Fairness in the Challenge

[MattC]

People seem to bring this up a lot, in one way or the other, and I confess to being a bit curious as to the viewpoints of others upon this particular issue.

Many seem to contend that the Million-Dollar Challenge is unfair. I agree with them that it is, but I disagree strongly as to who is actually suffering from this bias. It is my contention, the reasons and support for which I will provide below, that the Million-Dollar Challenge is unfairly biased in favor of the applicant. As I stated, I will provide supporting logic below for this rather outre and contrary deduction. I welcome all challenges to this belief, I'd rather be pointed in the direction of the correct answer rather than hold onto my errant conjectures.

I have two main contentions that support this point:

1) Little financial risk exists for the applicant in comparison to what the JREF risks by allowing the applicant to apply. Further, the act of application causes the JREF financial losses for no return, regardless of what stage the process is terminated in.

The applicant is only asked to pay expenses throughout the procedure. Generally, looking over the claims posted on the applications forum, these expenses would seem to number less than two hundred dollars. The one exception may be the GSIC case and the applicant's sound system, but as the applicant owned and (presumably) used this system before filing his application, the cost seems logically discountable from the reckoning. For ease of mathematics and to represent miscellaneous costs (postage, stamps, that sort of thing), let's inflate the figure to one thousand (1000) dollars.

Simplifying the fraction (1,000,000/1,000) will allow us to obtain the exact dollar amount risked by the JREF in comparison to that risked by the applicant. Performing this rather elementary calculation leads to the figure 1000:1. Translating that figure from mathematics into language reveals that the JREF has at risk one thousand dollars for every dollar the applicant risks in being tested, and this is with a very upper-level estimate of the costs involved in the application procedure. Had I any sort of paranormal ability, I would consider this risk rather well worth the application fee... which leads directly to the second part of my above contention.

There is no application fee. The applicant can freely apply to take the challenge, suffering only a small fee for postage. In a complete deviation from normal bottom-line-oriented business practices, costs such as research fees (access to certain research papers is not free, often requiring subscription to sophisticated databases, LexisNexis being a common example), technology costs, man-hours, and consultation fees are eaten by the JREF bottom line, in what I can only assume is an attempt to make the application procedure as painless as possible for the applicant. While the costs involved in processing the claim are certainly not major ones on an organizational level, the fact remains that the JREF receives no direct compensation from the applicant for costs incurred by the application and/or testing process. From a financial standpoint, the JREF loses money every time someone applies.

2) The applicant is given a voice in matters of protocol negotiation despite the difference in circumstances desired.

The logic behind the JREF giving the applicant a say in the matter is sound in that the applicant knows best the circumstances under which they can perform, the problem is that this gives the applicants the belief that they have some measure of authority. The standards under which the applicant desires to be tested are those under which he or she stands the best odds of success (considering the stakes involved, this desire is perfectly normal and reasonable), while the JREF desires a set of circumstances designed to produce a scientifically valid result, or as close to that as is possible given the claim (also normal and reasonable). This dichotomy of idealized desires often results in a situation where the applicants claim the test makes them unable to perform optimally, while the JREF is left claiming that the test was, as the applicant designed it, wholly unreliable or inconclusive.

I also find myself morally against the idea of the applicant being given an equal voice in the proceedings, as it turns what was a 'challenge' into something really more of a bad wager. To me, having an equal voice in something would require having equal risk - however, I do not imagine the challenge would receive many takers if the applicants had to raise one million dollars in stake money to match against the JREF's. It would certainly make the challenges that did occur far more monumentous, however. While the applicant could certainly back out of the proceedings in either situation, there is surely some difference between two equal partners disagreeing, and someone who risks nothing launching a trash-can fire of criticism against the other party. This being a moral belief, it is of course completely illogical and therefore discountable.

============

I hope I have done some justice to my beliefs in this matter. I look forward to viewing everyone's replies.

~ Matt

[JoeyDonuts]

Well, that's a by-god pretty good cost-benefit analysis of the MDC.

I hope Allan Greenspan sees it and publicly states that he believes the MDC is a solid investment opportunity.

I'd comment more, but I have to get ready to psychically deflect an asteroid away from the North Atlantic.

Ommmm-Bakula.....Ommmmm-Bakula...

