[nabraham]

Eric, the author, says he won't accept any puzzle submissions because of attribution and legal issues. This seems like the wrong outcome for people who want to make the site better but don't want credit, compensation, or attribution.

Has anyone seen a site using an IP assignment agreement which is the equivalent of "take my work, I don't want credit, and it's just for your site"?

The Creative Commons CC0 license comes closest, but one could scrape those puzzles and create a competing site, which I'd guess Eric wants to avoid.

[tl]

It’s a preference in his case that cannot be solved with licensing. Eric doesn’t want even potential ideas to influence him, and he says he has more puzzle ideas than time to implement them.

Personally, I suspect that he wants something that consumes so much of his free time to wholly be his, and I respect that.

[arve0]

The problem is trusting the submitter. How do you make sure derivate work is not submitted?

[ahaferburg]

If you want to help, why not ask the people running the site what you can do to help? Do you actually want to help, or do you want to make puzzles? Or do you just want to discuss a perceived problem that may or may not exist?

[inerte]

“your site” is really complicated. Who is “you”, person, website or the company? If it’s the person can they transfer the rights? What happens if they die? If they donate the estate? If they get hired or contracted? If the website expands scope or changes in any way?

[nabraham]

"You" would be the company, and the submitter would assign all the rights to it. Interestingly, I looked and couldn't find any terms of service or company name.

[mjtlittle]

Maybe he enjoys/benefits from the work, I feel like coming up with puzzle ideas would be somewhat fun/beneficial. I would definitely assume that if this were not the case he would outsource it or maybe even open source it.