Re: Four old puzzles #1

[James Dow Allen[_2_]]

I think one reason rec.puzzles has become less popular
is the SPAM onslaught. Why don't we find an otherwise
idle ng, perhaps rec.aquaria.freshwater.cichlids as I
have done here, begin cross-posting there, and hope
the spammers don't follow?

>> Please don't reveal why I aver this memo has unique looks.
>> Rather do make your best original theme and post in reply.
>>
>> Famous Will Shakespeare did secure it:
>> So true a fool is love, that in your will, ...
>> Or in Poem LXII:
>> As I all other in all worths exceed ...
>>
>> A Supreme Book can do it:
>> From Ecclesiasticus book LXIII verse XXXII see:
>> Glorify the Lord as much as ever you can,
>> for he will yet far exceed.
>> Or in Gospel by John:
>> My sheep do hear my voice.
>> And I know them: and they follow me.
>>
>> Can you write a sentence (or seven) which keeps faith
>> under my new paradigm?
>> by James Dow Allen

Richard gave a hint for #2, so I'd better give a
hint for "Four old puzzles #1".
I won't bother to rot13 the hint.

The entire message (that is, the lines
beginning ">> " above) is a sequence of
words that satisfies a constraint. (*Each* contiguous
subsequence of words in the message satisfies the same
constraint.) The *meanings* of the message and
the individual words are *irrelevant.* My full name
"James Dow Allen" satisfies the constraint, but
"Richard Heathfield" does not, nor does "James Allen".

This "hint" may tell you little new, but I hope it's
enough. This type of puzzle was very popular in this ng
a few years ago. Despite that no one's solved it yet,
I still believe that this one is of, at most, average
difficulty compared with those posted a few years ago.

James (Dow) Allen

PS: I hope my use of middle name doesn't make me
seem like a pretentious "preppy"! It's a habit I
started with the World-wide-web since "James Allen"
is a *very* common name.

[Richard Heathfield]

In >, James Dow Allen
wrote:

> I think one reason rec.puzzles has become less popular
> is the SPAM onslaught. Why don't we find an otherwise
> idle ng, perhaps rec.aquaria.freshwater.cichlids as I
> have done here, begin cross-posting there, and hope
> the spammers don't follow?

I wonder how the cichlid fans will feel about that, when they get back
from their decade-long expedition to Cichlidia to find their
newsgroup stuffed to the gunwales with puzzles?

<snip>

> Richard gave a hint for #2, so I'd better give a
> hint for "Four old puzzles #1".
> I won't bother to rot13 the hint.
>
> The entire message (that is, the lines
> beginning ">> " above) is a sequence of
> words that satisfies a constraint.

I guessed all that.

> (*Each* contiguous
> subsequence of words in the message satisfies the same
> constraint.)

That's additional information, but I'm not sure how useful it is. That
is, I don't immediately see an application for the new knowledge.

> The *meanings* of the message and
> the individual words are *irrelevant.*

I guessed that, too.

> My full name
> "James Dow Allen" satisfies the constraint, but
> "Richard Heathfield" does not, nor does "James Allen".

Bang goes Theory #6.

<snip>

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

[jonnie303]

On Oct 22, 11:29*am, James Dow Allen >
wrote:
> I think one reason rec.puzzles has become less popular
> is the SPAM onslaught. *Why don't we find an otherwise
> idle ng, perhaps rec.aquaria.freshwater.cichlids as I
> have done here, begin cross-posting there, and hope
> the spammers don't follow?
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Please don't reveal why I aver this memo has unique looks.
> >> Rather do make your best original theme and post in reply.
>
> >> Famous Will Shakespeare did secure it:
> >> * So true a fool is love, that in your will, ...
> >> Or in Poem LXII:
> >> * As I all other in all worths exceed ...
>
> >> A Supreme Book can do it:
> >> From Ecclesiasticus book LXIII verse XXXII see:
> >> * Glorify the Lord as much as ever you can,
> >> * for he will yet far exceed.
> >> Or in Gospel by John:
> >> * My sheep do hear my voice.
> >> * And I know them: *and they follow me.
>
> >> Can you write a sentence (or seven) which keeps faith
> >> under my new paradigm?
> >> by James Dow Allen
>
> Richard gave a hint for #2, so I'd better give a
> hint for "Four old puzzles #1".
> I won't bother to rot13 the hint.
>
> The entire message (that is, the lines
> beginning ">> " above) is a sequence of
> words that satisfies a constraint. *(*Each* contiguous
> subsequence of words in the message satisfies the same
> constraint.) *The *meanings* of the message and
> the individual words are *irrelevant.* *My full name
> "James Dow Allen" satisfies the constraint, but
> "Richard Heathfield" does not, nor does "James Allen".
>
> This "hint" may tell you little new, but I hope it's
> enough. *This type of puzzle was very popular in this ng
> a few years ago. *Despite that no one's solved it yet,
> I still believe that this one is of, at most, average
> difficulty compared with those posted a few years ago.
>
> James (Dow) Allen
>
> PS: I hope my use of middle name doesn't make me
> seem like a pretentious "preppy"! *It's a habit I
> started with the World-wide-web since "James Allen"
> is a *very* common name.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Given your "hint", a puzzle which seemed too hard is now much easier
to unravel. I am writing a short piece to claim to have found a
solution. Am I correct?

