I've actually put them in comments to the guardian article.
1) I've Already said that step 4 relies on Bernard knowing that Albert has not calculated that he (Bernard) does not know the date.....
2) How would Bernard know that Albert had not calculated? Even if he had overheard Cheryl telling Albert? There is nothing to stop Albert also having confirmed this for himself......If Albert had reasoning ability, then he would not necessarily have known that Cheryl had deduced that this is an adequet or meaningful piece of info......Albert might have just assumed this was idle speech from Cheryl.....how does he know that this means that she is hinting that it is meant to imply that he doesnt have unique dates.
How do we know Bernard does not assume that Albert has not also calculated from the month he knows?
3) If we assume that Albert does just make his opening statement because of cheryl telling him Bernard, then Alberts role in this puzzle is merely as a pawn of the quiz setter, Albert plays no active part, he merely relays info from cheryl.
4) Why would Cheryl tell Albert that Bernard does not know? Albert could work this out for himself, given that he knows the month (in the controversial answers case - August). In which case why doesnt she just tell her her sodding birthdate straight? Is it because Albert posessess little logical deduction ability? In which case she is being a bit mean in posing a question to which only Bernard could deduce the answer.
In which case why would 'renowned thickie Albert' be furious at Bernard getting the answer?
and yet in the articles point 7, it is suggested Albert is capable of logical deduction that surpasses the ability needed to be able to calculate(without being told), that Bernard does not know the date initially.
So again, why would Cheryl tell Albert? a person who is perfectly able to deduce/calculate that which cheryl tells him?
August 17th requires such a messy set up, the more you consider it.....
far easier to say, this is a logical deduction problem......posed by cheryl/the examiner, to challenge Albert and Bernard to not tell each other their info, but only what they can deduce (calculate) from which we are challenged to put ourselves in their shoes and deduce/calculate from the facts and the result of their deductions that they state.....just as they do with their own statements
Can't you see this is so much neater?