https://www.ozervnews.com

Here's one to ponder:

THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PARAGRAPH. I’m curious about just how quickly you can find out what is so unusual about it. It looks so ordinary and plain that you would think nothing was wrong with it. In fact, nothing is wrong with it! It is highly unusual though. Study it and think about it. You still may not find anything odd but if you work at it, you might find out. Try to do it without any coaching!

No indent ?

8 short sentences in 4 lines, far too many which could have been reduced to 1 or 2.

No E's

PeterH

No idea I am zonked again

PeterH,

Ya got it in one!

The most frequently-used letter of the English alphabet does not appear anywhere in those four sentences.

If you have a puzzle, Peter, go for it!

Peter is a puzzle

I'll put one up while Peter gets his ready.
Three friends decide to split the bill after a meal at a restaurant. The waiter says the bill is $90, so each guest pays $30.
“Later the waiter realises the bill should only be $85. To rectify this, he takes $5 from the amount to return to the group.
“On the way to the table, the waiter realises that he cannot divide the money equally. As the customers didn't know the total of the revised bill, the waiter decides to just give each of the three friends $1 and keep $2 for himself.
“Each guest got $1 back: so now each guest only paid $29; bringing the total paid to $87. The waiter has $2. $87+ $2 = $89 so, if the guests originally handed over $90, what happened to the remaining $1?”

It must be a flaw in the way you do sums T1. $85 divided by three equals $28.33 add the one dollar returned + $ 29.33. Times 3 = $87.99 then add the $2 he tipped himself and we are only 1 cent out. Poor old Mr Turnbull missed out again. Or is that how govt do their sums anyway
Either way, there is no victim this time.

supersparky wrote: ↑Tue Jul 10, 2018 7:18 pm It must be a flaw in the way you do sums T1. $85 divided by three equals $28.33 add the one dollar returned + $ 29.33. Times 3 = $87.99 then add the $2 he tipped himself and we are only 1 cent out. Poor old Mr Turnbull missed out again. Or is that how govt do their sums anyway
Either way, there is no victim this time.

Yes, it is the miss direction at this point, "“Each guest got $1 back: so now each guest only paid $29; bringing the total paid to $87." The total paid was $90. $90 - $3 for the refund = $87 - the $2 pocketed by the waiter = $85, the actual total of the bill. Reversed, $85 was the bill total + $3 refunded + $2 pocketed by the waiter = $90, the amount originally received by the waiter.

So who is up next?