Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

I've got one I want to post, but I don't wanna interrupt an ongoing game. Will someone PM me WHEN it's a good time???

excon

PS> No, it's not a good one. You smart people will be able to figure it out on your first try...

---

How about when this one is finished, which should be no time, if it hasn't already. (Sorry, I'm just trying to catch these posts in order so I don't miss anything. So I don't know what's ahead.)

I can PM you. And it doesn't matter if it's not "good." It's nice to alternate between easier ones and harder ones.

I'm sorry - I really have some junk I HAVE to get done in a short time before I have to work, so I don't have time to finish looking through these. I'm just sure, however, that someone's got this solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Looking

Okay, so the two men were playing horseshoes. There is a dispute as to who is closest to the stake. The murderer gets angry and hits the man with a horseshoe, killing him. I wouldn't be surprised if this has happened before and the killer is frustrated with the man. To cover this up, the murderer removes the stakes and takes the horseshoes with him, and moves the sand around to erase footprints. He tries to make it look like the man was trampled by a horse. I have this image of him using the horseshoes to add to the effect by putting prints in the sand.

Do we need to figure out anything else, or is this it? Should be page ExCon?

---

We have a winner. :)

Sorry for the delay - work on Saturday and Sunday is just very hectic.

This is really pretty darn close. There isn't anything about it having happened in the past, but it wouldn't surprise me either. And there's nothing about erasing footprints - I don't see the need for that cause the dead guy could've been walking and not ON a horse. (Or so the police could surmise.) He does remove the stakes and horsehoes though. And he very likely could've dropped a few to make some prints but it doesn't say.

So overall, very close to the original and nothing else to solve. :)

Side notes: I would call horseshoes a recreation not a sport, but that's me. Also, the reason I originally said the dispute wasn't over an object is because the dispute itself was over how close the horseshoes had been to the post, which can be judged by the sand as well - so I wasn't thinking of the dispute being over the horseshoes themselves. I didn't think about it being misleading. (My bad.) If I'd been asked if material items were "involved" I would have answered that differently. (But enough of defending myself. :D)

As for the beach - yes, it can be played there. But they have stuff like that in parks and such. I figured if someone thought about a park, you could get to the whole game/recreational thing a lot faster, but wasn't sure how quickly anyone would randomly come up with something like a park. But you got to the game thing pretty easily anyway so it doesn't matter. I did consider the plausibility of the cover-up on a beach. Would horses ever be on a beach so that the police would believe this? But then you mentioned wild horses on a beach so I decided that was OK. And a park could have horseback riding so that would've worked too. I admit, I was pretty iffy on all that.

Hello:

Glad that one got solved... I've actually got two. The first one's easy.

You're in a square cabin. There's a window in each wall. Each window faces south. You look out one window and see a bear. What color is the bear??
--------------------------

THIS one is going to be harder... You're on a ship in the northern hemisphere headed south. In your room, you have a table, a bed, a fan, a sink and a toilet. Using one or a combination of those items, you'll be able to tell WHEN your ship crosses the equator.

What will you use, and why?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by morgaine300

We have a winner. :)

Sorry for the delay - work on Saturday and Sunday is just very hectic.

This is really pretty darn close. There isn't anything about it having happened in the past, but it wouldn't surprise me either. And there's nothing about erasing footprints - I don't see the need for that cause the dead guy could've been walking and not ON a horse. (Or so the police could surmise.) He does remove the stakes and horsehoes though. And he very likely could've dropped a few to make some prints but it doesn't say.

So overall, very close to the original and nothing else to solve. :)

Side notes: I would call horseshoes a recreation not a sport, but that's me. Also, the reason I originally said the dispute wasn't over an object is because the dispute itself was over how close the horseshoes had been to the post, which can be judged by the sand as well - so I wasn't thinking of the dispute being over the horseshoes themselves. I didn't think about it being misleading. (My bad.) If I'd been asked if material items were "involved" I would have answered that differently. (But enough of defending myself. :D)

As for the beach - yes, it can be played there. But they have stuff like that in parks and such. I figured if someone thought about a park, you could get to the whole game/recreational thing a lot faster, but wasn't sure how quickly anyone would randomly come up with something like a park. But you got to the game thing pretty easily anyway so it doesn't matter. I did consider the plausibility of the cover-up on a beach. Would horses ever be on a beach so that the police would believe this? But then you mentioned wild horses on a beach so I decided that was OK. And a park could have horseback riding so that would've worked too. I admit, I was pretty iffy on all that.

