THE HINTS- VITAL TO SUCCESS

[N. Means]

Again it seems much easier to focus on deciphering just 166 words instead of sifting through tens of thousands of words in TTOTC or any other outside sources, but who am I to stop others who I believe are making mistakes.

Let's look at this statement deeper. Of course it's easier to focus on deciphering the 166 words in the poem but saying it's easier doesn't mean much. We do need to qualify what easier means. Do you mean easier like one doesn't have to read and understand more words? Or do you mean easier as helping understand the right things that f has devised?

I think it's harder to just rely on the 166 words in the poem to unlock the correct clue path. That's because of f's many statements that one must crack the first clue/wwwh and follow the clues from there to the blaze. It all hinges on the correct wwwh. So actually, I don't think you even have 166 words to use to decipher that all important clue because obviously many of the words in the poem have to deal with the following 8 clues. So in my opinion and using reason, I'm guessing you're down to about 25 words to figure out the path that f has described we need to accomplish. Therefore, it's actually much harder to decipher than the route I hang my hat on.

Good luck to you too, N Means!

Easier as in more direct or straightforward. In my opinion there are just too many opportunities to get mired down in chasing every potential subtle hint in the book, and I say that from experience, because I too have gone down many of these "rabbit holes" myself.

And you may be correct in your assumption that it is harder to just rely on the 166 words in the poem to unlock the correct clue path, and this may be precisely why so many people feel the need to search for and isolate the subtle hints.

And yes you are absolutely correct, everything does hinge on identifying the correct starting point, and whether or not one can correctly identify that through applying subtle hints in the book or just the poem alone does not really matter as long as one can indeed correctly identify it.

So I believe we are both saying the same things with the same goal in mind, we both just have different approaches.