MGWCC #814 — “You’ve Got to Stand for Something”

[Streroto]

Add-I saw something that makes it tighter than I thought. I guess I should never doubt the master!!!!

[HunterX]

Okay, finally called Scottie on the communicator and asked for the transporter beam.

It took me a lot longer to "see" it than I would expect from a week one. But, actually, that's a good thing, since sometimes a week 1 is too quick and not as satisfying an "A ha!" moment. This one had a nice one that I enjoyed.

However, as others have referenced, the slight... shall we say... "inconsistency" had me questioning the tightness of the construction. Though once I saw what was going on, it all became clear. Definitely a 100%er.

[KayW]

Awaiting beam-up. Enjoyed this one, but agree it's more like a ... week 2.5? For me, anyway.

[ChrisKochmanski]

Just getting around to saying ...

Beamed!

[DrTom]

Submitted after extensive help. I see two glaring inconsistencies, not one. Without help I never would have landed on the path. I rely on week 1 puzzles to reconfirm my conviction to keep doing these and that I will eventually get better, this one has not. I got a hint, it seemed logical, I followed it, I got letters, I ended up with nothing. Then I got a full on SHOVE, and even that took me ages. MGWCC is just too smart for me.

[flamingbear]

MGWCC is just too smart for me.

I definitely relate to this. Also seeing nothing yet.

[StunGun]

Huh. Totally shot down with my attempts. And after a WSJ chip-shot.
Anyone willing to offer a slight nudge?

[HoldThatThought]

Nudge on offer, if I see it in time.

PM line is open now.

[woozy]

It took me a lot longer to "see" it than I would expect from a week one. But, actually, that's a good thing, since sometimes a week 1 is too quick and not as satisfying an "A ha!" moment. This one had a nice one that I enjoyed.

Yeah... I kind of think a week one is not *supposed* to have a satisfying Aha moment. It's supposed to be "Oh, there's the theme pretty clearly. That's cute, and lets try the first or second thing to try. Yeah, that does it." This is an "Oh, there' the theme pretty clearly. That's cute, now let's think of things we can possibly do with it.... Nope, not coming up with *any* ideas...."(repeat for two days.)

[woozy]

Okay. Got it with"yeah you basically have it" nudge.

It ... works but.... kinda weak, the kind of weakness that might make things fair for a week four. (Although a bit easy for a week 4) but needs more motivation for anything less than a week 5. With more motivation it'd make a good week 2.

At the risk of being mean, no I am not doing this after getting the meta.

(Oh. And, yes, there is one aspect that is less than perfect. So much so that it is worth calling it an outright mistake. But not one that will stop you from solving if you were going to solve anyway.

[JWawro]

Glad to find that I am not the only one struggling with this Week 1. I keep telling myself not to get distracted by anything in the clues and just focus on the grid - any chance I should be looking at the 9 (or more) other instances of smaller size but of the same type as the 4 key entries? Week 1 usually requires a focus on the main entries, but since I'm not seeing anything else, my eyes start to wander...

[dk letter]

I started very late figuring it was only a week one. Oops! Took me a couple of hours but I finally got it!

It's crazy how the mind works. I think I would've gotten it sooner if it had been released as a week 2!

[rjy]

Downs-only, no-instructions - after a lot of staring! I usually try to submit without peeking at the prompt and in this case there was no risk - a solid 100% click. That said, what a tough grid to fill downs-only! Had to peek at a couple clues along the way, and then a few more afterwards to confirm answers.

Anyone get it cleanly that way?

[johnaldape]

I can't seem to get anywhere with the meta after finishing the puzzle. Can anyone PM me with a last-minute nudge?

[Joe Ross]

I MADE THE TOP310!

Had this as my WAG, but didn't pull the trigger.

[woozy]

Downs-only, no-instructions - after a lot of staring! I usually try to submit without peeking at the prompt and in this case there was no risk - a solid 100% click. That said, what a tough grid to fill downs-only! Had to peek at a couple clues along the way, and then a few more afterwards to confirm answers.

Anyone get it cleanly that way?

I have only *once* gotten a grid down only. And it wasn't this month!

[johnaldape]

Finally got it with some nudges. Thanks to woozy, HoldThatThought, and BarbaraK!

[BarbaraK]

I don't see any outliers impeding its Gaffneyanity.

I had to look up what JPEG stands for, and when I saw E = experts, exports became the first crossing element I found. Quickly found the others, all right there in their own initialism. And never even noticed that all the others are not only in their own initialism, they use and in fact start from their own letter.

With that kind of obliviousness, it's a wonder I solve any of these.

[HoldThatThought]

The placement of Experts/Exports was the only sour note to an otherwise creative meta challenge. I acknowledge that Matt has described that as an unintentional "oopsie!" that inadvertently came about in the final editing process. Struggling to make the metanism come together, within the frame of the already extended and asymmetrical grid, Matt didn't notice that the Experts/Exports pair had shifted in a manner that violated the intended rule.

As one of the handful of solvers that I have nudged pointed out to me, there is a further unintended consequence, that challenges the solver to Intuit how broadly that one violation of the rule can be extended. If the EXPORTS/EXPERTS shift does not have to stem off the E in JPEG, is it reasonable to conclude that the GOD part of TGIF can be paired with the word GOO, which appears in another part of the grid? Obviously, the answer is "no", and it's easy enough to discriminate between a "slightly misplaced, but otherwise harmonious pair" and a "completely different place in the grid, which violates the seeming rule far more egregiously pair", but it's only the original mistake that makes the god/goo shift (and, of course, additional time looking around for other one-letter shifters in the grid) even a question.

My opinion, it's a foul, and not an entirely a "no harm/no foul" foul, but it didn't fundamentally spoil the creative challenge.

I'm curious how other solvers feel, and whether anyone else considered the possibility of GOO/GOD like my one correspondent did.

[ZooAnimalsOnWheels]

I also took this too lightly as a Week 1. As soon as I saw "Lady" leading off the clue for 51A, I was sure I understood how to proceed and ended up circling every "of", "the", and "as" in the clues. Even after it was clear this lead nowhere, I was still brain-locked on finding something in the clues to match the themers. I did have OFT circled in the grid, but only because it was a substring of "of the" from FLOTUS. Similarly ASS got circled as part of "As soon" in ASAP. I needed a nudge to get set straight.