3
$\begingroup$

I am a new user on the site. I recently answered a puzzle by addressing the dead giveaway clue in the puzzle, here. There is nothing else it could have been.

Another user, downvoted the answer saying, I quote

"This answer was already given, and you didn't even address the other clues."

First of all, nothing else could have been the answer.


Second of all, if someone presents a clue like that, you don't need anything else to solve the riddle.

So my question is,

Am I supposed to address each and every single clue even though one clue gives away the answer?

Can't I answer on a question which already has an answer?

Or am I supposed to present a different (although wrong) answer to the same riddle, as another user did in the same question?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Might want to use blockquotes for that quote from another user. (place > before a paragraph, and use >! for spoiler blockquotes) $\endgroup$ – haykam Aug 20 '16 at 1:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Here is a direct link to that user's comment. $\endgroup$ – haykam Aug 20 '16 at 1:21
8
$\begingroup$

First of all, nothing else could have been the answer.

First, something else could have been the answer : it is not because you have found the right one that it is necessarily easy for every other user. Many 'easy' riddles (or not very puzzling) can lead to several valid answers (see for example this post).

Am I supposed to address each and every single clue even though one clue gives away the answer?

On this site, when answering a riddle, you are encouraged to address most of the clues, to show that your answer fits the puzzle.

Can't I answer on a question which already has an answer?

In this case, you answered a couple hours after the right answer has been given : we encourage you to read the other answers before posting your own. If yours is already here, you are free to upvote it; if you have another idea which also fits the clues (even if it is the wrong answer), you can post this answer (as other users could have this idea as well).

You are alluding to this answer: it was well formatted, and addressed all the clues. Even if in the end, it was not the answer intended, it still got upvotes because other users found that it was a good answer.

And, of course, welcome to Puzzling!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ ...Except for the last one, which I couldn't make fit. $\endgroup$ – Mithical Aug 19 '16 at 15:46
  • $\begingroup$ @Mithrandir Your answer did not fit all the clues, but at least addressed them :). Plus, it was a good try ! $\endgroup$ – IAmInPLS Aug 19 '16 at 16:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think it's really about answers containing enough explanation to justify themselves as reasonable guesses. Not everything needs to be explained in one answer, but enough does need to be explained to consider the solution plausible. (I do agree with your answer, though!) $\endgroup$ – Aza Aug 19 '16 at 19:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Emrakul Yes, that's what I was trying to say when I wrote that users are encouraged to address all the clues. Replacing the all by most of! $\endgroup$ – IAmInPLS Aug 20 '16 at 9:24
  • $\begingroup$ It may be worth saying explicitly, in response to "Can't I ... Am I supposed to ...?": If you don't have anything new and likely-correct to add, then you're supposed to leave the question alone because you don't have a useful contribution to make to it. And that's OK: for many questions you won't. Wait until you find one you do have something useful to add to. $\endgroup$ – Gareth McCaughan Aug 31 '16 at 15:39

You must log in to answer this question.

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