[Crispy Duck]

I think you've made a reasonable case that the MDC is a bad business model, but of course no-one has ever claimed that it is any kind of business model, whether good or bad.

I think JREF's intent is that the challenge should be as easy to take as possible, consistent with it producing a scientifically valid result. To ensure this, it specifically does not expect an applicant to pay for all JREF's admin and other costs. This is essential to its purpose. Remember, the main purpose of the MDC is to show that, even when someone (ie Randi) goes out of their way to make it easy for people to win a million simply by doing what they claim they do every day (dowsing, predicting the future, curing disease with a foot massage, etc), no-one has won the million and very few even rise to the challenge. In those terms, the MDC has its greatest effect when as many people as possible have access to it.

[Rasmus]

You forgot the third reason why the challenge is biased in favour of the applicants:

3. The applicant only has to do what he claims he can do.
If the ability really exists then the applicant can almost certainly walk away with the million dollars!

(In so far, I don't see that the applicant has an equal say in the design of the protocols. i.e. if there is no agreement then no tests happens. Which is bad for the applicant and good for the JREF.)

[chillzero]

I agree with this - and particularly with Rasmus's addition of point 3.

When I came here to look at taking the challenge myself, I was delighted to see the setup, and particularly the fact that all I would need to do was what I believed I'd been doing all along. I thought - this will be a snatch, really easy.

I looked at the FAQs and read a few discussions on setting up protocols, etc. I took on board some of the concerns about how to eliminate cheating, and I couldn't find anything to disagree with. I still believed that I'd be able to prove my psychic ability because I knew I wasn't cheating. It was only when I started trying to apply some of those checks into my readings, etc that I realised the truth of the matter.

Some psychics will claim that skepticism will force you to doubt yourself, and that the doubt is what interferes with your ability. My experience was that I had no doubt, I was more driven than ever to prove that I 'saw' this stuff internally - I wasn't reading body language, etc. I had no doubts, and even more conviction and confidence in my ability to take this test. And, I wasn't dealing with skeptics face to face either, so no negative forces to drag down my psychic aura, or whatever.

I firmly believe that if these abilities exist at all, it would be a really simple matter for any psychic to undergo the test without antagonism or intimidation, and that they could easily surpass the agreed pass marks.

[Rasmus]

I firmly believe that if these abilities exist at all, it would be a really simple matter for any psychic to undergo the test without antagonism or intimidation, and that they could easily surpass the agreed pass marks.

QFT.

The test doesn't make it difficult for the applicants. The applicant can take his ability and water it down to the simplest, most fool-proof, most reliable application possible.

You can levitate 100m above the ground for hours on end? All you need to do to pass the test is levitate 20 inches above the floor for a minute!

You can read the mind of a good friend and always know exactly what they are thinking? Fine, you get to chose a list of things for your friend to think about, in advance. You don't have to find out what he's thinking, you just have to differentiate between "a bottle of milk" and "a sun flower" and "a tennis racket".

You can show us that homoeopathy works to cure diseases that otherwise send people to certain death? You can demonstrate the undeniably strong, beneficial, medical effects of a homoeopathic potency? Great, we'll give you a million dollars if you are able to tell that strong, powerful, magical nectar from a bottle of water, and you can do that in any which way you please.

It should be easy as pie! And all the JREF really asks in return is that applicants should not waste their time and refrain from cheating.

[shadron]

Indeed. All that is asked of the claimant is to do it unequivocably. The claimant is given full rein to to establish conditions, set the stage, and perform. All the JREF asks, essentially, is that the agreed upon protocol be unequivocable, the outcome be obvious to all involved and not require any "judgement" applied by anyone, that it rule out chicanery, and that the chances of a false positive outcome be sufficiently large (as high as 1 in 1000 for the preliminary test, and higher for the final). These requirements seem very reasonable.

As for cost, it takes some money to make money. Since when does the stock market grant anyone a startup bankroll?

[Kuko 4000]

This is a good thread, I've found that many people who are against the MDC just don't understand it.

And wow, chillzero, I didn't know about your background, very interesting :)

[Rasmus]

As for cost, it takes some money to make money. Since when does the stock market grant anyone a startup bankroll?

Even then:

Someone has had the time and resources to find about their powers, possibly even develop and refine them.

They've had the time and resources to convince themselves and others of their ability.

