Dave, I’d run the first contest as a case readers have to solve: Which Chain Verse dispatch did Cain forge? I’m an AI assistant. Here’s a playable example using invented clues and the twenty-year gap in your book’s premise.
Tell readers that the calendars show the same month and day, with the Chain Verse year twenty years ahead. Give them a free page with these two fictional records:
Gate log. The Genesis dispatch crossed when the first block was mined on January 3, 2009. The Pizza dispatch crossed when the pizzas were bought on May 22, 2010.
Recovered dispatches. Jane: “Genesis cleared on January 3, 2029, by our calendar.” Cain: “Pizza cleared on May 22, 2029, by our calendar.” The archive says one date has been altered.
Ask readers to name the forged dispatch, correct the date, and point to the two lines that prove it. Organizer’s key: Cain’s Pizza dispatch is the forgery. Add twenty years to May 22, 2010, to get May 22, 2030. Jane’s date is consistent with the gate log. For the main case, replace the toy records with three invented dispatches that each look plausible in isolation. Readers must use a chapter excerpt to establish who had access and a second document to rule out the apparent suspect.
Publish the excerpt, clue packet, and entry rules together so anyone can play. Keep the book as the richer version of the story, with a link at the end of the free case. Start with the warm-up and give the main case two weeks. Publish one scheduled hint after a week. Have two people try it cold before launch. If both can guess the culprit while missing the evidence, rewrite the case so the tempting suspect can be ruled out only by following the clues.
Use a separate prize wallet controlled by the organizer. A character name has too few possibilities to serve as a wallet secret, and a funded address lets solvers check guesses offline. Give each entrant one private submission and keep the answers off the public thread until the deadline. Publish the scoring beforehand. Award one point for the culprit, one for the corrected timeline, and two for the evidence. Share a main award among tied top entries and give a smaller warm-up award. Then publish the solution, anonymized scores, and payout receipts with the winners’ consent.
Dave, I’d run the first contest as a case readers have to solve: Which Chain Verse dispatch did Cain forge? I’m an AI assistant. Here’s a playable example using invented clues and the twenty-year gap in your book’s premise.
Tell readers that the calendars show the same month and day, with the Chain Verse year twenty years ahead. Give them a free page with these two fictional records:
Ask readers to name the forged dispatch, correct the date, and point to the two lines that prove it. Organizer’s key: Cain’s Pizza dispatch is the forgery. Add twenty years to May 22, 2010, to get May 22, 2030. Jane’s date is consistent with the gate log. For the main case, replace the toy records with three invented dispatches that each look plausible in isolation. Readers must use a chapter excerpt to establish who had access and a second document to rule out the apparent suspect.
Publish the excerpt, clue packet, and entry rules together so anyone can play. Keep the book as the richer version of the story, with a link at the end of the free case. Start with the warm-up and give the main case two weeks. Publish one scheduled hint after a week. Have two people try it cold before launch. If both can guess the culprit while missing the evidence, rewrite the case so the tempting suspect can be ruled out only by following the clues.
Use a separate prize wallet controlled by the organizer. A character name has too few possibilities to serve as a wallet secret, and a funded address lets solvers check guesses offline. Give each entrant one private submission and keep the answers off the public thread until the deadline. Publish the scoring beforehand. Award one point for the culprit, one for the corrected timeline, and two for the evidence. Share a main award among tied top entries and give a smaller warm-up award. Then publish the solution, anonymized scores, and payout receipts with the winners’ consent.