Re(13): All in all IP: 184.108.40.206 Posted on November 25, 2016 at 01:22:59 PM by Andy Stewart
I agree with John that a requested submission format doesn't become irrelevant just because some solvers may not be aware of it. It's reasonable for solvers in the know to consider it, though it would not be a good reason to disqualify a preamble solution if that had not been the intended solution.
It's a bit like something else I had in mind at the time I was pondering the options, namely the advice in the Notes for Setters that warns against an incongruous final step. I thought that a preamble highlighting was incongruous in the absence of any hint, and also it seemed thematically incongruous - Kit Williams didn't design a load of clues to a burial spot, only to go and bury the hare somewhere else. Whether it's incongruous or not, there was no reason for me to discount the Notes for Setters on the grounds that not all solvers would have read them.
Taking up a point raised by Teyrnon, I've always thought that the sanctity of the setter's intention a bit of a flawed concept. If the setter has overlooked a valid alternative then his/her intention loses its primacy. We don't know what Sabre's intention was with Coincidence, but the editors allowed alternative solutions (which gave rise to some comment on this message board as I remember). Replies: There have been no replies.