And then, suddenly, there isn't enough time or money to do it just once more? (with local sceptic societies being more than happy to conduct tests, with forumites vouching to give money if only a protocol can be agreed on, with volunteers to perform various tasks for free, etc, etc, etc.)

No, it doesn't even take money to win the challenge. (there are a few exceptions, I guess. But mosts claims can be tested fairly easily and without much expense.)

[chillzero]

And wow, chillzero, I didn't know about your background, very interesting :)

Thank you.
I had the opportunity to tell James Randi my story this year, and he took me aside for a chat in the applications filing room. We reviewed a few, and discussed exactly what is being discussed here - that the challenge is weighted as much in favour of the applicant as possible.

I was delighted when he told me that people like myself are part of the reason he founded the Challenge, and indeed the forum. As well as the wonderful opportunity to identify a real paranormal ability, and the more publicised work done to discredit frauds, the idea that some like me can be educated to realise the fallacy of their beliefs was heartwarming to him.

[RoboTimbo]

Thank you.
I had the opportunity to tell James Randi my story this year, and he took me aside for a chat in the applications filing room. We reviewed a few, and discussed exactly what is being discussed here - that the challenge is weighted as much in favour of the applicant as possible.

I was delighted when he told me that people like myself are part of the reason he founded the Challenge, and indeed the forum. As well as the wonderful opportunity to identify a real paranormal ability, and the more publicised work done to discredit frauds, the idea that some like me can be educated to realise the fallacy of their beliefs was heartwarming to him.


I think this is a more important consideration that outweighs any perceived unfairness towards JREF. It's the "E" part. I don't think the million will be won by anybody, not because the challenge is unfair to them, certainly, but it has served it's purpose. CZ is a just one of, I imagine, many converts (congrats, CZ!), one who is most visible to us. I don't think we're able to know how many there are who we'll never know about but still benefitted. I don't think you can do a cost/benefit analysis on it that would make any sort of sense but I'm willing to go with my gut feeling, that it's a GOOD THING.

Kind of a rambling way to get to the point that the challenge was set up the way it was, heavily weighted in favor of the claimant, with a huge payout and virtually no risk to the claimant (other than ego and hopefully a big wakeup call), so as to give people real pause for thought about "woo woo" thinking. It HAD to be that way. I don't think it could have had as much impact if it were a simple bet with a lot of risk on the claimant's side. The obvious out would always be, "I can't afford to wager that kind of money, they'll just rig it so they win!"

[Mongrel]

This is a good thread, I've found that many people who are against the MDC just don't understand it.

If you look closely though what you'll find is not that they don't understand it, they deliberately misunderstand it. Most of the sites that are against the MDC seem to have an uncanny ability to misinterpret the rules.

Look through this section and see how many breach the "We don't care how it works, explain what you can do!" rule*, others try to bring the end result into doubt by saying "Randi will just declare that my powers weren't good enough!" despite the rule saying "there will be no judgement, the test will be arranged so that judgement will not be needed". Finally you have people like The Professor who want to squeeze every last semantic drop out of a word whilst shouting "Randi's afraid of me, he won't let me take the challenge"




*All rules are paraphrased

[Rodney]

I was delighted when he told me that people like myself are part of the reason he founded the Challenge, and indeed the forum. As well as the wonderful opportunity to identify a real paranormal ability, and the more publicised work done to discredit frauds, the idea that some like me can be educated to realise the fallacy of their beliefs was heartwarming to him.
And the reason he now feels compelled to discontinue the Challenge is . . . what, again?

[Gravy]

And the reason he now feels compelled to discontinue the Challenge is . . . what, again?Wow, you can navigate the internet and write posts, but you can't read? I don't suppose that ability, or disability, is worth a million, but it's remarkable nonetheless.

[MattC]

And the reason he now feels compelled to discontinue the Challenge is . . . what, again?

Please don't make chillzero post another one of her famous warning posts.

I reserve the right to cry if you do.

~ Matt

[William Smith]

And the reason he now feels compelled to discontinue the Challenge is . . . what, again?

See for yourself. (http://www.randi.org/joom/swift/swift-january-4-2008.html#i4)

[chillzero]

And the reason he now feels compelled to discontinue the Challenge is . . . what, again?

