does not necessarily mean, that you are forbidden to do so. While if you are told that you must *Not avoid* something, this means strictly, that you have to include it for whatever you are doing also the part that you must not avoid, so the opposite to avoid(but not necessalrily) is strictly to do the thing including the rest that are on your list. technically avoid is not part of simple logical state - it is enforcement or non-enforcement of logic - in this case it is about ringing the bell - if we had one extra not added, then the enforcement would be about negative part of instructions.
*Don't avoid the task!* can only be perceived as order to do the task. And we established earlier, that after avoid everything is positive.
So, not avoiding to ring the bell is the only right answer. You must ring the bell! You can ring other things as a part of the task, but ONE OF THEM *MUST BE THE BELL!!!*
The certainty in the delivery of “You’re going to summon something” is sending me!!
You could see the sadness in Victoria's face when she lost. I'm sure she is usually so organized that you could set your watch to her bathroom schedule.
Except when she's eating Crunchy Nut Cornflakes
I was actually kind of happy for her when that happened, it prevented the heartbreak that she was about to receive when she DQ'd for not wearing the necklace.
@@MurphyKitchellDQ'd would mean 0 points. Instead she got -5.
If Desiree had rung the bell, she would have won the series.
The way it was scored, rather than give points for the necklace task and then subtracting five, Desiree and Victoria just got a straight minus five. If they kept the necklace points then subtracted five, Desiree would have ended the series with 166 points, Guz (who would get one fewer point because of finishing behind Desiree) would end the series with 166 points, and Morgana (who would get two fewer points for coming in last) would end the series with 166 points. The series would end with a three-way tiebreak.
Man that would have been awesome
As it stands, I still feel like five points was a big penalty
I mean, the point deduction was advertised clearly. If you really played to win taskmaster then stuff like that would be avoided at all costs, most contestants couldn't even bother trying here so it really was just a coin toss. And it was probably better television as a result.
Victoria would have got zero without the penalty anyway because she didn't wear the necklace.
That's the game! We don't make the rules, that's only the task masters call
@@doommarauder3532 I think how the scoring was described in the task was more ambiguous than that: the wording could be interpreted either as "you will be assessed a five point penalty at the end of the task" or "you will be disqualified and lose five points" But then again, I think that Joe Wilkinson didn't touch the red green, so what do I know? (And I agree that taking the scoring seriously is ridiculous, but i am a ridiculous person, so it is on-brand for me).
Guz won because he respected Ethel.
Some great quotes here:
Alan - Y’know, I recently completed a master’s degree?
Desiree - Is anything ever alright?
Guz - This is gonna summon something
Morgana - *literal hysteria*
Victoria - What if I can’t do it? Do we all stay here forever?
I loved Alan's "every time I touch it, it ties itself in a knot," and Alex' "I'm not not laughing."
"This is the future of television" really got me.
"I admire your choke" with the close up of desiree's necklace, cheeky backhanded compliment by alex
Alan Davies just always looks like he's having a good time
I swear he gets off on other people's diminished hopes and dreams.
I love how, upon learning he has won 5 points, he still just sits there confused
He?
@@jonhohensee3258 gus
@@jonhohensee3258 yes
@@bekindtopeople498 no
"If you got that right at home, get out more" 😂😂
it's raining
@@yourmum69_420put on a coat
Guz wins the task, gets the five points, and stonefaces it. Not even a smile while everyone else is applauding 😂 just completely owning his victory
They seem to have missed that Victoria did not wear the necklace. She held it up and set it down.
She wore it on her hands? It never specifically said neck.
well it becomes irrelevant since she didnt ring the bell and failed anyways
@@canebro1 Bruh, that's called holding. Holding a necklace in your hand isn't wearing it any more than draping a towel over your head is being a woman.
@@canebro1 NECK-lace.
I think she was already doing so bad at the show in general, they just didn't bother.
I was all proud of myself for getting it right until Greg put me straight on blast. I do need to get out more.
I love how this task is actually incredibly simple since every double negative just cancels two out.
This is a perfect task to trip up over thinkers (like Victoria) who would get so immersed in all the negatives that they miss the full instructions. Also, I knew Susie Dent would be consulted.
No you didn't.
@@jonhohensee3258 To be fair, it's not the first time Alex consulted Susie as part of the show
@@maxington26 - Um, okay.
Couldn't you argue that to not avoid sth doesn't necessarily mean to do it? You just mustn't have the impulse to do it in the first place so then you wouldn't need to avoid the thing to not do it. For example i never played the piano but i didn't avoid it.
