Hi All,
When I want to cue a missing object that one of a group of people lost (don't know which one), would I gather all the photo's of all the known people, write out a new TRN and line to each person on each target reference material photo (or written document if no photo) then design a cue based on the group of TRNs?
Note:
Example (fake) people refs.. [1234/5454] or [4343/6556] or [7766/1122]
Example TRM ref of missing object [9999/0000]

Cue idea 1:
[4232/4220] [1234/5454] or [4343/6556] or [7766/1122]/ [9999/0000] / location

Or would I assign all of the people to one TRN and do something like this...
Example TRN referenced on all TRMs [5555/3333]

Cue idea 2:
[4232/4220] [5555/3333]/ [9999/0000] / location

Thanks in advance for the help.
~Nathan

Let's try the path of least resistance first. Can you acquire a photo of the missing object?

I see your point and since this all a hypothetical scenario let me refine my question to get at the heart of what I am asking.

Let's say this was more like a cache hunt.

- We don't know which one ( or more ) people cached the object.
- We know how many people are in the group and we know their full names. Some have photos but some only have written material about them.
- We have a general idea on what the object is but there are no photos - just some written material on what it might be.
- We are certain that it was cached.

Would it still be more simplistic to focus the cue on the object?

Hope this helps.
Thanks!
~Nathan

Well for example, the Lost Deutscheman Mine? (He was German, not Dutch).

Topical searches on the subject matter is the easiest starting point, usually that will give you something to latch onto.

So if I get your idea and the project were to locate the Lost Deutscheman Mine then we would start the first session like this...

[nnn1][nnn1] "Lost Deutscheman Mine"

If the results are dream like and/or are all over the board - then we might have a nonsensical cue. Try a different approach.

However if we have a solid connection then we would follow up with...

[nnn2][nnn2] [nnn1][nnn1] location

Followed by...

[nnn3][nnn3] The nearest most recognizable feature within 300 feet of [nnn2][nnn2]

Am I getting this potential flow right?
I am kind of getting away from my original "Group of people cue" question but it seems relevant.
Thanks again for all of the help.
~Nathan

That would be two spelling errors in a two-part word. Has this name actually been used? The Wikipedia article gives the impression that even though Dutchman is a misnomer (a plausible one as it's the English word closest to the original pronunciation of 'deutsch'), it is the term most widely used for the thing it means. Just wondering in case anyone wanted to try this example.

Could you not print out a screen shot of the Wikipedia article titled "Lost Dutchman's Gold Mine" and write out a TRN complete with a black pointing line (pointing into the title) and place it into an envelope?
Would this be too vague or would it be enough of a "you get the point" request?

It also says in the wiki article that the mine is "also known by many similar names" - which brings me back my original question: what if you have multiple people/targets with different names but all directed to the same question? It would seem inefficient to run a session on each individually but potentially worth it if you stumble upon a solid result.

On the flip side if you were to include into one session a bunch of names of targets/people and one or more were nonsensical then would that not throw the whole session off?

~Nathan

Kfa, thanks for catching in iPad spelling correction. Thought I was losing my mind. OP, you know the name of the miner, wouldn't that make a more logical starting point?

Friends don't let friends use Apple products.