Comments on: Independent 8125 by Quixote

By: Quixote

Quixote — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 07:40:43 +0000

Moot point — very few actual socks go into Oxfords. You’re right — I played safe!

By: Wil Ransome

Wil Ransome — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:28:20 +0000

Good stuff from nms and the Don as usual — personally I can’t see that there’s a gamekeeper-poacher problem.

I had one question: why in 1dn does Quixote say ‘Oxford maybe’? This suggests that he is being very careful to be ‘correct’ and avoid a definition by example. But if the clue simply says ‘one going into Oxford …’ surely that’s perfectly OK. A sock goes into an Oxford, a sock goes into a trainer, a sock goes into a boot, …

By: Quixote

Quixote — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 16:53:31 +0000

While I have a great regard for Niall, I stick to my view. There are many more potential bloggers than setters, and blogs ought not to be (how shall I put it?) incestuous. We don’t want to be like the all-too-cosy literary world in which Martin Amis (say) might write glowing reviews of Julian Barnes’s books (and maybe vice versa). Independent Independent critics fo me, every time — but I’ll respect the proprietor of the blog if Niall stays on!

By: flashling

flashling — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:10:54 +0000

I don’t really see a conflict Q, if NMS had been reviewing a Raich or Gurney then that would be a different matter.

Back to today, the long anagrams just fell out instantly with no crossing letters and then overall probably in a similar time to NMS.

Thanks both.

By: Kathryn's Dad

Kathryn's Dad — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:06:38 +0000

Thanks to nms for the blog. I never time myself, but this was a pretty quick solve for me – just right for a Monday morning. All clearly clued, with the only unfamiliarity being ESCHEATAGE.

I personally don’t have a problem with nms being on the team for blogging the Monday puzzle, and you can never have too many Sunderland fans on 225, can you? I know not all setters are keen solvers, but as far as I know Niall is, and his blogs are always clear and helpful. I like the range of bloggers we have for the Indy, since everyone brings his or her own different perspective of that day’s puzzle.

Thanks to Quixote for today’s.

By: crypticsue

crypticsue — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 12:49:21 +0000

I found this slightly trickier than the usual Monday Quixote but can’t really put my finder on why. Thanks to him and nmsindy too.

I wasn’t even aware that nmsindy was both setter and blogger until I met him back in May. His blogs always seem to me to be fair, accurate and as impartial as any other blogger’s work, and I don’t see any problem with him being on both sides of the ‘divide’.

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 12:08:33 +0000

Thank you, Quixote, at #1. As you may remember I was an Indy blogger here before being a setter, and, yes, in those early days, in practice was the “lead blogger” in terms of number of Indy blogs written. As the site expanded however, this has changed significantly and I now write just one blog every three weeks. I’m happy to continue with this, esp having been involved with the site from the very start, unless admin felt it was not appropriate.

By: allan_c

allan_c — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:43:50 +0000

Not quite as quick as nmsindy (18½ minutes) but nevertheless an enjoyable solve with the long anagrams easily unscrambled. ESCHEATAGE was new to me but easily got from the wordplay and crossing letters.

By: Quixote

Quixote — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:22:22 +0000

colleagues, even

By: Quixote

Quixote — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:19:48 +0000

I have always enjoyed Niall’s generosity — and I thank him here again most warmly. But I wonder whether one can truly be both a poacher and a gamekeeper. I myself comment on other puzzles by coleagues from time to time, but I wonder whether the dual role of setter and lead blogger for the same paper shouldn’t be discouraged?