Forrest Video about TFTW book-The Unintended Clue interview......

[Alsetenash]

Another name referring to a Vagabond is a HOBO, or say a 'Gypsy':

https://mysteriouswritings.com/featured-question-with-forrest-fenn-and-the-thrill-of-the-chase-treasure-hunt-gypsy-magic-image/

Then add in the Scrapbook of "Chaos and Embroidery" .

Have a kid read it and we might have a Cinderella Story. Seems to me that the this ending of TTOTC will have an understanding of - "....That person will be pleased when she sees it" f

https://mysteriouswritings.com/featured-question-with-forrest/

If you don't wan't to listen to the song, look up the lyrics:

https://youtu.be/D7wdLAM1yjc

Perhaps the means will justify this end? The ending is falling apart. Maybe the "she" is missing a Glass Slipper!

Family has Publishing rights to FF's autobiography in the Jar.

HOB'O Magic -People without a Home makes one wander...Dig it?
https://youtu.be/0j4RGh36fQU

IMO.

Edit: I'm not referring to Diggin Gypsy.

Perhaps there's a story in his autobiography in that glass jar about someone whom "Slipped away"?

Edit: Nor am I referring to Jdiggins or any searcher. Lol. Nor am I knocking Forrest.

https://youtu.be/hMjwb13TFCo

[Spoon]

Alsetenash - one of the both advantages and difficulties of Fenn's treasure hunt was the enormous amount of support that the man gave to it. Between the book, Scrapbooks, Q&As, Weekly Words, etc., etc., there is a huge cache of material from which to draw inspiration. While that can be helpful, it can also be a distraction. The opportunity to find things in all of that allows people to make connections to just about any solution that could be imagined. For instance, you tie wanderlust to vagabond and then to hobo. The connections are tempting, but are they right? Because another could just as easily have chosen another word or set of words from that writing and made a completely different set of connections. The possibilities are almost endless.

We see it a lot here on this forum. Searchers are taking pieces of Fenn's writings and making connections, and then those connections ultimately lead them to conclude that they have the solution. Yet theirs is just one of innumerable ways to look at the data given. Some searchers become so committed to their way of looking at those connections that they cannot help but to promote it as the only true way of looking at them and endlessly try to convince others that this is the way we should all see it. They just can't seem to see the other possibilities and that the connections of the type they made are inevitable, if one looks hard enough.

When I first got involved in the Chase I began interacting with a very nice guy who was also stuck on a particular point of view. He claimed to have over 100 pages of notes relating the writings of Fenn back to a single concept. The "reach" for some of those connections was similar to many I see promoted here. He had slipped down a rabbit hole.

What are we to make of the Chase, given that there is the opportunity to make these connections and thereby slip down rabbit holes? Should we assume, then, that it was all a game of chance, one in which we needed a high degree of luck to find the proper connections? Should we assume, as is being promoted by the "influencers", that Fenn just didn't do a very good job designing his puzzle and this is why we are saddled with such a disappointing outcome?

In order to present the Chase and Fenn's puzzle in a more favorable light would require a process from the author that avoided this randomness in connections. One that was more systematic and probably significantly more comprehensive. It would be one that wouldn't leaving us wondering, "Did I choose the right words/phrases/concepts from that story, or did I connect the stories/words/phrases/concepts to reach the right conclusions?" If the Chase was well-designed, the solver would know the process was right because it would work out consistently and (virtually) universally.

[Goldilocks]

Spoon I agree with what you said. Forrest said there were 9 clues in the poem. It was our job to first figure out the what the 9 clues were and then find the answers to the clues using hints. If the puzzle was done well, one would assume that there would be definitions/answers within the poem. This would not be achieved by throwing darts at a map or like you said, making random word associations. It also doesn't mean that there wasn't a method to the madness. It may just mean that we haven't figured it out yet.

[Not4but242Walk]

It also doesn't mean that there wasn't a method to the madness. It may just mean that we haven't figured it out yet.

How many bothered to answer the question posed by the poem?

[Goldilocks]

How many bothered to answer the question posed by the poem?

It's not about answering it, it's about getting the answer right.

[Alsetenash]

Alsetenash - one of the both advantages and difficulties of Fenn's treasure hunt was the enormous amount of support that the man gave to it. Between the book, Scrapbooks, Q&As, Weekly Words, etc., etc., there is a huge cache of material from which to draw inspiration. While that can be helpful, it can also be a distraction. The opportunity to find things in all of that allows people to make connections to just about any solution that could be imagined. For instance, you tie wanderlust to vagabond and then to hobo. The connections are tempting, but are they right? Because another could just as easily have chosen another word or set of words from that writing and made a completely different set of connections. The possibilities are almost endless.

We see it a lot here on this forum. Searchers are taking pieces of Fenn's writings and making connections, and then those connections ultimately lead them to conclude that they have the solution. Yet theirs is just one of innumerable ways to look at the data given. Some searchers become so committed to their way of looking at those connections that they cannot help but to promote it as the only true way of looking at them and endlessly try to convince others that this is the way we should all see it. They just can't seem to see the other possibilities and that the connections of the type they made are inevitable, if one looks hard enough.

When I first got involved in the Chase I began interacting with a very nice guy who was also stuck on a particular point of view. He claimed to have over 100 pages of notes relating the writings of Fenn back to a single concept. The "reach" for some of those connections was similar to many I see promoted here. He had slipped down a rabbit hole.