You could easily have found this yourself, but you can thank GzuzKryzt for sourcing it for you:

See for yourself. (http://www.randi.org/joom/swift/swift-january-4-2008.html#i4)

Our expectations at first were that we’d attract major personalities by this means, but they’ve avoided having to take the test by simply not applying; those who have actually applied are generally honestly self-deluded persons who have difficulty stating what they can do, which can be understood if they really don’t know what they’re experiencing; we at JREF have gone through involved procedures to help them recognize their problems. Usually, they have indicated that they don’t know what real scientific rules are, when it comes down to their actually being properly tested.

Now, to put my mod hat on and make Matt cry - please keep any further posts in this thread strictly on topic. It's not about why the challenge is ending, it's about the nature of the challenge while it is open.

[MattC]

Now, to put my mod hat on and make Matt cry - please keep any further posts in this thread strictly on topic. It's not about why the challenge is ending, it's about the nature of the challenge while it is open.

HOW DARE YOU EVIL MODERATOR WOMAN!??!!?

http://www.chaichan.com/wan21_Jan/pictures_dic/crying.gif

See what your harsh words of mayhem have reduced me to?! Once I was a proud human, sitting behind a keyboard attempting to bring his thoughts to the world. Now I am but a GIF image, not even worthy of a JPEG, sitting on a page displaying my emotions to an uncaring, unfeeling cyberspace audience.

"With my last breath I curse chillzero!!"

~ Matt

[The Professor]

People seem to bring this up a lot, in one way or the other, and I confess to being a bit curious as to the viewpoints of others upon this particular issue.

Many seem to contend that the Million-Dollar Challenge is unfair. I agree with them that it is, but I disagree strongly as to who is actually suffering from this bias. It is my contention, the reasons and support for which I will provide below, that the Million-Dollar Challenge is unfairly biased in favor of the applicant. As I stated, I will provide supporting logic below for this rather outre and contrary deduction. I welcome all challenges to this belief, I'd rather be pointed in the direction of the correct answer rather than hold onto my errant conjectures.

I have two main contentions that support this point:

1) Little financial risk exists for the applicant in comparison to what the JREF risks by allowing the applicant to apply. Further, the act of application causes the JREF financial losses for no return, regardless of what stage the process is terminated in.

The applicant is only asked to pay expenses throughout the procedure. Generally, looking over the claims posted on the applications forum, these expenses would seem to number less than two hundred dollars. The one exception may be the GSIC case and the applicant's sound system, but as the applicant owned and (presumably) used this system before filing his application, the cost seems logically discountable from the reckoning. For ease of mathematics and to represent miscellaneous costs (postage, stamps, that sort of thing), let's inflate the figure to one thousand (1000) dollars.

Simplifying the fraction (1,000,000/1,000) will allow us to obtain the exact dollar amount risked by the JREF in comparison to that risked by the applicant. Performing this rather elementary calculation leads to the figure 1000:1. Translating that figure from mathematics into language reveals that the JREF has at risk one thousand dollars for every dollar the applicant risks in being tested, and this is with a very upper-level estimate of the costs involved in the application procedure. Had I any sort of paranormal ability, I would consider this risk rather well worth the application fee... which leads directly to the second part of my above contention.

There is no application fee. The applicant can freely apply to take the challenge, suffering only a small fee for postage. In a complete deviation from normal bottom-line-oriented business practices, costs such as research fees (access to certain research papers is not free, often requiring subscription to sophisticated databases, LexisNexis being a common example), technology costs, man-hours, and consultation fees are eaten by the JREF bottom line, in what I can only assume is an attempt to make the application procedure as painless as possible for the applicant. While the costs involved in processing the claim are certainly not major ones on an organizational level, the fact remains that the JREF receives no direct compensation from the applicant for costs incurred by the application and/or testing process. From a financial standpoint, the JREF loses money every time someone applies.

2) The applicant is given a voice in matters of protocol negotiation despite the difference in circumstances desired.

The logic behind the JREF giving the applicant a say in the matter is sound in that the applicant knows best the circumstances under which they can perform, the problem is that this gives the applicants the belief that they have some measure of authority. The standards under which the applicant desires to be tested are those under which he or she stands the best odds of success (considering the stakes involved, this desire is perfectly normal and reasonable), while the JREF desires a set of circumstances designed to produce a scientifically valid result, or as close to that as is possible given the claim (also normal and reasonable). This dichotomy of idealized desires often results in a situation where the applicants claim the test makes them unable to perform optimally, while the JREF is left claiming that the test was, as the applicant designed it, wholly unreliable or inconclusive.

