🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <316@markle.randvax.UUCP> jim@randvax.UUCP (Jim Gillogly) writes:
>In article <2109@polya.STANFORD.EDU> haddad@polya.STANFORD.EDU (Ramsey Haddad) writes:
>>
>>Can anyone decrypt the following:
>> 122, 151, 164, 175, 184, 203, 221, 272, 278, 287, 323, 356
>As it happens, I have a copy of my 1980 Cryptologia paper, which has the
>numbers I used to find the above string.  The Denning page numbers give
>
>(fanfare, please)       122 151 164 175 184 203 221 272 278 287 323 356
>			 F   I   O   M   I   E   B   T   T   N   E   P
>

Mike Rose (mbr@lanl.gov) told me that he had seen the solution before,
that the code was based of the Declaration of Independance, and that
he believed that the answer was: DO NOT BREAM THIS.  Since this was
more letters than I had posted numbers, he wondered if I had missed
some numbers.  I was horrified to find that I had.  Hence, I
tentatively accepted his answer, and assumed that the `M' was either
because (1) Denning could find no `K' in the nearby text, or (2) the
Beale ciphers had encoding errors, and so she inserted an intentional
one as an inside joke.

I didn't check the Declaration of Independance myself, because I hoped
that someone would have an on-line version that would save some
tedious counting and reduce the possibility of errors.

And alas, Jim Gillogly has such a set of numbers, and they don't seem
to make sense, yet.

122 138 151 164 175 184 203 221 241 272 278 287 323 356
D   O   N   O   T   B   R   E   A   M   T   H   I   S
F   ?   I   O   M   I   E   B   ?   T   T   N   E   P

Oh yuck.-- 
Ramsey W Haddad