What are we to make of the Chase, given that there is the opportunity to make these connections and thereby slip down rabbit holes? Should we assume, then, that it was all a game of chance, one in which we needed a high degree of luck to find the proper connections? Should we assume, as is being promoted by the "influencers", that Fenn just didn't do a very good job designing his puzzle and this is why we are saddled with such a disappointing outcome?

In order to present the Chase and Fenn's puzzle in a more favorable light would require a process from the author that avoided this randomness in connections. One that was more systematic and probably significantly more comprehensive. It would be one that wouldn't leaving us wondering, "Did I choose the right words/phrases/concepts from that story, or did I connect the stories/words/phrases/concepts to reach the right conclusions?" If the Chase was well-designed, the solver would know the process was right because it would work out consistently and (virtually) universally.

Spoon

Most excellent writ. I am envious to your writing prose devoid of technical errors; a skill I could only wish to espouce. You having such underpinnings, leads me to think you could be a writer; a writer with publications?

As for finding connection, correct or otherwise down a rabbit hole. It's a very good point. I probably sound over doing it sometimes. I actually only just the other day learnt that FF spoke of his original thought of naming TFTW "The or A Vagabond". Though its definition or other words for the same type of meaning, such as Hobo; are only a nod in congruent essence to my point of view of what HOB means to me. That being said, my opinion of Brown being a sir name, that person is not a Vagabond nor Hobo in relation to the poem; in essence, that sir name Brown-moves around.

As yoy say, "the chase was well-designed". It looks to like there are layers of communication written in the poem. Same perspective in what Forrest has said in his interviews, Q&A's recorded on video, written etc. He speaks and writes in a toggling manner; toggling between each layer, which makes him sound contradictory in practice. I see three layers in the poem. Each of the three layers has their own point of focus FF is referring to in such Q&A's and interviews. I may sound like I'm over complicating the Poem and TTOTC. My derived solution of the poem is really simple and point blank easy. That is one layer of three. The other layers are a bit more complex, the difficulty increases from one , to two , then to three. Where I sound like I'm being too complex is in the persuit of proof in the evidentiaries in all of FF's forms of communication. To me, it's rather apparent that FF gave us many breadcrumbs in his communications that will help with "Confidence" in ones Decode. Such as the Q&A about the "...Saved especially for the the person that solves the clues. That person will be pleased when she sees it". There's no other quote quite like that one to use as a 'tool'. Perhaps he said that as for 'a Clue for confidence". Meaning: if one can figure out whom or what he means by the whole quote , specifically leading up to .."pleased when she sees it"; that that is the benchmark to confidence? It's referring back to the question asked,"Are there any objects placed in the Bronze Chest that are connected, or have meaning to the place the chest is hidden?

Who is she? Some have mentioned the possibility that "She" was FF referring to a Searcher. To me, that clearly is not the case-in my opinion. I don't know anything for sure and the odds are that 'for sure' this may be a never ending story. But it's a good fun story.

One must....

https://youtu.be/brZ1OmyKz_w

Forevermore,
IMO[z]
/0/

[Spoon]

Hey Alsetenash - thanks for the kind words, but I'm just a dumb actuary. I think that most people don't spend enough time editing what they wrote; a lesson I learned early in my career.

I believe I said, "If the Chase was well-designed", because we don't really have definitive proof that it was. Maybe because it's because we are both dreamers, but it seems like we both believe it was.

That is an odd quote, for sure, but I could probably list at least another 100 "odd quotes". The important questions are: Were they intentional? Do they have meaning within the context of the Chase? Is there a consistent methodology from which that meaning can be derived? While we have to allow for the odd slip-up by the author, I think the answers are probably yes, yes, and yes.

[Hear me all]

What is the wording on the back of the map? I don't have any of FF's books. Thank you.

After 5 years are you still imposing a burden on those that did purchase the book? Why? Why don't you buy the books? F said you needed them. How can you possibly be taken seriously when you wouldn't purchase the books during the Chase or even now? They aren't out of reach, in fact some are very cheap now.

[Blurrbee]

back when these videos were publicly available on youtube i downloaded a lot of them

[Fenndery]

It won't answer the mail on any visuals in the video, but I created transcripts of the portions that were specific to the unintended clue in TFTW. I'll gather all those and post them here. I recall that many searchers erroneously assumed it was the exclusion of Canada from the colored portion of the map that was the unintended clue, but that definitely wasn't it. Benchmark maps went through several iterations of the map with Forrest, none of which included Canada, so Forrest was well aware that Canada was excluded from the colored search area.

Its my opinion that the clue in TFTW was the story about his friend from Taos. Because that hint directly ties into the very last hint he gave with the pic of the chest and the "stick and the key" . They are the EXACT same hint . If you listen to the story and then LOOK at the pic and what the stick and key RESEMBLE , you will now see how that story relates . it is the FINAL clue of the poem :if you are brave and in the wood . NOW , take all that info , and look at the cover of his "smoke" book You will find that cover actually VISUALIZES the entire hiding place . Notice the skull where they are entering ? Notice the skull in his library ?

I am only being cryptic for the thousands of lazy people who just want the answer on a silver platter .I know you will take a second to at least take a gander at my words , and then you are going to say " HOW in the AF have I missed all these related hints ?" Because this will HONESTLY BE an aha moment . I promise to you it will NOT be a goose chase and you will thank yourself for hearing me out on this .TRUST ME BRO . Give me blind faith for the little time it will take to research this , and you WILL be rewarded . Peace bro.