I also find myself morally against the idea of the applicant being given an equal voice in the proceedings, as it turns what was a 'challenge' into something really more of a bad wager. To me, having an equal voice in something would require having equal risk - however, I do not imagine the challenge would receive many takers if the applicants had to raise one million dollars in stake money to match against the JREF's. It would certainly make the challenges that did occur far more monumentous, however. While the applicant could certainly back out of the proceedings in either situation, there is surely some difference between two equal partners disagreeing, and someone who risks nothing launching a trash-can fire of criticism against the other party. This being a moral belief, it is of course completely illogical and therefore discountable.

============

I hope I have done some justice to my beliefs in this matter. I look forward to viewing everyone's replies.

~ Matt

Firstly, the JREF loses NOTHING of their own since the initial Million was Given to them and not earned by them. AND ... The Applicant foots ALL of the protocol bills :) The JREF risks nothing of their own making.

Secondly, Jim Callahan has offered to give the JREF $50,000.00 to prove him wrong. (Just as Criss Angel and his clan failed to do)
Why do they not take this easy cash?

http://jimclass.com/

Please rethink your weak and shallow position :)

I'm glad you were looking forward to this.

[William Smith]

...
The JREF risks nothing of their own making.


Wrong.


Secondly, Jim Callahan has offered to give the JREF $50,000.00 to prove him wrong. (Just as Criss Angel and his clan failed to do)
Why do they not take this easy cash?

http://jimclass.com/

Please rethink your weak and shallow position :)

I'm glad you were looking forward to this.

Straw man.

[The Professor]

Drink the Gator-Aid :)

You know the JREF risks nothing that they've earned!

Show me or ANYONE where they've earned it!

[MattC]

Firstly, the JREF loses NOTHING of their own since the initial Million was Given to them and not earned by them. AND ... The Applicant foots ALL of the protocol bills :) The JREF risks nothing of their own making.

Define 'earned' in this context more clearly.


Secondly, Jim Callahan has offered to give the JREF $50,000.00 to prove him wrong. (Just as Criss Angel and his clan failed to do)
Why do they not take this easy cash?

http://jimclass.com/


They probably saw this warning:


This is to be used as an entertainment product and is not meant for children.

Also, so far as I can tell from the site, there's no sign whatsoever that the $50,000 is in any way related to the "International Seance Project". Can you provide further evidence supporting the conjecture that it was offered in this context?

Further, how do you answer Harry Houdini's debunking of seances in the 1920s?

~ Matt

(ps: I actually was somewhat looking forward to your post. Thus far you're the only person who seems to really believe it's unfair, so I confess that creating a thread to serve as the magnet for all of your random arguments was well worth reading poor capitalization and comments on my mental abilities.)

[chillzero]

Drink the Gator-Aid :)

You know the JREF risks nothing that they've earned!

Show me or ANYONE where they've earned it!

Please keep discussions in this section strictly on topic. Keep it civil and to the topic under discussion. Otherwise the thread will be placed on moderated status, or off topic posts will be removed.

[steenkh]

Firstly, the JREF loses NOTHING of their own since the initial Million was Given to them and not earned by them. AND ... The Applicant foots ALL of the protocol bills :) The JREF risks nothing of their own making.
The JREF has obtained agreement by the original donor that when the Challenge is discontinued, they can use the million dollars (or rather 2 million as the latest account showed) for other purposes. So the JREF does risk losing money of somebody is able to take the challenge.

Secondly, Jim Callahan has offered to give the JREF $50,000.00 to prove him wrong. (Just as Criss Angel and his clan failed to do)
Why do they not take this easy cash?
Funny that you should mention this phony offer in a thread about fairness ... :)

[chillzero]

As warned, thread moderated for topic (yet again). The topic is whether or not the MDC issued by RANDI is fair for the participants. Nothing to do with other challenges made to Randi, or whether or not he has the Million handy. Keep it on topic.