---

I was thinking mostly of erasing all indication there had been a game of horseshoes, and the killer would want to get rid of his footsteps - or at least I would if I were to kill someone. ;) I think describing horseshoes as a game is best. I don't think it's a sport either. I don't think the question and answer about being over an object was misleading - they weren't disputing who would get the horseshoe, just who would get the point. I think the game went well and was fun. It was even more fun because of some of the tangents - like my thinking there were actually horses involved. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

Glad that one got solved... I've actually got two. The first one's easy.

You're in a square cabin. There's a window in each wall. Each window faces south. You look out one window and see a bear. What color is the bear????
--------------------------

THIS one is gonna be harder.... You're on a ship in the northern hemisphere headed south. In your room, you have a table, a bed, a fan, a sink and a toilet. Using one or a combination of those items, you'll be able to tell WHEN your ship crosses the equator.

What will you use, and why?

excon

---

I've read the first one so I'll disqualify myself.

I'm working on the second one. I'm thinking it has to do with how the water swirls in the sink or toilet - i.e. clockwise vs. counter-clockwise. At the equator there would be no swirl in the toilet or sink. Is this right?

Quote:

---

I don't think the question and answer about being over an object was misleading - they weren't disputing who would get the horseshoe, just who would get the point.

---

Yeah, I guess that's how I was thinking. That makes me feel better.

Quote:

---

I think the game went well and was fun. It was even more fun because of some of the tangents - like my thinking there were actually horses involved.

---

LOL. I'd say it probably didn't help when you asked if there were wild horses and I said possibly. Except that is a correct answer - they just weren't involved. (But I think you created horses before you ever said that. Just just SO badly wanted those beautiful wild horses. We can pretend we were in Hawaii if you like.)

Quote:

---

You're in a square cabin. There's a window in each wall. Each window faces south. You look out one window and see a bear. What color is the bear??

---

White.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by morgaine300

Yeah, I guess that's how I was thinking. That makes me feel better.



LOL. I'd say it probably didn't help when you asked if there were wild horses and I said possibly. Except that is a correct answer - they just weren't involved. (But I think you created horses before you ever said that. Just just SO badly wanted those beautiful wild horses. We can pretend we were in Hawaii if you like.)

---

I love Hawaii. One of my best friends and his girlfriend got engaged there in June. They saw the wild horses on the beach one night and thought it was magical. What a special memory. :)

I wonder when I do the puzzles how much info to give. You could have just said yes, no, etc. and not clued me in about the assumption. The game would have been much longer, though as I reread the questions I did see Unky's question about whether animals were involved. Just due to that, I would have questioned you. Anyway, I notice in other puzzles that people indicate "false assumption", so I guess that's standard.

I think you're right about the sink and toilet. I know there is something to that. Although that's more of a science puzzle than lateral thinking puzzle. (We had a riddle/puzzle thread somewhere. What happened to it?) I think the fan would be totally mechanical and that wouldn't matter.

Unky'll know that one.

I'm trying to see if I can find something obscure that Adam may not have found, cause he seems to know them all. I was hoping he hadn't heard the horseshoe one but didn't know if it'd last until Monday. 'Course I didn't expect us to get a second person to help. Really difficult for just one person to solve these.

Anyway, let's see if we can find a more obscure one that Adam can play too, since he should be back on tomorrow morning. And I'm off tomorrow so I should still be able to be here, if if it doesn't get solved in the morning.

J-Lo, are you still able to be here often enough to host one more? If so, you can do one.

Have you ever thought about trying to make one up yourself? I'm working on that. I'd been thinking about that for a while, but when you mentioned one came from a TV show, it occurred to me that I can get something from TV, game, book, something.

I also have a bunch of those two-minute mysteries. Anyone ever done those?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Looking

Anyway, I notice in other puzzles that people indicate "false assumption", so I guess that's standard.

---

Yes, that's standard. It's also common to say it anyway, even when it does fit. Like when Unky asking if the dispute was over whatever, when it had never been established about a dispute. I chose to answer it, but it's "fair game" to still say "assumption made" and not say that's it right. If people make too many assumptions, I'll actually do that just to try to nip it in the bud and sort of remind people not to. (I think I did that once early on.)

And it's up to the host how much they want to give away in their answers, by qualifying, etc. Some people stick as much as possible to just yes, no and irrelevant, and take the statements VERY literally. The don't like a "word," they can say no and that's it. It does take longer that way and makes it more difficult, but is a fair way to play. I personally find it easier to not be so stringent about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by morgaine300

I think you're right about the sink and toilet. I know there is something to that. Although that's more of a science puzzle than lateral thinking puzzle. (We had a riddle/puzzle thread somewhere. What happened to it?) I think the fan would be totally mechanical and that wouldn't matter.