@@jonhohensee3258 Precedence obviously increases the likelihood of a third-party prediction of the same outcome in the future being an honest one. That's all I was saying.
absolutely my favorite task from series 12, thank you for uploading taskmaster team 🙏
Oof- tough call.
It's up there for sure but 12 has some NICE ones.
Competition is thick- innit?
Working backwards: Ring, don’t ring, ring, don’t ring, ring.
Technically, wouldn’t the “do the opposite of the following” also include saying “I did the right thing” three times and therefore make everyone lose five points?
Yes, you're right!
I would also add that the opposite of losing five points is gaining five points :D
That was my thought as well. It would have been great if one had said "I did the wrong thing"
@@Drayconic13 E. :P
I just realised this as well.
Under no circumstances must you not prevent the video from not stopping when you're not watching it.
I don't not misunderstand this
Que?
You must stop the video when you're not watching it.
Please don't avoid not failing to subscribe, and remember, every comment on our video does not help our channel's failure!
Did anyone else notice that Victoria made but did not wear the necklace? Unless I missed her putting the necklace on at least briefly, she actually failed the task twice
Guz there in the end trying to figure out if he under no circumstances has avoided not winning or not 😂
I didn't watch the video but I just wanted to comment about the brilliancy of the title. I sat for 5 minutes looking at it and breaking it up into pieces before I realized what it said. Do not avoid (=make sure) not making (=preventing) the bell not ring. Make sure to prevent the bell from Not ringing. So make sure the bell is ringing.
The verbal part of this task is kinda like stoichiometry.
The trick to this one is to think "Sod the task, if I fail this 1 instruction, I lose points." Therefore, focus all effort on interpreting the correct instruction at the start to avoid losing points, then start the popcorn necklace in an attempt to gain some points for the task.
Personally, I would just ask Alex to borrow a pen, and then cross out pairs of negatives until there's only one or zero left. The task is written down - use it!
@@NYKevin100 That was my thinking as well!
Don’t avoid not losing points by not avoiding not to make the bell not ring, is that what you’re saying?
@@NYKevin100 why the fuck do you even need a pen for it? is your mind that tiny, that you can't cross out the "nots" in your thoughts?
The real trick is being able to think of any strategy at all, knowing that said strategy is being filmed, timed, and scored on a point system where the quality of your notions will be placed on a leader-board in direct competition against your co-workers and friends.
I suppose you get used to it, but having the ability to _focus on anything while on stage_ is impressive to me.
particularly, focusing on a game, while remaining entertaining to your audience is a serious skill.
For those of you who don't know, licking the thread, specially licking so much of it, makes it usually worse because the fibers become bendier and are more likely to just bend and deform as soon as they find resitance rather than pushing through the needle hole like dry thread will.
She kept licking such big portions of it and making it harder for herself.
I'm already impatient for the next series to come out. Making us wait for new shows is just cruel lol.
I need to get out more. I counted those negatives and came to six and was so pleased when they said the same thing.
I feel about this task the opposite of not not-hating it.
Great job, you didn’t make my head not hurt 😵💫
I got the riddle right at home, and I should indeed get out more.
I got it immediately (and should get out more as well) but it's because one of my brothers liked speaking in double negatives as a teenager 😆
Really happy with myself for solving the riddle then brought back to earth by Greg telling me to get out more 10/10
I remembered the line, "Do the opposite of the following:" And I still decided that I would NOT have rung the bell. 😂 Guess I would've lost 5 points.
Same! I missed the fact that "avoid" counts as a negative because I was too busy focusing on all the "not"s. Whoops.
@@Verity58 same! I still don’t understand, if I was trying to not avoid a person I would be trying to run into them 🫠
They didn't account for "mustn't" as the opposite of must...
It's a tricky one, too much left open for interpretation, I broke it down to +'s and -'s as an equation and deduced to not ring the bell...
They could've argued either way considering the usual context of "everything you need to know is on the card"
@@nicholascrow8133 There wasn't a mustn't in the written directions.
Do the opposite of the following: You must under no circumstances not avoid not making the bell not ring.
If you cross out the 4 no(t)s: you are left with doing the opposite of "avoid making the bell ring"
@@CueyTKD There was a must, which the opposite is mustn't. I guess is comes down to interpretation of the conditions, whether you do the opposite of the sentence as a whole, or the opposite of each individual word...
I think looking at it logically and not just as a mathematical challenge of how many negatives there are...
It actually doesn't matter if they rang the bell or not.
Making the bell not ring is to stop it from ringing, should it start ringing.
Not making the bell not ring is to be uninvolved should it start ringing - it doesn't mean you have to actively make it ring - it just means you have to not be the reason it stops ringing.