[The Professor]

My addition to this question is .. Is it fair to allow others to interfere in the protocol negotiations? Perhaps the negotiations might be fair but if the JREF Forum members make phone calls, emails, or some other form of negative input into the negotiations, is that fair?

[jmercer]

Protocol negotiations are between The JREF and the applicant. Unless the applicant chooses to share the negotiations publicly (thus inviting participation), there is no possible input from anyone other than the principles involved.

Nothing unfair about that.

[The Professor]

Everything from the JREF is public and open for anyone to view. If someone interferes that is not Ethical and would put the JREF MDC is a very bad situation since it would appear that they are avoiding an applicant by sabotaging his protocol.

The participation of the Forum members is to HELP the applicant, and not tamper with the protocol. Just not Fair is it.

But we will not be the judge on this will we :)

[Azrael 5]

Interference in a protocol is not possible until a protocol is agreed by parties.This has not happened.The event at Halloween was nothing to do with you,but rather Jim Callhan.
So a JREF member disrupted Jim Callahan's illegal event.If it hadn't been illegal the police would have had no just cause to stop it.

[steenkh]

My addition to this question is .. Is it fair to allow others to interfere in the protocol negotiations?
Nobody has interfered in any protocol negotiations, unless you intended to negotiate protocols in the middle of the night on a cemetary, and in that case these negotiations were not with the JREF, because they were not involved.

Besides, if nothing wrong was going on, the police could not interfere, and your complaint is void.

You have not been showing that anybody has been unfair to you. I was against reporting your actions to the police, not because of fairness, but because I think you should be allowed to look as stupid and unethical as you wish. I knew from the beginning that you would claim that if you were prevented from doing something unethical, you would think it would be "unfair".

[William Smith]

...
The participation of the Forum members is to HELP the applicant, and not tamper with the protocol. Just not Fair is it.
...

Where, by whom and when exactly did this "tampering with the protocol" take place?

[chillzero]

Please let's not derail this thread further with discussion of The Professor's Halloween event which has its own thread.

[LittleMatchGirl]

Firstly, the JREF loses NOTHING of their own since the initial Million was Given to them and not earned by them. AND ... The Applicant foots ALL of the protocol bills :) The JREF risks nothing of their own making.

JREF does lose.. with every application. It takes resources (people, time and money) to handle and document every application under the established protocols set forth by the organization. We know JREF isn’t sending invoices to the applicants for use of such resources, so JREF is essentially - albeit indirectly - contributing funds (and time ) to the tests.

I find that a significant amount of people out there tend to forget that just because an organization is non-profit, that doesn’t mean that they don’t have overhead costs to take into account and a budget to have to work with like any other business out there.

[The Professor]

Please show me ONE TIME where the JREFer's were allowed to interfere with the MDC by contacting locations or people involved in an ongoing protocol negotiation.

Please show me this, so I will know it is standard procedure.

If you are intentionally interfering and lying to those whom you contact (I've never said I'd be performing a Magic Show) then it has a horrible reflection on the JREF MDC as it makes them appear to be trying to avoid an honest application by allowing their Forum members to attempt Sabotage and keep from risking the Million Dollars.

I spoke with the JREF themselves and they also see the problem with this interference.

[Azrael 5]

Please show me ONE TIME where the JREFer's were allowed to interfere with the MDC by contacting locations or people involved in an ongoing protocol negotiation.

Please show me this, so I will know it is standard procedure.

You have been told before.The location is nothing to do with your protocol,nor are the Lake Helen Police involved in your protocol.
The protocol is what you will do to eliminate trickery and to make it self evident.
Copy and paste that into your brain.

If you are intentionally interfering and lying to those whom you contact (I've never said I'd be performing a Magic Show)
But you are a magician and you have not shown any proof that you can conatct entities or create EVP's or do anything paranormal.Therefore only explanation is a magic trick.
then it has a horrible reflection on the JREF MDC as it makes them appear to be trying to avoid an honest application by allowing their Forum members to attempt Sabotage and keep from risking the Million Dollars.
The forum members do not represent the JREF,nor do they have any say in any protocol or challenge application.They have free will to contact anyone if they pelase.

I spoke with the JREF themselves and they also see the problem with this interference.

Doubtful.Please list who said what.

