> it also makes the puzzle more fun.

No; it makes the puzzle illogical and thus about as much fun, for those who prefer logical outcomes, as discussing religion or politics.

That could be - in my country religion and politics is literally a matter of life or death. We discuss them to no end.

I'm genuinely perplexed by this, how is the puzzle even a puzzle if you don't judge it by formal logic?

It's still useful for young people or those who have never stopped to consider it. I think it's a good introduction to the warts of a context sensitive grammar

Because in everyday life we do not formally define ideas.

Just for example I play a game with my children where we tickle each other when we see a yellow vehicle. Is a yellow tractor a vehicle for purpose of the game? How about a yellow baby cart. How about a billboard with a photograph of a yellow baby's toy car?

We honestly have more fun discussing what is a vehicle for purpose of the game than we do tickling. Especially when it becomes clear that a yellow baby carriage is a vehicle only if it is daddy to be tickled... Honestly a good lesson to learn early that life is not fair and that rules are subjective.

Reminds me of "The rule says, “No vehicles in the park”", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36453856