Listener No 4397: We'll Always Be Together By Flying Tortoise

[AHearer]

Thanks, Flying Tortoise (glad you weren't used in the experiment -- if it really took place). Nice to have a hands-on puzzle again. A fairly straightforward set of clues, and very clear instructions.

[jim360]

I can't work my head around the fourth instruction. The clues haven't been too hard to work through, though.

[lyrabelacqua]

Oh I loved this. Best PDM of the year.

[kdgs2]

Great fun. Having studied experiments such as this, I'm now second-guessing myself about how much detail to include in the brief description of its result.

[Ruthrobin]

Yes, very nice, though I suspect there might be a quibble about the appositeness of the initial.

[jim360]

Damn right there's a quibble! Shame on the Listener for allowing this sort of sloppiness through!

Or not. I mean, who turns to crosswords expecting perfect accuracy in such matters? It's a great effort by Flying Tortoise, although it had me scratching my head for longer on the endgame than on the clues. Tempted to write more than just a "Brief description", mind.

[Hagen]

I can't make any sense at all of the fourth instruction. This puzzle is similar to last week in that I've spent longer on the endgame than the gridfill. Is this the new Listener trend - easy clues, PDM takes ages? Last week I got there, but this time I got fed up and threw in the towel. Judging from comments so far I'll regret not persevering when I see the solution, but I know when I'm beaten. Oh well, you can't win 'em all.

[Scorpius]

Pretty rapid grid fill and not too much experimenting to get the conversion. My initial hunch, prompted by something in Ahearer's comment' and an appropriate pair of initials, was completely wrong.
Still two issues to resolve. I don't altogether understand the first instruction, which appears pointless and at odds with something in the preamble. The second issue is how precisely to interpret the last word of the last instruction. There are two possibilities, both of which seem valid.

[doctormatt]

Very clever, and beautifully designed! Thanks.

[AHearer]

Apologies, Scorpius -- I intended my comment neither to lead nor to mislead!

[Scorpius]

No need for apologies, Ahearer. It's my devious mind that can turn the most innocent remark into an inadvertent hint.

I meant to say in my first post that I liked the clues in general, but 1ac strikes me as having a bit of wordplay that I think is more appropriate to the liberal wings of the Guardian crossword. I'm astonished that the Listener editors allowed it. One of the words in the clue is used for a cryptic meaning that it cannot possibly carry. If I have parsed the clue wrongly, apologies to the setter, but I've tried without success to come up with any parsing that legitimises the clue.

To Hagen, I would say the endgame here is far, far easier than last week's. Just follow the instructions and experiment. It took me under ten minutes, compared to the hours I spent on Pointer's puzzle. You might kick yourself when you see the solution

[crucifer]

Also completely bemused by the first instruction. Other than that a fairly gentle, but fun, outing. Recreating the grid in Excel helped with the experimentation.

[icynorth]

Nice clues, but I simply can't see why the fourth instruction is necessary. It seems to hint at an experiment yet to come.

But thanks for an enjoyable solve, Flying Tortoise!

[Hagen]

Thanks for the encouragement Scorpius! I had another look and I've got it now, though I have much the same unresolved issues as you mention in your earlier post. I can sort of see what the first instruction is aiming for but if I'm right (which I may well not be) but there is indeed a potential contradiction. Also the final instruction can have two valid interpretations, as you say, but as I don't send solutions in I'm not too bothered about that.

A clever idea but I'm not keen on puzzles that take me much longer to do the endgame than the gridfill, and even then leave lingering doubts. Last week's may have been harder but I found it much more satisfying.

[Scorpius]

Icynorth, the fourth instruction is necessary to solve the puzzle.

[crucifer]

Like Hagen I think I've worked out what the first instruction might be hinting at now. I suspect there are going to be many, many differernt approaches to the submissions for this one. Will be interesting to see how the judging pans out.

[emcee]

Not happy with the endgame to this puzzle.

According to the preamble we must use ALL cells of the grid in the final representation. At the moment I have a "final" representation but, thanks to the first instruction, I feel there is more to do.

Hmm...

[upsetter]

Almost worth living another 3 weeks just to see RR's representation on the LWO blog.

[perseverer]

........ and an appropriate animation from Dave Hennings

[Hagen]

It's just dawned on me exactly what the first instruction is all about and there's no contradiction. I was missing a vital point before. But as Crucifer there are several (at least two) different approaches here. Nice idea but far too vague an endgame. Wasn't FT's last puzzle the "Abandon ye" Inferno one, where there was a lot of ambiguity too?

[icynorth]

Thanks, Scorpius. Having followed all the instructions physically, I see now why the 4th instruction is there, but it's more aesthetic than scientific.

One point I will raise is the choice of bold letters. These imply a factor which could introduce variance into the results. I could suggest better examples.