---------------
jonnie303, uk

[James Dow Allen]

On Oct 22, 9:53*pm, jonnie303 > wrote:

> Given your "hint", a puzzle which seemed too hard is now much easier
> to unravel. I am writing a short piece to claim to have found a
> solution. Am I correct?

Yes, yes! Callooh, callay!
John's post satisfies the constraint!!
(Though my response here does not.)
Maybe I *will* post another of these next decade,
after all!

.... And I hope you agree mine was orders of magnitude
easier than Mr. Heathfield's (at "#2").

> jonnie303, uk

Well, *almost* satisfied the constraint. Next time
edit your .sig.

James

[ken]

On Oct 23, 3:03*am, James Dow Allen > wrote:
> On Oct 22, 9:53*pm, jonnie303 > wrote:
>
> > Given your "hint", a puzzle which seemed too hard is now much easier
> > to unravel. I am writing a short piece to claim to have found a
> > solution. Am I correct?
>
> Yes, yes! *Callooh, callay!
> John's post satisfies the constraint!!
> (Though my response here does not.)
> Maybe I *will* post another of these next decade,
> after all!
>
> ... And I hope you agree mine was orders of magnitude
> easier than Mr. Heathfield's (at "#2").
>
> > jonnie303, uk
>
> Well, *almost* satisfied the constraint. *Next time
> edit your .sig.
>
> James


I solved it (.....pause for applause.....) too.
But I am finding the proof a bit hard to manage.
I'll try a riddle.
Why did the gnu cross the road?
The gnu wished to see a gnu view.

*almost* ken

[James Dow Allen]

On Oct 26, 4:43*pm, ken wrote:
>
> I solved it (.....pause for applause.....) too.
> But I am finding the proof a bit hard to manage.
> I'll try a riddle.
> Why did the gnu cross the road?
> The gnu wished to see a gnu view.
>
> *almost* ken

Two cheers! (And sorry, ken, that I couldn't say three!)

*almost* J. D. Allen

[ken]

On Oct 26, 10:42*pm, James Dow Allen > wrote:
> On Oct 26, 4:43*pm, ken wrote:
>
>
>
> > I solved it (.....pause for applause.....) too.
> > But I am finding the proof a bit hard to manage.
> > I'll try a riddle.
> > Why did the gnu cross the road?
> > The gnu wished to see a gnu view.
>
> > *almost* ken
>
> Two cheers! *(And sorry, ken, that I couldn't say three!)
>
> *almost* J. D. Allen


Alas, my proof is not valid :(
There is an error.
Bahhhhh...

ken

[Martin DeMello]

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:29:02 +0000, James Dow Allen wrote:
>
>>> Please don't reveal why I aver this memo has unique looks. Rather do
>>> make your best original theme and post in reply.

Mentioning subsequences provided a very big hint (assuming that I have
truly solved your puzzle). Also, writing this way is a lot harder than I
assumed it would be; kudos!

martin

[James Dow Allen]

On Oct 27, 1:07*pm, ken > wrote:
> On Oct 26, 10:42*pm, James Dow Allen > wrote:
>
> > On Oct 26, 4:43*pm, ken wrote:
>
> > > I solved it (.....pause for applause.....) too.
> > > But I am finding the proof a bit hard to manage.
> > > I'll try a riddle.
> > > Why did the gnu cross the road?
> > > The gnu wished to see a gnu view.
>
> > > *almost* ken
>
> > Two cheers! *(And sorry, ken, that I couldn't say three!)
>
> > *almost* J. D. Allen
>
> Alas, my proof is not valid *:(
> There is an error.
> Bahhhhh...
>
> ken

Alas! I'm sorry, Ken, if wrongly I challenged you.
(I was in The Grand City, Webless, and just now
did see your message.)
Full cheers did you deserve, but *I* couldnt give
you three of them and still obey this rule.