There is no problem,providing you have permission to do whatever it is at the stated times,then why worry.
If someone is percieved to be breaking the law then contactin gthe authorities is only right.Just like you and Callahan did in regards James Randi and alleged counterfeiting.
:)

[William Smith]

Please show me ONE TIME where the JREFer's were allowed to interfere with the MDC by contacting locations or people involved in an ongoing protocol negotiation.

Please show me this, so I will know it is standard procedure.

If you are intentionally interfering and lying to those whom you contact (I've never said I'd be performing a Magic Show) then it has a horrible reflection on the JREF MDC as it makes them appear to be trying to avoid an honest application by allowing their Forum members to attempt Sabotage and keep from risking the Million Dollars.

I spoke with the JREF themselves and they also see the problem with this interference.

At the risk of sounding redundant:

Where, by whom and when exactly did this "tampering with the protocol" take place?

It is, of course, a rhetorical question.

No JREF Forum member can tamper with the protocol. Only three parties can influence said protocol: The JREF, the testers and yourself.

No outsiders can tamper with protocol.

Repeat: No outsiders can tamper with protocol.

Do you understand this, The Professor?

[remirol]

Please show me ONE TIME where the JREFer's were allowed to interfere with the MDC by contacting locations or people involved in an ongoing protocol negotiation.

The act of contacting people is not inteference.

If you are intentionally interfering and lying to those whom you contact

Can you cite exactly what lie you believe to have been told, to what third party, and under what circumstances?

Can you further cite exactly how you were hindered as a result of your claimed interference?

Since you refuse to provide any hard facts, it strikes me as far more likely that you are just blowing smoke (as you have been for some time now).

I spoke with the JREF themselves and they also see the problem with this interference.

If your claim or protocol involves committing an illegal act (or an act that the local authorities will frown upon) the JREF is under no obligation to assist you with this. It is your responsibility to ensure that you have everything in place and that your actions fall completely within local laws and acceptable standards of activity.

Also, if you falsely represent yourself to local authorities in the effort to "con" them into granting permission they would otherwise not provide, and someone calls you out on it, this is YOUR OWN FAULT.

[chillzero]

Please try to keep discussion of specific challenges to the threads already dedicated to those challenges. This was meant to be a more generalised discussion on the challenge itself.

[Jeff Wagg]

Please show me ONE TIME where the JREFer's were allowed to interfere with the MDC by contacting locations or people involved in an ongoing protocol negotiation.

Please show me this, so I will know it is standard procedure.

If you are intentionally interfering and lying to those whom you contact (I've never said I'd be performing a Magic Show) then it has a horrible reflection on the JREF MDC as it makes them appear to be trying to avoid an honest application by allowing their Forum members to attempt Sabotage and keep from risking the Million Dollars.

I spoke with the JREF themselves and they also see the problem with this interference.

The forum members, who you refer to as "JREFers" are not representatives of the JREF, and they do not act on behalf of the JREF. Anything they do is completely their responsibility. The suggestion that the JREF was somehow involved in any actions of the forum members is completely baseless.

The JREF has NO opinion on any so-called "interference," as it has nothing to do with us.

[The_Animus]

You forgot one key ingredient that helps to balance out the fairness between the JREF and the Applicant. The Applicant has to perform a feat or prove something that has never been done or proven in the history of man or observed in all of nature.

[eirik]

You forgot one key ingredient that helps to balance out the fairness between the JREF and the Applicant. The Applicant has to perform a feat or prove something that has never been done or proven in the history of man or observed in all of nature.

That has nothing to do with fairness. If one really can do something paranormal, it doesn't matter if it has been proven or not. It would off course be extremely difficult if you have no super powers. That is the whole point.

Take the dowsing- if it was real, there would be no problem demonstrating it above statistical chance. Easy money. Don't you agree?

[Pogo]

You forgot one key ingredient that helps to balance out the fairness between the JREF and the Applicant. The Applicant has to perform a feat or prove something that has never been done or proven in the history of man or observed in all of nature.
Sounds like such a feat would be pretty self-evident to me.

[steenkh]

You forgot one key ingredient that helps to balance out the fairness between the JREF and the Applicant. The Applicant has to perform a feat or prove something that has never been done or proven in the history of man or observed in all of nature.
The Challenge is targeted against those people who claim they are able to perform such feats, not people who maybe can do it, but people who can actually do it.

