User: maucaus

Re:Vigenere?

On: Judge Creates Own Da Vinci Code

The "y" is in the "reality" of paragraph 3.

Re:Incorrect Sequence

On: Judge Creates Own Da Vinci Code

Ignore my previous post and that article. I've gone through the PDF again and found that I had missed quite a bit in my daze of insomnia:

smithycodeJaeiextostgpsacgreamqwfkadpmqzv

This now corresponds exactly with what others, like lamplighter, have already written.

Incorrect Sequence

On: Judge Creates Own Da Vinci Code

I'm pretty sure that the sequence mentioned in this Slashdot article is wrong. I went through the PDF last night and came up with:

smithycodeJaeiextotgpcgramqwfkadpmq

Which fits the description mentioned in an article from The Guardian:

After the "Smithy Code" series, there are an additional 25 jumbled letters contained on the first 14 pages of the document, Mr Tench said.

The article mentions that Dan Tench is a media lawyer who had discussed the cipher with the judge, so I'm assuming that he confirmed how many letters are involved.

Re:is it upside down ?

On: Cryptic Code Stumps Experts

Actually, the first thing I thought of was checking it upside down... and that's before I knew half the story. Certainly the mirror image of Les Bergers d'Arcadie would hint at something like that. I read the upside-down inscription (discounting the delineated D and M) as NNANSONO or MANSONO... which struck me as a bit odd when I eventually read the full article and found that the family name had been Anson. Then again, maybe I'm just fishing.