[IrishElk] Room For One More

An archive of solved lateral thinking puzzles.

Moderators: peter365, Balin, kalira, JenBurdoo, Tiger

[IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:31 pm

Rose successfully pulls off a scheme that she is certain will shock her employer. But she is the one who ends up shocked, while the employer is not surprised at all.
Last edited by irishelk on Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Earnest » Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:51 pm

Rose = HAF? Scheme = a set of moves? A strategy? A summary of ideas? A painted scheme? Was the scheme written? Printed? Scheme = a plot? A plan? Something related to her work?

she is certain will shock her employer = because it was innovative? It proposed a solution never explored before? Did she expect her employer to be proud of her? To be happy? Was the scheme intended to: solve a problem? Gain more? Extinguish competitors? Better a product? Invent a new one? Face financial difficulties? Did the employer required her to pull off a scheme?

Did she end up shocked because something went "out of the scheme"? Something unexpected happened? The employer made her notice something she did not notice before? The employer had already pulled off the scheme? The same one? Another one? Someone else already pulled off a better scheme? She did not know something that instead the employer did?,

Relevant her work? Is food relevant? Clothing? Hotels? Restaurants? Banks? Cars? Planes? Music? Entertainment? Cinema? Technology? Internet? Does the firm provide services? Sell products?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby KayleeArafinwiel » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:59 pm

True story? FYOI? FSEI?

Is Rose her real name? Or if this is a character she is playing, is Rose her character's real name? Is Rose from St. Olaf, Minnesota?

Is Rose the sort of person who thinks up outlandish schemes on a regular basis? Does she have a habit of coming up with statements those around her (friends/roommates? colleagues?) think are rather foolish?

I have no idea what scheme this is or may be, but when I saw the puzzle statement I could think of only one possible Rose, and even if I'm wrong I'll be interested to see where this goes, lol.
KayleeArafinwiel
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:11 pm

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby gregoryuconn » Fri Jan 04, 2019 12:40 am

Her employer = her direct supervisor? Her team? Her whole company? Relevant what industry she works in? Was this a good shock? Or a bad shock? Or is some meaning of "shock" other than "astonish" relevant, like economic shock or electrocution?
gregoryuconn
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Northern Virginia, USA

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:44 pm

Earnest

Rose = HAF? Yes. Scheme = a set of moves? Yes. A strategy? A summary of ideas? A painted scheme? Was the scheme written? Printed? Scheme = a plot? A plan? Or this. Something related to her work? Yes.

she is certain will shock her employer = because it was innovative? No. It proposed a solution never explored before? No. Did she expect her employer to be proud of her? No. To be happy? No. Was the scheme intended to: solve a problem? Gain more? Extinguish competitors? Better a product? Invent a new one? Face financial difficulties? Not really any of these. Did the employer required her to pull off a scheme? No.

Did she end up shocked because something went "out of the scheme"? Not really... Something unexpected happened? But yes. The employer made her notice something she did not notice before? Yes, Notice or realize. The employer had already pulled off the scheme? The same one? Another one? Someone else already pulled off a better scheme? No to these--the employer had done something relevant, but I wouldn't call it a "scheme." She did not know something that instead the employer did?, Yes.

Relevant her work? Yes. Is food relevant? Clothing? Hotels? Restaurants? Banks? Cars? Planes? Music? Entertainment? Cinema? Technology? Internet? No to all! Does the firm provide services? Sell products? No, FA.


KayleeArafinwiel

True story? FYOI? This, very possible that it's happened before. FSEI?

Is Rose her real name? Yes. Or if this is a character she is playing, is Rose her character's real name? Is Rose from St. Olaf, Minnesota? Haha, not that Rose.

Is Rose the sort of person who thinks up outlandish schemes on a regular basis? Irr. Does she have a habit of coming up with statements those around her (friends/roommates? colleagues?) think are rather foolish? Irr.

