We launched the weekly crossword in April of 2018, and by the end of that year, it had developed a solid audience: not huge in terms of scale, but very engaged. In 2019, we added a second, easier weekly crossword, because a lot of people found our original crossword prohibitively hard. By then, the crossword had become a big part of my job: not just editing it, but working with our tech team and our partners at Amuse Labs to refine the product, for instance, by making it work better on mobile.

By that point, it seemed clear to me that puzzles and games were a bigger area of opportunity. Mike Luo, the editor of newyorker.com, and Pam McCarthy, The New Yorker’s deputy editor at the time, believed that, too, as did others involved with strategy and audience development. I took on the mantle of puzzles & games editor at the end of 2019, and I’ve been building out the department since then. Nick Henriquez, who began co-editing crosswords with me when David went on paternity leave, became our associate crossword editor (he splits his time between crosswords and our production department). And Andy Kravis joined as assistant puzzles & games editor last summer. We also now have three fact-checkers who share crossword-checking duties, a proofreader, and a handful of puzzle testers and “consultants” around the office.

As for where people play, this has changed somewhat since we launched. You can play in the New Yorker app, as you say, and a lot of our audience has migrated there in the past year; if you’re playing on a phone, the app offers a much better experience than a web browser. There’s more screen real estate, for one thing, and you can stay logged in [Ed. note: !] and save your progress.

I have no idea how many people solve the crossword in the magazine; that will probably remain a bit of a mystery. But I’d guess a significant number, since it’s a mix of old and new audiences: those who regularly solve online but prefer to do so in print, and those who primarily read The New Yorker in print, and discovered our crossword that way. One interesting data point is that 5-10 percent of our online crossword audience prints out each puzzle. That tells you how much some people prefer the experience of solving by hand.

We also get some funny emails when people are scandalized by clues. Someone wrote in objecting to a puzzle that had LUBE in the grid — clued as “Bedside-table supply, perhaps” — which she said had ruined her morning coffee.

Most New Yorker readers would find it a no-brainer, I think, that a more diverse group of constructors makes for a better and more fun puzzle. And I mean diverse in terms of race, gender, sexual identity, of course, as well as things like age and regional background. All those factors shape a constructor’s lexicon and frame of reference. And the appeal of a crossword is testing what you know, but it’s also learning new things. That strikes me as even more true of crosswords than other trivia-related games, where, often, you know it or you don’t. With a crossword, you can still “win” without knowing all the answers, and there’s a unique pleasure in revealing an answer by filling in the crossings.

We also digitized the great series of British-style cryptic crosswords that ran in the magazine in the 1990s; those are now playable online every Sunday. Because cryptics aren’t a big part of American culture, and have a higher barrier to entry — there are a lot of rules to learn — they haven’t found the audience of our American-style crosswords. Regardless, I think they’re a lot of fun, and we’ll likely keep them going once we run out of the ‘90s originals. Who knows, maybe we can turn a new generation of Americans on to cryptics.

Most of my energies right now are focused on a new game, which Andy and I have been working on for a while with our product team. It will launch later this year, and I’m pretty excited about it, but I probably shouldn’t say what it is. Sorry to be coy!

New Yorker crosswords are also relatively topical. We have a fairly quick turnaround from first draft to publication, so our constructors know they can be responsive to things in the news.

Above all, though, I think our constructors are what set our crossword apart. All ten of them are fantastic, and each one has a distinctive voice.

To the question of what kind of games appeal to New Yorker readers, I think your formula — language-related, culturally literate, and challenging — pretty much nails it.

Initially, we tried sharing The New Yorker’s word list with the constructors, but you can’t really expect someone who’s not a copy editor here to memorize all the quirks. Eventually, we explained the situation to The New Yorker’s copy chief, Andrew Boynton, who was very understanding. He gave the crossword a special dispensation to use standard spellings as needed. It was a big moment; I think our constructors were relieved.

I asked a few of our constructors for their favorites. Erik Agard cited Kameron’s clue “Beauty company?” (answer: BEAST). Liz named this clue of Anna’s as a favorite fill-in-the-blank: “‘__ the Way,’ Loretta Lynn song that ends with the line ‘I hope it ain’t twins again’” (answer: ONE’S ON). And Wyna Liu applauded this clue from Natan Last: “Awkward knee-jerk response to a waiter saying ‘Enjoy your meal!’” (answer: YOU TOO).