Avoiding doing so is to show hesitance towards the task and not avoiding it is to show no hesitance towards it - so as long as they don't hesitate to leave the bell alone while/if it's ringing, they're fine.
And the opposite of "you must not" is just "you must", so that's a moot sentiment.
This means that the challengers have to complete these 2 criteria to pass:
1. Don't stop the bell from ringing.
2. Don't question your decision to leave the bell alone once it's ringing.
In other words, whether the contestants chose to ring the bell or not made absolutely no difference whatsoever and they all should have completed the challenge successfully.
I agree in almost everything. For me it's easier to think of it as "making the bell not ring" = "muting the bell", then all else is easier. However, after ringing the bell, Guz was the only one who muted it. So I would say that should make him fail, as he did stop the bell from ringing.
Well, logic is a branch of math, and you can think of it as a mathematical challenge as long as your definitions are expressive enough!
TL;DR: I am getting the same result as @SamuraiPipotchi.
Let me introduce a few logic operators (inspired by computation tree logic, you can google that if interested):
¬: logical negation
A: under all circumstances
E: there exists a circumstance
You could think of a circumstance as a possibility, or as a branch of the multiverse (if it even exists).
Here is how you would translate these English formulations in a mathematical form:
"not x" = ¬x
"must do x" = Ax
"can do x" = Ex
Here are some more:
"do the opposite of x" = ¬x
"under no circumstances x" = ¬Ex (equivalent to A¬x)
"avoid x" = ¬Ex (equivalent to A¬x)
If you transform the task into logic symbols, apply some logic rules, then transform it back to English, you get the following:
(do the opposite of the following:)(you must)(under no circumstances)(not)(avoid)(not)(making the bell not)(ring)
(¬)(A)(¬E)(¬)(¬E)(¬)(¬)(ring)
¬A¬E¬¬E¬¬ ring
¬¬EE¬¬E¬¬ ring
EEE ring
E ring
(you can)(make the bell ring)
It means that they are allowed to make the bell ring (but they don't have to).
@@danyboy86 I didn't notice him muting the bell afterwards. I suppose he would have failed if he did
@@jraph I always forget that mathematics can get that precise and varied with it's expressions
Okay, so I absolutely love this! I had something vaguely in this direction but you guys formalized it and found more inconsistencies. I love that there is a rigorous way to do this.
God, I should get out more, shouldn't I?
Alan and Victoria were on the same QI episode where there was a question on Double Negatives 😂
Couldn't you argue that to not avoid sth doesn't necessarily mean to do it? You just mustn't have the impulse to do it in the first place so then you wouldn't need to avoid the thing to not do it. For example i never played the piano but i didn't avoid it.
4:58 I'm so sad no one reacted to Alex's joke
I notice Victoria also failed to wear the necklace, which was the first part of the task.
Trying to solve this using the title made my answer to the riddle virtually impossible.
you’d get the same answer with the title
I absolutely love guz, he's hilarious 😂
Greetings from America! Love these episodes! Please keep them coming!!!
The moment it says to do the opposite just cross out the “not’s” and change “must” to “must not”.
"If you got that right at home, get out more". I've never felt more attacked in my life.
I love how the 2 things they were most worried about were not offending gods or ghosts.
My immediate thought was to place a piece of popcorn on the table for every negative, and then remove them in pairs
I'm not sure Gus Khan understand how churches work, and I'm loving it.
I had a middle school teacher that would literally write questions like this on the tests, lol.
"Is anything ever going to be okay ever again, Alex?"
"If you got that right at home, get out more." We've been called out, fellas.
“You must under no circumstances” oh Alex 😂
I can live with making the same mistake as Victoria :D Like her, I thought the double negatives were the easy part, then forgot the very first negative (do the opposite).
but Victoria had it written down in front of her. No excuse for her to forget
I wonder about humanity as a whole whenever I see clips from this show.
Okay, I read and deciphered and dissected the title like 10 times before I even allowed myself to click on the video😅
I stopped watching the clips of tasks when they started uploading full episodes, but I had to watch this one just so I could find out whether they had to ring the bell or not.
For puzzles like this I always take away pairs of "not"s until only 1 is left.
The title of the video alone broke my mind
Victoria only connects the words.😂
Symbolic logic is useful for parsing these kinds of sentences. The rule is that two negations are the same as nothing ("not not X = X"). So you count the number of negations, if it's even then they all cancel out (as was the case here), and if the total number of negations is odd then it's just like having one negation.
Am I the only one who would have just tied the bucket to my neck and smashed the bell?
Victoria also didn’t follow the part of the task that said you have to make AND wear the necklace.
I got hung up on "no circumstances" of all things
With just the title I knew it was “don’t ring the bell.”
