3
$\begingroup$

A discussion broke out in the comments to this riddle regarding splitting riddles into multiple parts. In this case QuyNguyen2013 had added hints to his first riddle and put them as new questions. There are other riddles like this that have clues split up over multiple questions. I'm not a fan of this, but I'm not sure what everyone else thinks. Should this be considered acceptable behavior?

It's only a short hop and skip away from multiple part riddles like the SErial Killer and that's already been discussed. Does that cover this case?

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

I think that releasing hints as separate puzzles will just create more clutter on the questions end, as they're typically too short or simple to count as a full puzzle in their own right.

A better place for them would probably be in the question itself.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ But what makes a puzzle "too short or too simple to count as a full puzzle"? Who gets to decide that? That is something that is completely subjective... $\endgroup$ – Warlord 099 Nov 20 '14 at 16:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Warlord099: I wouldn't use short/simple as a criterion - instead I'd use 'can the puzzle be solved with the information given in the question?' - i.e. is it valid as a self-contained puzzle? $\endgroup$ – A E Nov 20 '14 at 16:51
  • $\begingroup$ @AE My point was more or less that short/simple is a lousy criterion for what is or is not a puzzle because it is subjective. $\endgroup$ – Warlord 099 Nov 20 '14 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Warlord099 - I agree. :) $\endgroup$ – A E Nov 20 '14 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ @AE I only used "short/simple" as my criterion after looking at what's currently out there. My assumption was that, since it's a hint, it can't be any harder than the already existing puzzle. If it works as a standalone puzzle then sure, but at that point I'd imagine it to be neater to just post it as a separate puzzle (avoiding crosslinking/localised answers). $\endgroup$ – Sp3000 Nov 20 '14 at 19:35
5
$\begingroup$

I don't see any reason why the answer to one puzzle shouldn't be a clue to another puzzle.

"Ric isn't a fan of this" doesn't seem (to me) like a good reason to ban it. OP could simply move on to another puzzle which he/she likes better.

So long as each puzzle is valid as a standalone puzzle, I don't thing that it is the same thing as a multiple part riddle.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, one of the links Ric posted says as long as a puzzle functions as a puzzle by itself, then it should be allowed. So what if it's related to a different puzzle? $\endgroup$ – pacoverflow Nov 20 '14 at 15:47
-2
$\begingroup$

It seems like we should not allow it.

It defeats the point of the question being answerable in itself like all other questions on the Stack Exchange.

Also, if the other question is ever deleted, then this one would be broken.

It is okay to reference another question, but not depend upon it.

Also, this manner of posting creates a puzzle out of the site and not just out of the question.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .