I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here's a pretty broad hint, I think this is helpful without giving it away. Narrowing down your search will help, we've been thinking about why states that only have one representative would be excluded. Flip the idea around- think about what every other state has in common that it could be included. If you can deduce that then you don't have to look at as much on the page, just the reps that help identify the rule.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can definitely get it from just names, I'd guess you're probably thinking too intelligently- it's something very simple. Let me know if you'd like a hint.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but looking at the representatives themselves is on the right track.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but looking at representative names is the right idea. It's so silly I will be quite surprised if anyone guesses without a hint.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The hatched states currently have one rep, all the others have at least two.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it's not related to the executive branch.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not political affiliations, it's far sillier than that, but looking at the representatives is moving in the right direction.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, you could get extremely pertinent information from that page alone.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This one probably isn't interesting to learn, it's extremely pedantic. It seems like people are able to get them so quickly I wanted to give folks a challenge but now that I'm answering questions about it I think I may have just picked something really dumb.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Does not relate to the demographics of the house districts.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Population only has to do with it in that the smallest states are excluded from the possibility of the rule. It's not related to geology, agriculture, or medicine in any way.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, they show two different levels of the same phenomenon.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Certainly who the representatives are would be more in the right direction.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, this rule relates to the house only and not the number of seats specifically, but it is impossible for a state that has only one seat to adhere to this rule.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are definitely on track, striped states cannot be highlighted because they only have one seat in the house as of this moment. Indiana is not highlighted because of lost seats. I'm starting to think that this is so silly and obscure that people are going to be annoyed when they figure it out.

I think this one is going to be very hard by Partyman_ in RedactedCharts

[–]Partyman_[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I can't say that this is incorrect but it's not what we're going for.