Unky'll know that one.

I'm trying to see if I can find something obscure that Adam may not have found, cause he seems to know them all. I was hoping he hadn't heard the horseshoe one but didn't know if it'd last til Monday. 'Course I didn't expect us to get a second person to help. Really difficult for just one person to solve these.

Anyway, let's see if we can find a more obscure one that Adam can play too, since he should be back on tomorrow morning. And I'm off tomorrow so I should still be able to be here, if if it doesn't get solved in the morning.

J-Lo, are you still able to be here often enough to host one more? If so, you can do one.

Have you ever thought about trying to make one up yourself? I'm working on that. I'd been thinking about that for a while, but when you mentioned one came from a TV show, it occured to me that I can get something from TV, game, book, something.

I also have a bunch of those two-minute mysteries. Anyone ever done those?

---

I will only be here until 5:00 or 6:00 on Wednesday - whatever time I leave work that day. I'm pretty sure I won't get much work done this week, but my firm is great. They know how hard I work and they are already teasing me about this week being a bust. :o

I have a couple of possibilities. I have thought about making one up. The site I used for the last couple is full of that - either people making up puzzles about something that happened to them or something historical.

I don't know the two-minute mysteries. Maybe we should get one of each going. I'll send you a PM to make sure you don't know the ones I'm looking at. Give me a couple of minutes. :)

Okay, we are assuming we got Excon's answers right, so I'm putting up a new puzzle.

He lied about his age but he was telling the truth. How could this be?

Don't know how much time I'll have tonight but I'll try. There's other stuff I should be getting done, and oughta try to leave this as checking in here and there.

Did he lie to another person or persons (as opposed to himself)?

Is it relevant whom he lied to?

Did this person really exist?

Was he born on February 29? :p

Was he a human? (We're going to get that one on every puzzle now.)

Is what he was telling the truth about also his age?

Don't know how much time I'll have tonight but I'll try. There's other stuff I should be getting done, and oughta try to leave this as checking in here and there. Same here. I need to get to bed at a decent hour and I still have things to do tonight.

Did he lie to another person or persons (as opposed to himself)? Yes

Is it relevant whom he lied to? Yes - though the solution would work anyway

Did this person really exist? Yes

Was he born on February 29? No, but interesting thought.

Was he a human? (We're going to get that one on every puzzle now.) Yes

Is what he was telling the truth about also his age? No - good question

OK, new kind of 'puzzle.' For anyone interested, I've started some things called mini mysteries. They're actually mysteries, as opposed to puzzles, but they require some of the same kind of thinking. Don't know how well these will go over, but we'll try them.

The one advantage is that you don't have to worry about your schedule. You can solve what you see, and there aren't any questions to follow. You only need check if anyone's solved it yet or not. (And still guess on your own even if they haven't.)

The disadvantage is they're hard for me to type up. I can't type quickly, but copying something off a book is difficult.

For those who can't seem to find new threads:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/games/...ml#post2547748

Is this person still alive?

Is/was this man famous or relatively well-known?

Is/was this person a country leader of sorts (president, prime minister, king, dictator, etc.)?

Is the referenced "his" in the setup referring back to the "he" who lied? (i.e. he lied about his own age)

Is this person still alive? I assume you mean in real life vs the puzzle - No

Is/was this man famous or relatively well-known? No

Is/was this person a country leader of sorts (president, prime minister, king, dictator, etc.)? no

Is the referenced "his" in the setup referring back to the "he" who lied? (i.e. he lied about his own age) yes

Yes, I meant in real life. I can't imagine he'd be dead in the puzzle and still be able to tell anyone anything. (Unless you want to bring the ghosts into it.)

Was his occupation relevant?

Was his station in life relevant?

Does "lie" here mean telling something that was factually untrue?

Does "telling the truth" here mean something that was factually true?

Or, does "telling the truth" here mean only what he thought to be the truth but perhaps was not?

I assume this is someone we would not know of through knowing your basic history? (i.e. just some story handed down that your average person would not know)

Are there particular circumstances surrounding this lie that are relevant? (How's that for an open-ended question.)

Does "age" mean his actual chronological years of being alive out of a womb?

Is the setting in which this lie telling took place relevant? (Take it any way you like: country, type of area, building, whatever. If you say yes I'll narrow it down later.)

Are the people he told the lie to relevant?

(Note that I'm trying to distinguish between circumstances, as in events or relationships, etc. versus setting like the type of location, or both if relevant.)

Based on the assumption this is someone we don't know of (since he wasn't famous), would it be relevant to know the time he lived in?