Quick poll.

[python33]

Between the sometimes ambiguous rules, clues and errors I was curious at this point who is still interested in the second book which would be the second half of the treasure hunt.

Edited to Add: I am not associated with book or hunt in any way.  

[rambobrite]

No way, no hell! This book has no pictures so how am I supposed to search pixels for locations? Sheesh.

[David C.]

These poll results are right where they ought to be. In many ways this contest is better than most. It's legit, not a scam, prizes are real, and there's overall a good friendly vibe to it all. I believe that the authors genuinely intended for all methods to be difficult but solvable, potentially without clues, but with a plan to provide clues as needed to ensure winners of all prizes. They're following through on all of that, and they do respond to emails. Add to that the certainty that the solutions are self-contained, no outside research is required, and you've got a really great basis for a contest.

So that would give them a starting grade of A. The Chapter 4 solution was more than fair, and I don't object to some of the arbitrary flukes in the solution that made it a little trickier to solve. Still an A.

The Chapter 2 solution was too random for my tastes, with tons of red herrings and no logical basis for the correct method over any other. That said, once it's established that random methods are fair game, that's not a dealbreaker. Still A- / B+.

Chapter 1 is tough though. This is the risk they took in having only one person know the methods with no one double-checking the work. 6 errors in a short string of letters, with no explanation or accountability (so far) is really disappointing. That said, I suspect they feel bad about this and the errors weren't intentional. Sometimes these things just happen because people make (many) mistakes. And miraculously, someone did manage to solve it all the same.

So overall this contest probably still deserves a B grade, with the jury still out on the Chapter 3 solution. For under $10, I'd say I've easily gotten my money's worth despite the disappointments. I voted yes.

[python33]

Feb 13, 2021 21:15:38 GMT -5 David C. said:

These poll results are right where they ought to be. In many ways this contest is better than most. It's legit, not a scam, prizes are real, and there's overall a good friendly vibe to it all. I believe that the authors genuinely intended for all methods to be difficult but solvable, potentially without clues, but with a plan to provide clues as needed to ensure winners of all prizes. They're following through on all of that, and they do respond to emails. Add to that the certainty that the solutions are self-contained, no outside research is required, and you've got a really great basis for a contest.

So that would give them a starting grade of A. The Chapter 4 solution was more than fair, and I don't object to some of the arbitrary flukes in the solution that made it a little trickier to solve. Still an A.

The Chapter 2 solution was too random for my tastes, with tons of red herrings and no logical basis for the correct method over any other. That said, once it's established that random methods are fair game, that's not a dealbreaker. Still A- / B+.

Chapter 1 is tough though. This is the risk they took in having only one person know the methods with no one double-checking the work. 6 errors in a short string of letters, with no explanation or accountability (so far) is really disappointing. That said, I suspect they feel bad about this and the errors weren't intentional. Sometimes these things just happen because people make (many) mistakes. And miraculously, someone did manage to solve it all the same.

So overall this contest probably still deserves a B grade, with the jury still out on the Chapter 3 solution. For under $10, I'd say I've easily gotten my money's worth despite the disappointments. I voted yes.

That was very well put.

At least with this hunt the solves are there even though they are going at a monthly pace.   Better than having a hunt fade away with the originator nowhere to be found and with no solves given.  Been burned before with that.

[clark45]

Personally I think the majority of criticism towards the hunt is derived from a single source; there's no actual need to read the book to solve the puzzles. Not a personal gripe.
Honestly I have no clue how you could write a book treasure hunt that ties the story to the solves and is difficult enough to keep people from solving all of them in a week.

[davem]

Feb 14, 2021 11:07:00 GMT -5 clark45 said:

Personally I think the majority of criticism towards the hunt is derived from a single source; there's no actual need to read the book to solve the puzzles. Not a personal gripe.
Honestly I have no clue how you could write a book treasure hunt that ties the story to the solves and is difficult enough to keep people from solving all of them in a week.

All great points on this thread.  B+ to A- rating I give it as well.  Yes, with no images/pictures to augment the text, it is hard to tie it into the storyline, like you mentioned. It can be done though and that's my only major criticism (along with the impossible solve of Chapter 2 -- especially since it was fricken Star Wars!!).  I supposed I could say that a minor criticism would be the apparent confusion around what is a clue, what is not a clue and when exactly are clues coming.  Don't say that the rule is a clue will be given "if" no one has solved the next chapter "30 days" after the last but then change it a few times in between.  It would have been better to say "nothing".  Nothing at all.  Put out some correspondence sometimes and sometimes it's a clue and sometimes it's not.  No rules to be broken and frustrate people.  Saying that...... you'll never make everyone happy.  Chapter One's errors are close, too. So minor criticism. 

Four puzzles were all solved ahead of time (before the summer as planned), but not too quickly and 50% of them without serious Clues.  I think the non-conventional nature of this hunt kinda shook up the ATH community.  Mostly in a good way.  I loved it and voted Yes! 

Bring on the next 6!