Listener 4333 - Discussion And Appreciation

[sunny-dave]

Listener No. 4333 - In the Event of Fire by Flying Tortoise

This thread is for the traditional 'elliptical' discussion, comments and thanks to the setter.

If you want to participate in a more direct conversation, a parallel thread has been started entitled "Listener 4333 - Hints and Help". There will be a link to this in the first reply on here.

[petefoxes]

Full grid, all clues solved, haven't found the quotation yet. This thread is what I (as a relatively new solver) want at this pre-PDM stage - an idea of how taxing others found the solve, not the breadcrumb trail of crosswordsolver. Will check there or the other AB thread (nice idea) when I've finished or given up!

[Zabadak]

I found this deeply unsatisfying - no unambiguous version of the quotation, a very messy grid at the end (is it supposed to be readable, you know, like with real words?) and not much joy with the entry adjustments either - I could really only justify a few with any conviction. And I lost heart trying to see the significance of the two 10's. Sorry FT, it's untidy, unconvincing and way too ambiguous. I cheerfully reinstate the Z-Cup.

[sunny-dave]

Hmmm - full grid and all clues solved many hours ago.

Eventually ground out a link to a quote which (in one version) will fit the rubric's instructions.

Not my favourite sort of Listener - I much prefer harder clueing with a more logical (even if highly cryptic) route to enlightenment, rather than just rambling around in the dark looking for the switch.

[Keepatit]

I don't have an Oxford Dictionary of Quotations and, in the absence of one, can't see any obvious reason for choosing among the possible word orders, given the proliferation of non-words. So as not to give too much away, could someone with an ODQ simply tell me whether, of the first three words in the quotation, the shortest comes first, second or third?

[perseverer]

Keepatit - it might seem slightly pointless to some, but I'll answer that on the other hints and help thread

[petefoxes]

PDM proved reasonably satisfying. The version of the quotation I recalled from memory isn't in my ODQ but I'm going with it as I think it obeys the preamble.

I agree the endgame could have been neater but I enjoyed the clues and the idea. Thanks, Flying Tortoise.

[Cruncher]

I wonder which ODQ edition is the correct one? I have the 4th edition (1992) which has one word missing and another spelt differently. There seems to be a consensus view of words and order on Google but little confirmation to be gleaned from the final grid. Find it difficult to believe that it could be this ambiguous

[Cruncher]

Good to see you back, RuthRobin. That was a ridiculous offensive last week even surpassing what might have been expected of EmCee's avatar

[AndrewG-S]

Zabadak, i think you and I can have a fight for the z cup this week, with maybe a few others scrambling for it too!

[EV_Solver]

All I can say is that I'd have thought that one of the Listener editors might have been able to open the latest ODQ in order to check the quotation. Obviously that was too much to expect. This sort of thing, together with the unpleasantness displayed by factions of Listener solvers such as that displayed in this forum recently, is why I now only solve the Listener once the IQ and EV (both of which are generally better than the Listener, I think) are out of the way.

[jim360]

Good grief! Not only do we have Listener infighting, but we might have to deal with broadsides from EV/ IQ solvers as well!

For Pete's sake...

[EV_Solver]

Sorry Jim360, I hadn't realised that this was a thread for those who ONLY solve the Listener, not those who solve the Listener AND other puzzles. I've seen from previous threads that you are the AB head policeman who makes it clear when people aren't wanted, so I'll get my coat. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.

[Philoctetes]

EV_solver - you are more than welcome here. I think Jim's comment was more of a "phew", perhaps sardonic in intent, and not intended to chase you away. We have no need of police, as we are really quite friendly. I agree with you that the possible variant solutions is sloppy at best. too many negatives against this week's effort, I feel

[jim360]

I'm not the AB police, but I did get myself involved in the discussion rather heavily. I was hoping that we'd see an end to it this week. The whole thing annoyed me rather and seeing people still talking about it is going to annoy me again. Especially when, yet again, people talk of factions and what not.

Do we have to keep bringing it up? I mean, if you don't even like the Listener so much as other outlets it seems bizarre to join in the discussion. You're welcome to, of course, but I can't say I share your opinions.

[EV_Solver]

Fortunately I was being very tongue in cheek with my response to Jim360...

Yes, many negatives against this week's. For me, puzzle of the weekend was Ifor's IQ - followed by Ottorino's EV, with Flying Tortoise trailing some way behind.

[jim360]

Hmm. If that's so, there's a certain irony then. I was thinking "wow, you're taking my post way too seriously!" ... Whoops. Sorry.

[EV_Solver]

I'm not sure I am being tongue in cheek when I say that should one be precluded from joining in a Listener discussion if one prefers other outlets? So presumably one can only join in discussions on one's favourite puzzle, and nothing else? I think there are several things to say about that:

1. I haven't said that the Listener isn't my favourite outlet. I've said that this week, of the three broadsheet advanced thematics, the Listener was the one I enjoyed least. Next week it will no doubt be different.

2. As you routinely comment on puzzles other than the Listener, aren't you breaking your own rule? And

3. As somebody who has been solving all three puzzles for more than fifteen years, I think I have the experience to comment on any of the three outlets.

Oh, and:

4. Maybe you should start your own forum so you can control who meets the very strict criteria you seem to have regarding who is fit to contribute to a discussion?

[jim360]

I never said you couldn't comment. I just was annoyed when it seemed like a pointless discussion appeared to be starting again. Let's just leave it there. There's no need to be arguing, really.

[jim360]

And, just to add to that, the whole discussion has perhaps made me more uptight than I would like. It did get rather intense, for some reason. Perhaps I saw it again when it wasn't there.

[TheBear69]

This question of the word order for the quote typifies one of the principal reasons I stopped submitting solutions: submitted solutions that have a good quote but in the wrong order will be marked incorrect. If one has fully filled the grid and then modifies it so that an apt quote appears, I consider the puzzle solved regardless of whether the order of the words is the one in a book I do not own and see no reason to acquire. I love the Listener but life is much better since I stopped worrying about the competition...