I have no idea what scheme this is or may be, but when I saw the puzzle statement I could think of only one possible Rose, and even if I'm wrong I'll be interested to see where this goes, lol. Lol! Not Betty White, unfortunately, but actually a little bit OTRT.


gregoryuconn

Her employer = her direct supervisor? Technically, yes, but neither would think of the relationship this way. Her team? No. Her whole company? No/FA. Relevant what industry she works in? Yes. Was this a good shock? Or a bad shock? The planned one--bad. The actual one--could be either. Or is some meaning of "shock" other than "astonish" relevant, like economic shock or electrocution? "Astonish" is correct.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Thu Jan 10, 2019 2:24 pm

Did she plan to do this at work? At home? Somewhere else? Did she intend for her employer to find out what she did? Was anyone else involved in pulling off her plan? Could anyone be said to be a victim of her actions? Had the employer anticipated that someone might do what she wanted to do?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:31 pm

GalFisk

Did she plan to do this at work? Partially. At home? Noish. Somewhere else? Yes. Did she intend for her employer to find out what she did? Yes. Was anyone else involved in pulling off her plan? Someone else relevant, but not a co-conspirator. Could anyone be said to be a victim of her actions? Debatable, but I'd say yes. Had the employer anticipated that someone might do what she wanted to do? No or irr.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby JenBurdoo » Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:33 pm

Was she planning to trick the other relevant person? Anyone else?

Was the scheme to be pulled off over email? in person? snail mail? telephone?

Would the scheme take a significant amount of time to prepare or execute? Seconds/minutes/hours/days/more?

Would there be a financial loss involved? Or was the scheme humorous in nature, such as a practical joke?
JenBurdoo
 
Posts: 1727
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:12 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Sat Jan 26, 2019 3:02 pm

JenBurdoo

Was she planning to trick the other relevant person? Yes, probably necessary to trick or at least deceive this person. Anyone else? No.

Was the scheme to be pulled off over email? in person? This is involved. snail mail? And this, in a minor way. telephone?

Would the scheme take a significant amount of time to prepare or execute? Yes. Seconds/minutes/hours/days/more? I'd imagine more than a week to complete.

Would there be a financial loss involved? No. Or was the scheme humorous in nature, such as a practical joke? No.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Sat Feb 09, 2019 8:03 am

Is the scheme illegal? Is she employed by a company? A person? Is she doing this to benefit her employer? Herself? Is she doing it as part of her profession? Part of her job ?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:20 pm

GalFisk

Is the scheme illegal? Yes it is. Is she employed by a company? No. A person? Yesish, good question, explore! Is she doing this to benefit her employer? She thinks so. Herself? Not directly. Is she doing it as part of her profession? Part of her job ? No to both.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby CoffeeBean » Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:28 pm

Is the nature of Rose's job relevant? Is she self employed? A part-time worker? A contract worker? An agent?
Does her plan involve financial manipulation? Fraud? Tax evasion?
CoffeeBean
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 6:34 pm

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:40 pm

CoffeeBean

Is the nature of Rose's job relevant? Yes. Is she self employed? Yes. A part-time worker? Yes. A contract worker? There is likely no formal contract, but in the sense that she is not a regular employee, yes. An agent? No.
Does her plan involve financial manipulation? Fraud? Tax evasion? No to all.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Hobbsicle » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:22 am

Is her actual line of work illegal? Or only the scheme itself? Does she work in the employer's home? Is the other relevant person related to either one of them?

Is she expecting the scheme to at some point be revealed? Or is her intent to always keep it secret? Does she believe it will benefit the employer financially? Emotionally? Relationally? Physically?
Hobbsicle
 
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 11:42 am
Location: Texas, United States

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Earnest » Tue Feb 19, 2019 7:34 am

Did she want to explain the scheme to the employer?
Just complete it and presenting the results to the boss? Publishing reserved documents/conversations relevant?
Is rose the only one employee of the employer? Is she the first one? The employer was not surprised at all because: it already happened? He noticed Rose pulling off the plan? He noticed something that let him think she will? He already did what Rose planned? He already figured out what Rose was planning? Are accounting books relevant? Did the plan involve customers? Is Rose working in health care? As an apprendist? By a dentist? (E.g. she planned to substitute a golden teeth with a fake one and keep the gold) Is anesthesia relevant? Does she work as a baby sitter? As cleaning lady? Touring guide? Scientist? Researcher at university?

Does the plan involve: data manipulation? illegal manipulation of money? Illegal substances? Alchol? Illegal transactions? Compromising conversations? Theft? Privacy violation (checking the habits of someone)? A damage to a costumer? Taking advantage of the possibilities that her job position gives her (e.g. having the keys of someone's house; a password? Keys of a car?)? Is she employed in a spa?