I'm not sure that I agree this puzzle is too hard.
Book called _Origin_ by Darwin, yes, did effect my goal:
"Hence it seems to me, as it has to many other ..."
and
"were to build for themselves a thin wall of wax,
they could make ..."
or
"abundance of the individuals of many species all over"

Khayyam did obey in best known Rubaiyat:
"Come fill the cup ...
"The Bird of Time has but a little way To fly ..."


And more casually,

"I beg thou, Yes?" "No." "Please, oh yes?" "No!" "Please, oh
please?"
"No ... well, OK, yes." "Oh, yes!" "Oh yes!! Oh yes! Oh Yes!"
"Ohhhhh!!!!!!"

James Dow Allen

[ken]

On Oct 29, 10:03*pm, James Dow Allen > wrote:
> On Oct 27, 1:07*pm, ken > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 26, 10:42*pm, James Dow Allen > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 26, 4:43*pm, ken wrote:
>
> > > > I solved it (.....pause for applause.....) too.
> > > > But I am finding the proof a bit hard to manage.
> > > > I'll try a riddle.
> > > > Why did the gnu cross the road?
> > > > The gnu wished to see a gnu view.
>
> > > > *almost* ken
>
> > > Two cheers! *(And sorry, ken, that I couldn't say three!)
>
> > > *almost* J. D. Allen
>
> > Alas, my proof is not valid *:(
> > There is an error.
> > Bahhhhh...
>
> > ken
>
> Alas! *I'm sorry, Ken, if wrongly I challenged you.
> (I was in The Grand City, Webless, and just now
> did see your message.)
> Full cheers did you deserve, but *I* couldnt give
> you three of them and still obey this rule.
>
> I'm not sure that I agree this puzzle is too hard.
> Book called _Origin_ by Darwin, yes, did effect my goal:
> * * * "Hence it seems to me, as it has to many other ..."
> and
> * * * "were to build for themselves a thin wall of wax,
> * * * they could make ..."
> or
> * * * "abundance of the individuals of many species all over"
>
> Khayyam did obey in best known Rubaiyat:
> * *"Come fill the cup ...
> * *"The Bird of Time has but a little way To fly ..."
>
> And more casually,
>
> "I beg thou, Yes?" *"No." *"Please, oh yes?" *"No!" *"Please, oh
> please?"
> "No ... well, OK, yes." *"Oh, yes!" *"Oh yes!! Oh yes! Oh Yes!"
> "Ohhhhh!!!!!!"
>
> James Dow Allen

Two cheers you sent,
I was fully content,
Alas! on review of my text, I found my 'But' following my 'too' :)

[James Dow Allen]

On Oct 22, 9:53*pm, jonnie303 > wrote:
>> Given your "hint", a puzzle which seemed too hard is now much easier
> to unravel. I am writing a short piece to claim to have found a
> solution. Am I correct?
>
> [by]
> jonnie303, uk-

(My response is unconstrained.)

Kudos to Jonnie303 and Ken, and thanks for solving my
puzzle! Clicking on Google's "Find other posts"
button I see both of you have solved my puzzles
in the past, often with very clever solutions.

Apologies to Ken for not noticing the small error
in his post. I do have a simple executable for
testing such passages, however the executable runs
only on Unix and I read Usenet only on Windows.
I won't waste time looking for a Linux driver
for my cell-phone Internet connection: it's so
dreadfully slow (Note 1) I'm likely to throw the
cell-phone against the wall any day now!

Note 1: Actually the connection is plenty fast
enough for what I *want* to view, but not fast
enough to cope with the huge armadas of ads,
stylesheets and javascripts "needed" these days
to display a few sentences of simple text.

James Dow Allen

[Vicious Cat]

ken > wrote in news:631643c6-50ae-411e-9f4a-71306e02e825
@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:

Light dawns (I hope?)
Scary how many hours I pondered this - and how many rules got despatched.
I agree with a prior message - It has been a struggle in the making of this
reply.
I can't go any further

Sid