Thanks. Your point about ‘proportionate (sic) representation’ is helpful.

Thanks for your response. I am sorry if I wrongly sensed a more general hostility here, and at the same time I am glad if I was wrong (if you see what I mean). The problem has partly been one of intertwining general discussion (qv) and this specific blog. The point was almost a ps to my main comment, part of which you also kindly acknowledge.

Like you I don’t think the setter’s death enhances a puzzle or particularly detracts from it, and I agree that living setters new or old should not be squeezed out by those in the grave.

I still believe that some reactions to the puzzle were OTT – and why not, providing a balance is maintained?

There is no hostility towards ‘dead setters’, only towards poor crosswords. I don’t believe that just because someone is deceased, this means that a poor crossword should be viewed with rose-coloured spectacles.

To quote you, “Briefly, we do not ‘own’ the Guardian cryptic and we probably represent a small proportion of those who do it and generally enjoy it. Many of us don’t even buy the paper.” This is a very valid point tupu and one which is beyond my own selfish horizon but I do buy the Guardian on a Saturday (£1.90).

So, I apologise to Rover fans out there but unfortunately most of them will not read this.

For every one person that likes Shed or Enigmatist there are probably ten or twelve who dislike them and prefer Rover. However three of “the weaker setters” in four days is a bit much. I solve the Graun most days and the Telegraph Toughie as well, and their list of compilers has the same broad church. Some there like Warbler, Campbell and Busman would probably be routine daily puzzles in the Graun and don’t get me started on the puzzles by Excalibur which are best forgotten.

I personally feel this has been a pretty dull Graun week so far with only Araucaria’s puzzle as a beacon of light in a murky tunnel. You may hear the screams in twenty minutes time if Auster appears on the website.