Any device relevant? Pc? Phone? Cars?
Part time job: has she got turns? Did she work during night? Afternoon? Evening? Relevant? Is it a pub?

Did Rose ended up being shocked in a positive way? In a negative way? Was she fired? Is the employer an undercover cop? Did she end up being arrested? Are other cultures relevant? Muslims? Japanese geishas?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Wed Feb 27, 2019 4:48 pm

Hobbsicle

Is her actual line of work illegal? No. Or only the scheme itself? This. Does she work in the employer's home? YES. Is the other relevant person related to either one of them? NOISH, explore!

Is she expecting the scheme to at some point be revealed? Yes. Or is her intent to always keep it secret? No. Does she believe it will benefit the employer financially? Possibly. Emotionally? Likely this.Relationally? And this. Physically?


Earnest

Did she want to explain the scheme to the employer? Eventually, yes.
Just complete it and present the results to the boss? Yes. Publishing reserved documents/conversations relevant? No.
Is rose the only one employee of the employer? Yes. Is she the first one? Yes (or any others are irr). The employer was not surprised at all because: it already happened? He noticed Rose pulling off the plan? He noticed something that let him think she will? He already did what Rose planned? He already figured out what Rose was planning? No to all, lurking FA.
Are accounting books relevant? No. Did the plan involve customers?No. Is Rose working in health care? As an apprendist? By a dentist? (E.g. she planned to substitute a golden teeth with a fake one and keep the gold) Is anesthesia relevant? Does she work as a baby sitter? THIS. As cleaning lady? Touring guide? Scientist? Researcher at university? No to rest.

Does the plan involve: data manipulation? illegal manipulation of money? Illegal substances? Alcohol? Illegal transactions? Compromising conversations? Theft? Privacy violation (checking the habits of someone)? I'd definitely call it this. A damage to a costumer? Taking advantage of the possibilities that her job position gives her Yes. (e.g. having the keys of someone's house; a password? Keys of a car?)? Is she employed in a spa? No to rest.

Any device relevant? Noish. Pc? Phone? Cars? No.
Part time job: has she got turns? Did she work during night? Afternoon? Evening? Relevant? Irr, days or evenings. Is it a pub? No.

Did Rose ended up being shocked in a positive way? In a negative way? Negative from her perspective. Was she fired? Irr, but likely. Is the employer an undercover cop? No. Did she end up being arrested? No. Are other cultures relevant? Not really, this could take place in many countries. Muslims? Japanese geishas? No.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:32 am

Is she employed by the parents of the baby? By a babysitter firm? Socioeconomic status of the parents relevant?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Earnest » Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:54 am

Assuming that the employer is not one of the parent...(otherwise I would ask if betrayals are involved; if so, kind of the employer is the husband and wanted to know if his wife is betraying him?)

Is something illegal going on?
Did she want to ask questions to the children about the parents (are they able to talk?)? Did she want mainly to exploit the fact that she is free to enter the house where she works? Did the kids have both parents? Relevant? Money relevant? Codes? Passwords? Secrets? Is the employer relevantly connected to the family a part from the working relationship? Does the puzzle work with any family? Is the family composed by 2 parents and 2 or more children? Taking strangers inside the house relevant? Faking a robbery?

Did she relevantly follow the family also during holidays? Can she relevantly ask for money if they are given to fulfill desires of the children? If so, did she ask for more money than due?
Earnest
 
Posts: 2434
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:52 am

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:48 am

GalFisk

Is she employed by the parents of the baby? Yes. By a babysitter firm? Socioeconomic status of the parents relevant? No to rest.


Earnest

Assuming that the employer is not one of the parent... The parents are the employers. (otherwise I would ask if betrayals are involved; Yope. if so, kind of the employer is the husband and wanted to know if his wife is betraying him?) Not this.

Is something illegal going on? Other than the technically illegal thing Rose does, no.
Did she want to ask questions to the children about the parents No. (are they able to talk?)? Irr. Did she want mainly to exploit the fact that she is free to enter the house where she works? No. Did the kids have both parents? Yes. Relevant? Yes, the situation wouldn't happen otherwise. Money relevant? Codes? Passwords? No to these. Secrets? Yes.
Is the employee relevantly connected to the family apart from the working relationship? YES, good q.

