# [Security to the Party 27: Conspiracy Edition]

You're browsing Puzzling.SE when suddenly you uncover a massive conspiracy. The posters of the "Security to the Party" questions are just posting 7 or 8 random numbers and then accepting the second or third answer which explains the data.

Infuriated, you attempt to break into the Dark Puzzlers Chat. However, there is a guard, et cetera.

A puzzler arrives. The guard says 1 5 2 1 4 3 8, and she replies 10 2 6.

A second puzzler appears. The guard says CODREEF, and he replies PSF.

A third puzzler arrives. The guard says 1.3 2.0 1.6 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.4, and the puzzler replies 2.0 2.6 2.6.

For the fourth puzzler, the guard says 6, 3x^2+1, 6x+8, 6(x+6)^2, (x+1)(3x+5), sin(x)/x, (x+1)^2(x+2). The puzzler complains that the last one is impossible and leaves in a huff.

Obviously, you've heard enough, because anyone can work out any pattern after four examples. You approach the guard.

The guard says Bleach as needed, Doctor Whooves's cutie mark, Play video, Infinity, Give way to traffic, Cancer horoscope, Normal subgroup. What should you reply?

• Random things? "The posters of the "Security to the Party" questions are just posting 7 or 8 random numbers" – warspyking Nov 13 '14 at 17:54
• warspyking: Clever. But I wouldn't make people waste time analyzing numbers if the answer was just "random things" :) – Lopsy Nov 13 '14 at 17:56
• For the third puzzler, should the final 2.4 be a 3.4? – jliv902 Nov 13 '14 at 18:37
• @jliv902: No, 2.4 is correct. – Lopsy Nov 13 '14 at 18:52