A lot of people reading it probably didn't even realize that it is a logic puzzle. To those, it may be some kind of obscure riddle with terrible grammar.
Heck, it's not even clear that Albert and Bernard are communicating with one another and not merely with the answerer. If you assume they do not communicate at all then the puzzle becomes impossible.
> A lot of people reading it probably didn't even realize that it is a logic puzzle. To those, it may be some kind of obscure riddle with terrible grammar.
I'm not clear on what the difference between a riddle and a logic puzzle would be in this context.
> If you assume they do not communicate at all then the puzzle becomes impossible.
Why would someone make an assumption that renders the puzzle impossible? I suppose the questioner could just be a troll or something.
I do not make a comparison to 'difficulties many people face with logic problems' and did not make an assertion that many people face difficulties with logic puzzles.
Getting back to the article: the problem is worded so badly it should be sent back to the author to more coherently express what they think. Specifications, etc...
Heck, it's not even clear that Albert and Bernard are communicating with one another and not merely with the answerer. If you assume they do not communicate at all then the puzzle becomes impossible.