Oh, come on, no one laughed at Alex "inhabited" pun? That was gold.
Can you explain it? I don't get the joke.
@@sjwimmel A nun's uniform is called a habit
@@paulpardee who tf would know that?
@@yourmum69_420 It's common enough knowledge that a 1993 Whoopi Goldberg film used it in its title - Sister Act 2: Back in the Habit
I don't expect young people or non-native speakers to know it, but the panel certainly should have.
I did get it right at home and yes, Greg, I need to get out more.
I don't need to not get out more.
It took me watching Alex's explanation twice to figure it out
Thank Christ I got the double negative question right. An even number of negative qualifiers ie. 6 = a positive statement. And then Greg destroyed all my happiness by (justifiably) tearing strips off me
Are we all just overlooking the fact that Alex said that the place used to be in-habit-ed by nuns?
That get out more from Greg felt personal
If there is an odd number of negatives it makes a positive but if there is an even number it makes a negative
I'm surprised the outcome wasn't meant to be "I have done the wrong thing, I have done the wrong thing, I have done the wrong thing"
Ethel would be proud.
damn he said “if you got that right at home, go out more” like ok bro didn’t need to come at me like that 😂
For those wanting to read the prompt in full: "do the opposite of the following: you must, under no circumstances, not avoid not making the bell not ring."
Please do a Taskmaster fan favorite/redemption series where contestants that did not win but were well liked are voted upon by fans and can compete again. Maximum one person from a series.
For example, my ideal lineup is:
James Acaster
Mel Giedroyc
Nish Kumar
Mike Wozniak
Asim Chaudhry
Please consider this!
God, Alex is a military genius...
To all those who struggle threading a needle... All you need to do is fold the thread so you have a loop, hold it close to the end so the loop is small and then thread the needle... Since it is now in a loop, the cut end of the thread with it's imperfections will not get stuck 😊
loop the thread around the needle, hold the thread with your thumb and index finger right next to the needle, pull the needle out, pinch your fingers a little bit more, and you can thread the now pointy end of the loop through the hole without any problems even though it being two threads
that is fair, I do need to get out more
Wonderful!
Ethel would be proud
Finally! Great to see a Leatherman make an appearance. I've watched so many tasks that would have been much much easier with a Leatherman handy.
Guz is definitely one of my favorites.
No he isn't.
I didn't try counting the negatives. I just knew they were supposed to ring the bell, because ringing a bell in an old church is flipping awesome, so of course you should do it.
So here is the thing - it says "Under no circumstances" the opposite of that could imply that there circumstances under which you can do whichever course of action you decided. Since the circumstances aren't clearly outline in the instructions, or lack there of, I would say anything is fair game.
I got the riddle right but def forgot about the “do the opposite” part. How infuriating
My gut instinct from the start was to just ring the bell, then as I was watching I changed my mind.
So you got the riddle wrong then
this is like a bad dmt trip
This is gonna summon something 🤣
Victoria talking about threading the needle making her queasy: I thought I was the only one.
@@jonhohensee3258 fixed it.
@@doctorstrangepants6706 no you didn't lmao
@@lred1383 try refreshing your app/webpage.
@@lred1383 lmao? I bet you barely chuckled.
@@jonhohensee3258 a polite nose exhale with a half-smile
Here's the thing though. The opposite of "under no circumstance" isn't "under every circumstance." It's "under some circumstance." So you should be able to just not ring the bell because you can make up a circumstance that was either met or not met and be right. It's poor word choice to use "circumstance"
The opposite of 'under no' would be 'under all.' You don't opposite circumstance.
Make the bell ring.
I tried the opposite of trying to not avoid not watching this video
"get out more", i would, but i solved that as it was read, without even thinking about it. at this point, i'm pretty sure if i stepped outside i'd spontaneously combust.
Every two negatives cancel each other out. Whatever is left over is the correct instructions.
Edit: apparently, I hadn't watched until the end :D
"the opposite of the following: You must under no circumstances not avoid not making the bell not ring." that's six negatives:
Opposite
No circumstances
Not
avoid
Not making
not ring
So ringing the bell should've been the right answer.
What a relief that they said the same thing in the show
@@hoihoi1312 did they? As in, in the full show? Or did I miss it in this clip?
I am not unamused by that.
I’m going to text my friends and tell them that Greg Davies says I need to get out more so we’ll all just have to go to lunch this week.
I thought the same way Victoria did...but I had to pause it and it took me like 10 minutes! 😆
i like the one guy who is wearing a sweater with a very specific simpsons reference (dignity)
I'm a little sad that I had no problem understanding those instructions. I need to get out more 🤣