Comments on: Inquisitor 134 MICKEY MOUSE by Charybdis

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 10:37:09 +0000

The Crossword Centre website (run by Derek Harrison) is long-established. There is a link to it from this site – click on Links to see it (and other websites related to crosswords).

By: Hihoba

Hihoba — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 08:22:26 +0000

I did not see the original post and so have no idea what was implied or stated. Indeed I was not aware that the message board even existed until it was brought to my notice by Colin B! All I saw was a correction to a prize puzzle on a board where the heading is the sentence “Please do not discuss (or even mention) current puzzles until after the solution is published.”
I do agree that the problem in this case is minor, but the principle is major. Many solvers are unaware that there are blogs and message boards, and they should not be disadvantaged. Solvers who do read them deserve all they get if they believe the posts from “ignorant pigs” (to quote Paul B)!

By: Tilsit

Tilsit — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 17:55:28 +0000

As the person who removed the original offensive post. I agree entirely with Mike L. People who had seen the original postwer also disadvantaged as it implied the puzzle was in some way faulty.

By: Paul B

Paul B — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 15:49:45 +0000

Quite right too. You don’t need to be a genius, Hihoba, to work out who caused the (incredibly small) problem relating to this fine puzzle, or to see that no advantage was given.

The truly unfortunate thing about this is to witness how a fellow who is, by common consent, something of an ignorant pig should be paid so much attention.

By: Mike Laws

Mike Laws — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:26:58 +0000

Off your high horse Hihoba, please.

The original comment, couched in sufficiently provocative and gratuitously offensive terms to be desrving of its quick deletion, was seen by Charybdis, and provoked a clarification (which no one with a sense of humour would have needed), and an apology for an error, which was so transparently so that it would not have inhibited any competent solver from completing the puzzle correctly. I endorsed his comments.

No one, other than a naive neophyte, would uave been advantaged in any way. The gist of a privately received message pointed out that the crossword is more important than the blog. I’ll endorse that too.

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:25:41 +0000

Re issuing of corrections/confirmation, I understand the point being made in the blog and the logic behind it.

Nonetheless I can’t see that there is anything wrong with such information being given (by the editor directly or with his approval) on public outlets that crossword fans look at.

I think the arguments given are entirely valid in a commercial context eg when tenders are being sought and all potential tenderers are entitled to have the same information. But I think it’s taking it a bit seriously to look at it in a similar way when it’s just a crossword and the opportunity is there to clarify and avoid doubt.

By: Colin Blackburn

Colin Blackburn — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:21:39 +0000

Thanks for the blog Hihoba. I wonderful puzzle making a triple of Charybdis puzzles over two weekends (EV and Listener are the other two.)

I got the solution and made the corrections as you have but I dithered slightly wondering why those four words. I spent some time wondering if they were connected with the film or with each other in some way. In the end I decided they were simply four commonly misspelled words. I think I might have misspelled one or two of them in my time!

Great preamble. Superb clues, some excellent devices.

Re 34ac: The clue was corrected to:

No OAP prepared for dead of WW1

giving (NO OAP)*

(Although I know you wrote and submitted your blog before the correction was published.)