Healers are apparently working miracles every day, dowsers are hired to find water, psychics are predicting events or talking to the dead: these people do not behave as if they are performing an extraordinary feat. They actually live off their abilities. Would it really be a problem for them to take the challenge? Considering what these people are claiming daily, it would seem that the odds are stacked heavily against the JREF.

[RoboTimbo]

You forgot one key ingredient that helps to balance out the fairness between the JREF and the Applicant. The Applicant has to perform a feat or prove something that has never been done or proven in the history of man or observed in all of nature.


If the applicant has never done it before, how do they know they can do it for the MDC? The JREF assumes, generously in some cases, that the applicant actually has performed their claimed paranormal ability before. The applicant is even advised of some simple pre-qualifying steps to take so that they can rule out mundane reasons for their perceived paranormal ability to spare them embarrassment later.

The applicant doesn't have to do anything. They are the ones who choose to apply for the MDC.

Do you think the JREF should relax the objectivity of protocols to help people win the million without actually proving anything paranormal?

[The_Animus]

Do you think the JREF should relax the objectivity of protocols to help people win the million without actually proving anything paranormal?

No. I'm saying that from the perspective of the skeptic the odds are massively against the applicant to win the MDC. That is all I was saying. I'm a little confused that so many people seemed to take my statement negatively.

[RoboTimbo]

No. I'm saying that from the perspective of the skeptic the odds are massively against the applicant to win the MDC. That is all I was saying. I'm a little confused that so many people seemed to take my statement negatively.



That's not because of anything the JREF are doing. I would say that the odds are massively in favor of any claimant who can simply do what their claim says they can.

If I claim to be able to tell a homeopathic preparation from a placebo 95% of the time and I genuinely believe that I can do it and I've demonstrated it to myself dozens of times, I'm a sure winner. How is that massively against the applicant?

But, you are correct in that from the perspective of the skeptic, the odds are pretty low that I'm really going to win the MDC. But that's also the beauty of it, it doesn't matter what the skeptic thinks!

[Jackalgirl]

No. I'm saying that from the perspective of the skeptic the odds are massively against the applicant to win the MDC. That is all I was saying. I'm a little confused that so many people seemed to take my statement negatively.

Perhaps I've breezed through this thread too quickly, but I don't understand what you mean about odds.

If a person actually possesses the power that he or she claims to have -- and, since the MDC is aimed squarely at people like Sylvia Browne (http://www.stopsylvia.com), who claim very high success rates and charge people a lot of money for the use of their "abilities" -- then the odds are 1:1.

If I claim I can lift a bowling ball with the power of my mind, all I have to do is do it.

I've stated this before to other people: the MDC is not about transient, intermittent occurrences that people think are paranormal. It's not about the stuff that might have a paranormal explanation (but for which there are other, mundane explanations).

It's about the clearly paranormal stuff that people claim works reliably, every day (and, in many cases, for which they charge money to do). So again, if they can actually do, the odds are laughably easy.

I'm sure this has been said before, but it bears repeating.

[Paul2]

The Animus, the fact that a feat has never been done before in history is actually irrelevant in one case: the case in which the applicant has done the feat before. True? (Let's ignore cases in which the applicant has a spotty record of achievement). The odds are not against the applicant in this case because the applicant has already demonstrated that the feat is possible - they have actually done it.

In the other case, the one in which the applicant has not done the feat before, why are they applying in the first place?

So, you see, either way, the odds are not against the applicant. In one case, the odds are vastly in favor of the applicant because their feat has already been achieved. In the other case, the odds are nominally against the applicant, but the applicant has no business applying anyway because they haven't done what they are somehow claiming they can do, which would be nonsense.

[William Smith]

No. I'm saying that from the perspective of the skeptic the odds are massively against the applicant to win the MDC. That is all I was saying. I'm a little confused that so many people seemed to take my statement negatively.

Have you considered the fact that possessing a veritable, provable, dare I say: real?, paranormal ability requires no odds against?

I quote Rainier Wolfcastle: "What's there is there."

[Cuddles]

Please bear in mind that the Million Dollar Challenge section is for discussing the million dollar challenge. Since The Professor's application has now been rejected, discussion about him and his complaints is no longer appropriate for that section. Please keep such discussion in threads like this one (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=129655) and do not start or derail multiple threads in the MDC section.