Does the puzzle work with any family? No. Is the family composed by 2 parents and 2 or more children? Mother, father, only one (relevant) child.Taking strangers inside the house relevant? No. Faking a robbery? No.

Did she relevantly follow the family also during holidays? No. Can she relevantly ask for money if they are given to fulfill desires of the children? No/irr. If so, did she ask for more money than due?
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:27 am

Age of the child relevant? Can it speak? Walk? Keep secrets? Not keep secrets? Is she related to the child? Does she relevantly babysit other kids?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:04 pm

GalFisk

Age of the child relevant? Not really, assume baby/toddler. Can it speak? Walk? Keep secrets? Not keep secrets? Irr.
Is she related to the child? Great question! Yope. Does she relevantly babysit other kids? No.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:24 am

Adoption relevant? Relationship by marriage? Unclear or unknown relationships? Lies?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:41 pm

GalFisk

Adoption relevant? YES. Relationship by marriage? A marriage is relevant-ish. Unclear or unknown relationships? Yes. Lies? Yes, or at least failure to tell the truth.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Doriana » Mon Mar 25, 2019 10:56 am

Is Rose the biological mother of the child? Is the woman the child lives with the biological mother? Is the man the child lives with the biological father?
Doriana
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:12 pm
Location: Göttingen, Germany

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:12 pm

Doriana

Is Rose the biological mother of the child? Is the woman the child lives with the biological mother? Is the man the child lives with the biological father? No to all. Explore. =)
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:46 pm

Is tie biological mother known? Is Rose claiming to be the biological mother? Claiming the adoptive parents are the real parents?
Edit: does the employer suspect she will try to pull of this scheme? Even count on it? Do they set a trap for her?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Balin » Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:18 pm

Is genetic testing involved?
Balin
 
Posts: 7460
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:12 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Sun Mar 31, 2019 2:42 pm

GalFisk

Is tie biological mother known? Yope. Is Rose claiming to be the biological mother? No. Claiming the adoptive parents are the real parents? Not exactly "claiming" this, but explore.
Edit: does the employer suspect she will try to pull of this scheme? Even count on it? Do they set a trap for her? No to all.


Balin

Is genetic testing involved? Yes, very much so.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:33 pm

Does Rose send the kid's DNA for testing? Her own? That of the adoptive parents? Is there something Rose doesn't know? Something she suspects? Does she think the kid is the biological child of the mom but not the dad?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Wed Apr 03, 2019 1:31 pm

GalFisk

Does Rose send the kid's DNA for testing? Yes. Her own? No. That of the adoptive parents? Yes. Is there something Rose doesn't know? Yes. Something she suspects? Yes. Does she think the kid is the biological child of the mom but not the dad? Yes!
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby Balin » Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:08 pm

So is the kid the biological child of the adoptive parents? Do they know this?
Rose works for the parents - is she a nanny? Babysitter? Au pair?
Balin
 
Posts: 7460
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:12 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby GalFisk » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:12 pm

So Rose thinks the test will show infidelity, which will shock the parents, but instead it shows no relation, which shocks Rose and doesn't surprise the parents at all?
Does she think the kid looks too unlike the father?
GalFisk
 
Posts: 9053
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 8:03 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: [IrishElk] Room For One More

Postby irishelk » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:05 pm

Balin

So is the kid the biological child of the adoptive parents? No. Do they know this?
Rose works for the parents - is she a nanny? Babysitter? This. Au pair?

GalFisk

So Rose thinks the test will show infidelity, which will shock the parents, but instead it shows no relation, which shocks Rose and doesn't surprise the parents at all?
Does she think the kid looks too unlike the father? You got it!


********************************SPOILER
Rose's son and daughter-in-law pay her to babysit her grandson. She's never trusted that no-good daughter-in-law, and anyway the kid looks nothing like her son, so she becomes convinced that the daughter-in-law cheated and it's someone else's baby. While alone in the home, she takes the opportunity to get DNA samples, and secretly has them tested to prove the supposed infidelity.

She is shocked to learn from the tests that not only is her grandson not biologically related to her son, he's not related to the daughter-in-law either! They adopted the child, and didn't make this known to Rose because she's an insufferable, judgmental busybody.
User avatar
irishelk
 
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Washington DC-ish


Return to Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests