Moderator: Community Team
rizky_biznezz wrote:Not stupid probably trying too hard did u get any letter clues from jokes
Razorvich wrote:Cracking the SMILEY CODE is one thing..... knowing its meaning is another
Winged Cat wrote:As pointed out in PM, "above numbers" is vague. There are numbers in the facts, but are the dates included? The "2016" from the post title? The post time (which varies depending on time zone of who's looking)?
Winged Cat wrote:I wonder if the silver condition as stated is incorrect. It says "finish", not "win", but games I have finished and not won recently have not gotten me silver tokens. Presumably games started before the challenge are not valid for tokens, but in games started during the challenge where the winner gets a silver token, no one else in the game does.
Man from Modesto wrote:A-ha!
If you get a smiley token, all your token points count, not just the silver paired with a bronze. That is why you only need one.
Razorvich wrote:Smiley Token:
Sum_above_numbers_search_game_results_smiley_token_settings
Razorvich wrote:Add all the numbers (not written numerals like "nine" or "ten", but numbers like 9 and 10) to get a game number
2016
153
29
21
24
325
365
6
25
11
325
1582
10
1582
11
2
14
1752
______
8253
Razorvich wrote:SEPTEMBER 2016 - Smiley Challenge
by Razorvich on Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:43 am
Official Monthly Challenge for September 2016
Winged Cat wrote:Thanks for the challenge, but as normal for this type of thing*, some of the clues were technically wrong or not usable.
*Not a fault of you specifically. Rather, it has been my experience that almost everyone who tries putting together a puzzle like this runs into this problem unless they are careful to guard against it specifically - and guarding against it can be tricky.
Winged Cat wrote:There are too many forum posts to manually search them all by hand in the time given. (Literally. Even if someone spent 16 hours a day - every waking hour, on average - spending maybe 30 seconds per topic on average to scan the entire topic - which is probably a bit fast considering the length of some topics - checking every day from 9/3 to 9/30 inclusive, they would only check 108,000 topics. There are currently 140,508 topics. "Recent posts" is not a usable heuristic: the earliest of those was posted in 2006.) Checking those posts, there is not anything obviously googable. So I am wondering how we were meant to find them.
Winged Cat wrote:Please do not simply brush off these complaints as sour grapes. (As you know from PMs, I was close on decoding; I just guessed the wrong non-letter, non-space characters. And I've got enough points for the CA medal.) They are honest problems with your clues, offered as things for you to consider so that next time you can make a better challenge.
CatchersMitt14 wrote:Winged Cat wrote:Thanks for the challenge, but as normal for this type of thing*, some of the clues were technically wrong or not usable.
*Not a fault of you specifically. Rather, it has been my experience that almost everyone who tries putting together a puzzle like this runs into this problem unless they are careful to guard against it specifically - and guarding against it can be tricky.
There were no incorrect clues in the puzzle. As for usability, they ultimately all had a purpose, perhaps some being more helpful than others. Some clues were more direct and some clues were open to multiple interpretations. That is just part of being a puzzle.
Not all puzzles are constructed with a linear path between the question and the answer. Some people enjoy those types of puzzles. Plenty of puzzles are designed with multiple paths and various red herrings causing the solver to piece together clues and weed through assumptions in order to complete the task. Take sudoku for example. At the beginning each box has several answers that seem to fit. It is not until you find and enter some correct numbers that you can begin to eliminate options for other boxes.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users